Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of an Adjourned Regular Meeting <br />October 29, 1997 <br />Town of Los Altos Hills <br />City Council and Planning Commission <br />Adjourned Regular Meeting <br />Wednesday, October 29, 1997, 6:00 P.M. <br />Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road <br />A. Call To Order and Roll Call <br />Mayor Casey called the Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and Planning <br />Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. <br />Present: Mayor Casey and Councilmembers Dauber, Hubbard, Johnson <br />B. Scope of Planning Commission Review (Level of Detail): <br />%W 1. Height of Residence <br />2. Height of Entry <br />3. Architectural Features (chimneys, towers) <br />4. Skylights and Windows <br />Council discussed the level of Planning Commission review on projects. Dauber <br />commented that at an earlier Joint Meeting the issue of height had been addressed so she <br />did not believe there should be any confusion on that issue. Casey however felt that the <br />Planning Commission was not following this guideline. She further noted that applicants <br />were adding conditions to projects which they did not even wantjust so they would have <br />something to give up on a project when asked. Siegel recommended builders and <br />neighbors negotiate areas of concerns. The Council was not in the design business. He <br />further commented that siting of houses was very important and projects on major streets <br />in Town were of more concern due to high visibility. Hubbard expressed concerns about <br />the tendency to appeal projects and hoped they could be avoided if at all possible. <br />Schreiner believed part of the problem was applicants maxing out their projects. Siting <br />did not always address bulk issues. The Commission actually had few tools to mitigate <br />projects and lessen their impact on neighbors. Gottlieb concurred that the Commission <br />was trying to balance the ordinances with the tools available. Jinkerson stated that he <br />thought the Planning Commission was working quite well together. <br />Bill Hofrng, 26045 Torello Lane, commented that oftentimes applicants felt ambushed at <br />the Planning Commission Meeting when they heard issues that had not been raised <br />before. <br />October 29, 1997 <br />Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting <br />1 <br />and Siegel <br />Staff: <br />Planning Director Curtis Williams, Assistant Planner Suzanne <br />Davis and City Clerk Pat Dowd <br />Press: <br />Carol Tiegs, Los Altos Town Crier <br />Planning <br />Chairman Carol Gottlieb and Commissioners Cheng, Jinkerson, <br />Commission: <br />Schreiner and Stutz <br />B. Scope of Planning Commission Review (Level of Detail): <br />%W 1. Height of Residence <br />2. Height of Entry <br />3. Architectural Features (chimneys, towers) <br />4. Skylights and Windows <br />Council discussed the level of Planning Commission review on projects. Dauber <br />commented that at an earlier Joint Meeting the issue of height had been addressed so she <br />did not believe there should be any confusion on that issue. Casey however felt that the <br />Planning Commission was not following this guideline. She further noted that applicants <br />were adding conditions to projects which they did not even wantjust so they would have <br />something to give up on a project when asked. Siegel recommended builders and <br />neighbors negotiate areas of concerns. The Council was not in the design business. He <br />further commented that siting of houses was very important and projects on major streets <br />in Town were of more concern due to high visibility. Hubbard expressed concerns about <br />the tendency to appeal projects and hoped they could be avoided if at all possible. <br />Schreiner believed part of the problem was applicants maxing out their projects. Siting <br />did not always address bulk issues. The Commission actually had few tools to mitigate <br />projects and lessen their impact on neighbors. Gottlieb concurred that the Commission <br />was trying to balance the ordinances with the tools available. Jinkerson stated that he <br />thought the Planning Commission was working quite well together. <br />Bill Hofrng, 26045 Torello Lane, commented that oftentimes applicants felt ambushed at <br />the Planning Commission Meeting when they heard issues that had not been raised <br />before. <br />October 29, 1997 <br />Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting <br />1 <br />