HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/03/1991 (2) Minutes of a Regular Meeting
'"'ter April 3, 1991
Town of Los Altos Hills
City Council Meeting
Wednesday, April 3 , 1991, 7:15 P.M.
Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road
1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Siegel called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 7:15
p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall.
Present: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Hubbard, Johnson, and
Tryon
Absent: Councilmember Casey
Staff: Acting City Manager Richard DeLong; City Attorney Sandy Sloan;
Director of Public Works Bill Ekern; Planning Consultant
Margaret Netto and City Clerk Pat Dowd
Press: Cristal Borlik, Los Altos Town Crier
Mayor Siegel noted that Item 6.4 on the agenda had been continued to the next
Council Meeting and Item 10.2a would be discussed with Item 6.3.
2. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
2.1 Presentation by Assistant Chief Stu Farwell on Los Altos County Fire
District Issues
Stu Farwell, Los Altos Fire Department, addressed the Council concerning the
options of upgrading the El Monte Fire Station or building a new fire station at the
southwest corner of Parking Lot A at Foothill College. To upgrade would cost
approximately $500-600,000 and even with the upgrade it would not meet today's
earthquake designs. To build a new station would cost approximately $1 million. A
public hearing would be held late May or early June to make a decision. On the
subject of joint efforts, Mr. Farwell noted that a study was underway and the affected
cities, Los Altos and Mountain View, would be contacted after the study was
completed.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
iblorApril 3, 1991
1
Commissioner Pahl reported that the following issues were discussed at the
3/27/91 Planning Commission Meeting: 1) the visual impact and mitigation
thereof of the cable tv site as related to color and structure. It was agreed
Commissioner Ellinger would meet with representatives of Sun Country Cable
to discuss these concerns. 2) Lands of Wong, approved variance to maximum
development area to allow a 547 square foot deck addition. Commissioner Pahl
noted that this approval was made in part because of the timing of the Wongs'
plans (They had been submitted under the urgency ordinance.) and that the lot
had no outdoor living space.
Council questioned this issue of no outdoor space, noting that Mr. Wong had
been advised and understood that his plans used all of his development area.
Siegel stated that Council wanted to see every new home and major remodel.
He cited the recent example of Lands of Yu which the Council had not seen and
he believed the Council had the right to see every new home. Hubbard
suggested the Town's ordinances be strictly adhered to but not impose another
layer of bureaucracy. Tryon stated that she did not believe another two weeks
was too much of a delay and believed it was a check and balance period.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Siegel
and passed unanimously by all members present to provide the following
L direction to staff: It shall be Council policy that every new primary and
` secondary dwelling and major remodel be placed on the Consent Calendar for
Council review. This does not include denials, just approvals by the Site
Development Committee and Planning Commission.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items Removed: 4.3a) (Tryon), 4.4 (Paul Nowack), 4.5 (Betsy Bertram) and 4.6
(Tryon)
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Hubbard and
passed unanimously by all members present to approve the balance of the Consent
Calendar:
4.1 Approval of Warrants: $77,556.46 (3/29/91)
4.2 Proclamation - Los Altos High School Main Street Singers
Items Removed:
4.3 Consideration of Whether To Concur with or Review the following
Planning Commission Action at Its Meeting on March 27, 1991:
L
April 3, 1991
2
` 4.3a Approval of Variance to MDA, 547 square foot deck addition, Lands
tar of Wong, 11675 Dawson Drive
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To appeal the Planning Commission's approval of
a variance to the maximum development area to allow for a 547 square
foot deck addition and to schedule for a public hearing at the next Council
meeting to allow the Council the opportunity to review the project.
4.4 Acceptance of Conservation Easement on Lands of Eshner, Altamont
Road
Paul Nowack, applicant's engineer, referenced the conservation easement
and noted that the map rejects the easement. The easement was never
offered, accepted and has been rescinded. He suggested negotiation as they
could offer more easement in better areas of the land.
Tryon did not believe acceptance of the conservation easement was
necessary at this time as the Town had the easement whether or not this
action was taken. The City Attorney responded that she believed it would
be more appropriate to accept the easement at this time and this would not
preclude future Council actions.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by
Stir Johnson and passed unanimously by all member present to adopt
Resolution #13-91 accepting conservation easement on Tract No. 4897.
4.5 Request from Bullis School PTA to use Westwind Barn for School
Function
Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, asked why this request was coming
before the Council and if the Westwind Barn Board was aware of the
request.
Staff noted that according to the lease such requests needed to go before the
Council and a letter had been received from the Board of Westwind Barn
with their approval of the request.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by
Siegel and passed unanimously by all members present to approve the
request from Bullis School PTA to use Westwind Barn for a
Father/Daughter night on May 1, 1991.
4.6 Encroachment Permit for Construction of a Sanitary Sewer in
L Purissima and Concepcion Roads, Lands of Wheatley -- Reso #
4
ir
April 3, 1991
3
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To continue this item to the April 17, 1991 Council
ilraw Meeting and discuss it at the same time as the public hearing on Lands of Wheatley,
appeal of Planning Commission's denial of a variance for a secondary unit to exceed
the 1,000 square foot limitation of the zoning code by 100 square feet.
5. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
6.1 Appeal of Planning Commission's Approval of a Driveway, Lands
of Sun, 12444 Robleda Road
Hal Nissley, applicant, commented that there were several aspects of this issue
including the court order between he and his neighbors, the fact that he
wants the Suns to be happy with the circular driveway and the legal issues.
He stated that he had the easement rights to the property and the right to
repave what was previously there. He had invited everyone to view the
site for themselves but only Commissioner Pahl came.
Paul Smith, applicants attorney, stated that no reference should be made to the
litigation issue. He stated that the driveway serves the Nissley property
and he was denied the opportunity to repave what was there. There were
L three areas of concern: berms, width and location. Concerning the berms,
�✓ they prevented two standard size vehicles from passing each other and
they also created a runoff situation which was artificial rather than
natural. They were requesting that the berms be removed. Regarding the
width of the driveway they felt it should be 16' wide. It was narrower now
and it was serving two houses. On the matter of location they believed the
paved portions of the driveway should be close as possible to the driveway
which is where they were before. They had no objections to the Suns
using the driveway but they wanted it to be safe.
Hal Nissley, applicant, stated that he was all in favor of the circular driveway
but the question was what could be done in the easement. He wanted to
repave what was paved before and did not care what the Suns did outside
the easement.
The City Attorney stated that the owner of the property needed to apply for the
permit and the Suns were the owner. The easement was on top of the
driveway.
Max Blasch, previous owner of easement, stated that his neighbor wanted to go
around the palm tree so he could not pave at the time. He supported the
Suns' position.
thie
April 3, 1991
4
Jerry Clements, applicant's engineer, commented on the turning radius of the
�lr driveway and asked for a practical field test with neutral parties driving
vehicles which would result in a report on whether or not the 24' turning
radius was appropriate.
Hal Nissley, applicant, noted that the Planning Consultant had approved his
request to pave the driveway but then had removed the approval. The
Planning Consultant noted that she had been advised that only the
property owner could apply for the permit.
Paul Nowack, representing the Suns, commented on the berms and stated that
they collected water and prevented erosion. On the subject of the turning
radius, he noted that the Lincoln Town Car needed a 20' radius and their
driveway had four more feet than that.
Mr. Sun, 12440 Robleda Road, stated that they had moved in three years ago
and had been trying since that time to complete the driveway and the
landscaping but they had been blocked by their neighbor. They had
submitted plans for the circular driveway but had been taken to court by
the Nissleys. They believed the driveway was safe and sound and the
neighbors and the city wanted them to complete the landscaping.
Tim Hopkins, Suns' attorney, noted that the repaving of the driveway outside
the easement would need a permit.
Gordon Strom, Los Altos Hills resident, stated that he had a Lincoln Town Car
and had no problem making the turn on the driveway under discussion.
Council discussed the issues that had been raised and also reviewed the
drawings of the driveway including the upper and lower portions.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Johnson
and passed unanimously by all members present to deny the appeal of the
Planning Commission's approval of a driveway for Lands of Sun, 12444
Robleda.
6.2 Resolution Determining That a Major Remodel and New Construction
Should Be Treated the Same As Far As Building Permits Are Concerned
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel
and passed unanimously by all members present to adopt Resolution #14-
91 determining that a major remodel and new construction should be
treated the same as far as building permits are concerned and to change the
fee schedule to reflect the treatment of major remodels as equivalent to
new construction in terms of impact on public infrastructure.
April 3, 1991
5
6.3 Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 (Zoning) of Title 10 (Zoning and Site
Development) to clarify Article 4 (Nonconforming Uses and Structures)
(FIRST READING)
Council had before them an ordinance which would clarify that
nonconformities must have been legal at the time of their construction.
According to the Director of Public Works' staff report, the goal of this
ordinance was to disallow people from covering their property with non-
permitted structures, for example, and then claiming them as existing
non-conformities when they go to redevelop. The Planning Commission
made the following recommendations for changes to the proposed
ordinance: Section 10-1.401 Nonconforming Structures: " . . .result in an
increase in the nonconformity or change of use in the nonconformity."
and Section 10-1.406 Nonconforming Uses: Maintenance: " . . .however,
no structural alterations or change of use in the nonconformity."
Timothy Tang, 26638 Purissima Road, referenced several sections of the Code
including 10-1.401, 10-1.405 and 10-1.406 and recommended that the uses of
the structures be looked at as well as the square footage. He also
commented on structural alterations and repair to damage. He
commented that the Wheatley request for a secondary unit to exceed the
y1 1,000 square foot limitation was only two feet from his property line. Mr.
Tang supported the Planning Commission's recommendations to the
ordinance.
Siegel suggested site development approval for non-conforming uses and
Tryon stated that it was important to look at intent of Site Development
Ordinance. It was clearly the intent that all primary and secondary
dwellings go through Site Development as well as reconstructions.
Johnson suggested deleting the words "in the nonconformity" in the
recommendations from the Planning Commission.
The City Attorney stated that she believed the changes in the ordinance were
sufficient to cover site development being required for all new dwellings
or reconstruction of non-conforming structures.
Dan Siedel, 26642 Purissima, supported proposed changes to the ordinances.
He referenced the Town's original "green sheet" and noted the ability for
residents to walk around their property. He also shared copies of pictures
of non-conforming structures in the Town.
Stephanie Munoz, 13460 Robleda, stated that she believed the time to deal with
nonconforming structures was when the house was sold. There were no
controls over rental properties and this could be a major impact on a
April 3, 1991
6
( person's property if the secondary dwelling is near a property line. Mrs.
♦r Munoz also expressed her concerns about building out on a property and
noted the importance of fairness.
Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, asked if a change in the footprint or
roofing of a secondary unit required site development and was advised
that it did. She also supported the recommendations made by the
Planning Commission. She did not agree with the policy that if a
nonconforming structure was destroyed it could be rebuilt as it was even if
that was in violation of the Town's ordinances.
Hubbard commented that the Rebuilding/Building Out Subcommittee had not
recommended such changes and had not discussed secondary dwellings.
Shari Emling, 11853 Murietta Lane, recommended that the Council cover all
the bases and use careful wording; the ordinances need to have integrity.
Max Brown, 12670 Dianne Drive, supported the ordinance changes. He was not
aware that units could be rented and expressed concern about what actions
could take place on properties in Town.
Bill Avalini, 26640 Purissima Road and Sue Tang, 26638 Purissima Road, stated
that they were concerned about the Wheatley application and supported
�r the ordinance changes.
Ed Hager, 26656 Purissima, supported changes in ordinance and noted that they
as well as many of their neighbors could conceivably change their barns to
secondary dwellings.
Mr. Wheatley, 26644 Purissima, believed it was unfair that his application was
being discussed during this meeting but was not officially on the agenda.
He objected to his being given direction by staff and then having the
project objected to. He believed he was in line with the Town's ordinances
and was willing to mitigate problems. Regarding the urgency ordinance
Mr. Wheatley stated that if this were adopted, he would be deprived of
what he could do on his property.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Tryon
and passed unanimously by all members present to approve the following
changes to the proposed ordinance: Section 10-1.401 Nonconforming
Structures: " . . .result in an increase in the nonconformity nor change of
use."; Section 10-1.406 Nonconforming Uses: Maintenance: " . . .however,
no structural alterations nor change of use."; Section 10-1.405, change act of
God to Act of God; and Section 10-1.406, amend to read as follows: " . . . .as
411/
April 3, 1991
7
required by law or ordinance or authorized by the Planning Commission
by a conditional use permit."
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Tryon
and passed unanimously by all members present to waive further reading
of ordinance.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Tryon
and passed unanimously by all members present to introduce ordinance
amending Chapter 1 of Title 10 to darify Article 4 (Nonconforming Uses
and Structures).
6.4 Site Development Permits for Conversions of Existing Buildings to
Secondary Dwellings
Council had before them the City Attorney's report dated 3/22/91 which
included the following statement. "If a structure is allowed to remain in
existence, even though it is nonconforming, and a secondary dwelling is a
permitted use, then a nonconforming structure may be used as a
secondary dwelling without a site development permit. If this conclusion
is not one the Council intended, the Council might wish to consider
adopting an urgency interim ordinance prohibiting the use of
nonconforming structures as secondary dwellings while the Council and
the Planning Commission study the matter."
MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel
and failed by the following roll call vote to add consideration of an
urgency interim ordinance amending Chapter 1 (Zoning) of Title 10
(Zoning and Site Development) with regard to nonconforming structures
to the agenda.
AYES: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Johnson and Tryon
NOES: Mayor Pro Tern Hubbard
ABSENT: Councilmember Casey
It was noted that a four-fifths vote of the Council was required to add an issue
to the agenda as an urgency item.
Hubbard stated that he voted against adding this ordinance to the agenda as he
believed Mr. Wheatley should be allowed to be present at the meeting at
which it was discussed as it directly affected his project.
It was agreed the urgency ordinance would be placed on the next agenda at
which time Mr. Wheatley's public hearing was scheduled to be heard.
April 3, 1991
8
L
6.5 Appeal of Planning Commission's Denial of a Variance for a Secondary
Unit to Exceed the 1,000 Square Foot Limitation of the Zoning Code by 100
Square Feet, Lands of Wheatley, 26644 Purissima Road
This hearing has been continued to the April 17, 1991 Council Meeting.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7.1 Request from Larry Anderson for Reconsideration of Denial of Request
For Waiver of Fees
Mr. Anderson, 13021 West Sunset Drive, addressed the Council concerning his
request for waiver of fees. He explained he had submitted his plans in
September of 1989 and they were approved in November of that year. He
had been unable to get the work done by the time the permit had run out
and had requested and received an extension. He did not believe,
however, that the additional staff work resulting from this extension
should result in a $200 charge.
4` Siegel explained the fee schedule to Mr. Anderson and noted that the Town
covers the cost of such applications.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by
Hubbard and passed unanimously by all members present to not grant the
request for waiver of fees for Lands of Anderson.
8. NEW BUSINESS
9. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES, AND
COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES
9.1 Continued discussion of Pathway Issues: Review detailed
mapping project for a specific area -- Presentation by Pathways,
Recreation and Parks Committee
Council had before them the area maps A and B covering on and off road paths
in the Page Mill, Arastradero Road section of Town, as prepared by the
Chairman of the Pathways, Recreation and Parks Committee. A
discussion was held on the importance of signing these paths and Hubbard
suggested labels for some rather than using the posts. The Director of
Public Works stated he would look into this option.
April 3, 1991
9
Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, noted that the paths for Hidden Villa are
fie color coded.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel
and passed unanimously by all members present to approve the area maps
for A and B as prepared by the Chairman of the Pathways, Recreation and
Parks Committee, with the following amendments: Area A - delete the
sign for the off road path behind 28001 Arastradero Road and add a sign for
the Page Mill entrance to Matadero Creek; Area B - add a sign for 27840 Via
Felice. (These reports are on file at Town Hall.)
Dot Schreiner, Chairman - Pathways, Recreation and Parks Committee, raised
the issue of the Carse easement on Taaffe Road and asked that this issue be
discussed by Council. It was agreed this item would be agendized and the
Carses and the neighbors would be notified of the meeting.
10. STAFF REPORTS
10.1 City Manager
10.1a Report on Current Status of Yard Waste Collection Program
The Acting City Manager reported that a financial problem had resulted as
r+ a result of the free yard waste dropoff. Under the terms of the
contract with the Los Altos Garbage Company they would
dispose of four debris box loads per week at no additional charge
to the Town. Above that there is a $250 charge per box. The cost
had steadily increased over the months with the February bill
being $11,000. As there was no good way of assuring that the
people using this free service were from the Town, it was
difficult to control the costs. He did have several suggestions to
help solve the problem, such as limiting the size of the trucks,
changing the hours of operation, compacting the materials,
using coupons and limiting free service to residents only
(requiring a driver's license for identification purposes).
John Angin, Los Altos Garbage Company, noted that while it was good to
take so many boxes of debris away, he did not believe it was all
generated from the Town. He also noted that the Town still had
the four clean up days throughout the year. Mr. Angin
commented that they could prepare a flyer with any changes to
the program that Council might make.
The Director of Public Works commented that the Town was really paying
for air as the clippings took a lot of room but had little weight.
1111,
April 3, 1991
10
` He suggested that compacting the material would allow for
or much more to be put in the boxes.
Fred Montgomery, 27855 Black Mountain Road, noted that he did not
know about this service but he was sure that if driver's licenses
were required the costs would be cut in half.
Fabian Garces, 26111 Elena, concurred with the recommendation that the
materials be compacted and suggested that the Town chip the
materials for residents use. In response to this it was noted that
this had been discussed but there was no good place to put a
chipper which was a noisy process.
Stephanie Munoz, 13460 Robleda, asked that she be advised of a review of
all solid waste programs. She believed there had been
inadequate notice regarding the recycling program. She
recommended contacting Palo Alto regarding their programs
and also suggested a portable mulcher as a possible solution.
Mrs. Munoz believed the Town would be better served if the
garbage company picked up the clippings and residents took care
of the bottles, newspapers, etc.
Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, asked Council to review the recycling
program as related to costs per can.
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To begin a program on Wednesday, April 17th
for the free yard waste dropoff which would include the
following: limited to residents only (driver's license required as
proof of identification); days changed to Wednesday to Sunday;
trucks limited to a certain size; and materials compacted to six
foot lengths. A flyer would be prepared for all customers and a
notice would be included in the environmental mailing going to
all residents. In addition the Acting City Manager would report
back to the Council the second meeting in May.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by
Tryon and passed unanimously by all members present to go
past the 11:30 p.m. hour of adjournment.
10.2 City Attorney
10.2a Site Development Permits for Conversions of Existing Buildings
to Secondary Dwellings
This matter was discussed earlier in the meeting.
April 3, 1991
11
10.3 City Clerk
11. COUNCIL-INITIATED ITEMS
11.1 Discussion of Potential Threat to the Health and Safety of Los Altos Hills
Residents Imposed by the Possible Installation of Flow Restrictors by the
Purissima Hills Water District, and Other Water Related Issues.
Tryon stated that she brought this issue to the Council so that it could be discussed
openly and because of her respect for the residents of the Town and her concerns
regarding fire safety.
Joan Schlenz, 13551 Paseo del Roble, commented that her home had been
threatened in the 1985 fire and if they had had flow restrictors they would not have
been able to wet the roofs and help their neighbors. The response time from the
Fire Department was not particularly good and she thought the use of flow
restrictors was a poor idea.
Dan Seidel, Director - Purissima Hills Water District, addressed the water concerns
and stated that flow restrictors would be used only for those who did not care about
conserving water. He asked Council for their continued cooperation and noted that
the next Board Meeting of the Water District was scheduled for Wednesday, April
10th at which time they would be discussing the issue of fire hazards raised by
Councilmember Tryon.
Fred Montgomery, 27855 Black Mountain Road, thanked Councilmember Tryon for
bringing this problem into focus and noted that although they would never have a
flow restrictor because they conserve their water, one never knew if all the
neighbors were as careful and that was a concern.
Fabian Garces, 26111 Elena, thanked Councilmember Tryon for bringing this issue
forward and questioned how an arbitrary number of gallons of water could be set
when there were variable factors involved such as amount of landscaping and the
number of the people in the household.
Shari Emling, 11853 Murietta Lane, commented on the punitive action and
arrogance of the Purissima Hills Water District and suggested that if they had 500
flow restrictors they better have good liability insurance.
Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, asked that a representative from the Purissima
Hills Water District report to the Council at Council Meetings so that everyone
could be kept up to date on the issue. She also inquired whether flow restrictors
were legal and suggested that landscaping bond requirements be adjusted.
April 3, 1991
12
Dennis Riches, 27874 Via Corita, stated that outside water was the issue not inside
water use. He did not see a problem with people paying more if they used more
water as the Town's percentage of the overall water use was so small.
Siegel stated that flow restrictors would be used only as a last resort but he did
question why the Water District had 500 of them on hand. Tryon stated that Los
Altos Hills was not like other communities in that there was a real fire concern.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Johnson and
passed unanimously to ask the Purissima Hills Water District to reconsider use of
flow restrictors because the potential of fire danger is high in Los Altos Hills and to
ask them to consult with the Fire Marshall and Fire District in Los Altos.
12. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further new or old business to discuss, the meeting was
adjourned at 12:15 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia Dowd
City Clerk
The minutes of the April 3, 1991 Regular City Council Meeting were
approved at the April 17, 1991 Council Meeting.
April 3, 1991
13