Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 7.1 Minutes of a Regular Meeting DRAFT Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday,.December 10, 1997, 6:45 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes (3) #20-97 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. A moment of silence was observed in memory of Commissioner Stutz who passed away over the weekend. Present: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Schreiner, Cheng & Jinkerson Staff: Curtis Williams, Planning Director; Sheryl Proft, Assistant Engineer; Lath Lonberger, Planning Secretary 2. PUBLIC HEARING 6:45 P.M. 2.1 LANDS OF LOUGHMILLER, 25309 La Loma Drive (89-97-ZP-SD-GD-LM- VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence, a lot merger, variances to allow grading within 10 feet of a property line and to exceed the allowable development area, and a request for annexation (continued from November 12, 1997). The Planning Director had nothing further to add to the staff report. Commissioner Cheng disclosed she had listened to the tape of the November 12th Planning Commission meeting. The applicants provided a model of the project for review. The Planning Director noted that the fourth parking space was within the setback. The project could not be approved this evening unless the parking space was changed as the application was not noticed for public hearing with this change (a variance required). The applicants could return to the Commission at a later date, if so desired,to request a variance for the parking space to be proposed within the setback. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 2 Bert Loughmiller, 801 Church Street, Mountain View, applicant, discussed the changes to the plan which included the following: pushing the house back two feet further from the ridge; proposed back filling to lower the exposed height of driveway retaining walls; moving the house down the slope and backfilling which have allowed the wall heights to be reduced by up to two feet; and the relocation of the fourth parking space. He was surprised with the information regarding the fourth parking space and the need for a variance to allow the required space within the setback. Fred Herring, 1741 Broadway, Redwood City, project architect, discussed the change to the fourth parking space,the varying heights of the retaining walls, and the roofmg materials. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Cheng supported the design with a change to the fourth parking space out of the setback. Commissioner Schreiner was pleased with the changes made from the previous meeting. She agreed with the Planning Director's suggestion to approve the application with the required fourth parking space in its previous location (in front). Chairman Gottlieb would like the roofing material to include a patina, and the porch material to be something other than copper so the house would be less obtrusive from above. The Planning Director discussed the very tight parking backup issue. He recognized, due to this difficult site (40% slope), this was not a typical parking backup area. He further explained that the Commission is trying to minimize development area, minimize the grading for the retaining walls, which tightens up the backup space. Also, because of the location, it is not conflicting any parking movements back down the driveway. There is not a safety issue. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson to recommend approval .to the City Council for a Site Development Permit for a new residence, a lot merger, variances to allow grading within 10 feet of a property line and to exceed the allowable development area, and a request for annexation, Lands of Loughmiller, with the following changes/additions to the conditions of approval: add to condition#1 that the applicant shall revise the plans to relocate the fourth parking space closer to the house and out of the setbacks; add to condition #6 that the copper roofing shall include a patina to enhance a weathered appearance, and that the roof material for the flat overhang on the ridge side of the house shall not be copper. AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Cheng, Jinkerson& Schreiner NOES: None . This item will be scheduled for the January 7th City Council public hearing agenda. 3. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR-None Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 3 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 P.M. 4.1 LANDS OF WHEATLEY, 26644 Purissima Road (203-97-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence. The Planning Director introduced this item noting the receipt of a letter of support from Mr. and Mrs. Sandman, a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Seidel voicing two general concerns (excessive illumination, and the requested dedication of a 30 foot wide half-width public right of way along Purissima Road), and a letter from the applicants. He discussed the Lands of Kash dedicated easements on Burke Road. The assistant engineer discussed the required easements and the natural swale on this property. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Robert Wheatley, 26644 Purissima Road, applicant, discussed the swale and the history of the property. He is looking forward to this project which will move the house and the garage out of setbacks and farther away from the street. Some compromises where made with staff. The design has a single story appearance with the upper bedrooms tucked in. They are well under the maximum development area numbers. He further discussed the following: condition #21; the improbable street widening; conditions #19 and #20; the requirement to dedicate a 40 foot wide conservation easement centered over the drainage swale in the rear of the property; and an irrevocable offer to grant a 40 foot wide storm drain easement over the drainage swale in the rear of the property. The swale through the property is dry for seven months of the year with a trickle of water about a foot wide running through it, as it does currently, for the remainder of the year, with few exceptions. Staff has proposed a much wider easement area which seems unnecessary to the expressed needs of the Town and very restrictive to the owners. He stated properties in the area had managed nicely for 50 years without any easement, asking for a smaller requirement of ten feet to each side from the center line of the swale with a restriction on planting therein to native species and to allow a small plank bridge over the swale that can be used to get over the swale when it is muddy or wet. He asked the Commission not to take more than what is absolutely necessary just because the Town wields the power to do so. He has no problem with the request for native plantings within the easement. He does not want development numbers reduced due to the conservation easement. He felt the proposed design is no more prominent than the current house. Staff provided a choice of either two recommendations. Mr. Wheatley asked that#1 be approved as he prefers the area on one level for ease. He also requested only a 20 foot easement, if the Planning Commission found one necessary. When asked about lowering the entire house, Mr. Wheatley explained they were trying to keep the drainage away from the house. Also, it would make the house appear to be in a hole. No one would benefit from lowering the house. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 4 The Planning Director commented on the review process, the grading policy, previous meetings with the applicants, and the visual impact (not highly visible with exposed wall area). Condition #2 could be expanded to retain trees and prohibit trimming of trees along Purissima Road unless with prior approval from the Planning Department. The assistant engineer noted they could review a width reduction in the easements, however, she would not recommend anything less than 30 feet. In response to the neighbor's concern regarding lighting, condition #8 could be expanded to address impacts on adjacent properties. Discussion ensued regarding the grading policy (guideline). Chairman Gottlieb suggested reducing the house one foot or lowering the bedroom; spreading grading out. She would prefer the applicant stay close to the grading policy by flattening the transition slope (backfill) to a more natural grade. Commissioner Jinkerson would like to be consistent with the grading policy. However, he does not want to tell the applicant he cannot have a level floor. The Planning Director felt staff could work with the applicant so no area of the finished floor level is more than five feet above existing grade, unless the Planning Director determines that such a limitation is impractical. Another suggestion was to expand condition#14 to avoid any inconvenience to other properties on the private road. The Planning Director indicated a note on the plan stating the existing house and garage to be removed 30 days of occupancy of new house was not a part of this approval. Staff will work with the applicant regarding this issue. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Jinkerson and seconded by Commissioner Schreiner to approve the Site Development Permit for a new residence, Lands of Wheatley, with the following changes/additions to the conditions of approval: add to condition #1 for revised plans so no area of the finished floor level shall be more than five feet above existing grade, unless the Planning Director determines that such a limitation is impractical, and to flatten the transition slope (backfill) to a more natural grade; add to condition#2, no trees may be removed from this area "or trimmed"...; add to condition #8, consider impacts on adjacent properties; add to condition #14, avoid impeding access to other properties on the private roadway; and conditions #19 and #20, changing 40' to 30', and addition to both that no structures shall be permitted other than a pedestrian bridge crossing, if designed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Cheng, Jinkerson& Schreiner NOES: None This approval is subject to a 21 day appeal period. Brief break at 8:15 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 5 4.2 LANDS OF ZATPARVAR, 26170 Fremont Road (179-97-TM-IS-ND-GD); A request for approval of a two lot subdivision, and proposed Negative Declaration. The Planning Director introduced this item noting the receipt of a letter from the applicant which discussed the easement for the drainage channel and access road which would need to be approximately 35.84 feet, while if there is no drainage channel, they would need only 25 feet. This means they are losing 10.84 feet of their property width for the development, which could have a negative impact on the house design. They were hoping for some flexibility from the Town in regard to codes and regulations. Also discussed in the letter was the height restriction on Lot A, and concerns regarding starting the driveway next to the channel and between the redwood trees (the applicant included an arborist report). The request for a landscape easement (along that portion of the channel that will not have a driveway adjacent to it) rather than a conservation easement was discussed by the assistant engineer who noted this was not the original location of this drainage channel. It use to cut through the other properties. She stated it was the City Engineer's view that this is actually a storm drain channel. This 30 foot wide easement that the storm drain channel is in will be a rock lined channel for the most part with some native plantings. This is the reason for a landscape easement so there will be native plantings adjacent to it so it will begin to look more like a natural creek. She further discussed the channel improvements as it relates to this property and the surrounding properties. Improvements on the these two lots will be a part of the subdivision. The channel depth will range from 4 feet from were it first outlets to 3 feet for the majority of the channel. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the letter from the Santa Clara Valley Water District asking at some future date would the channel need to be widened. The assistant engineer commented no, not with the Town's current zoning. Commissioner Jinkerson asked, other than the impact on the development area, is there any other argument against putting the driveway on the east side of the property. The assistant engineer responded no, other than increasing the amount of development on the properties with the two driveways with more impact to the lots on the other side. The Town would still need access to the channel so there would need to be another roadway put in for the Town to access the channel. Commissioner Jinkerson felt there was a safety issue with the placement of a driveway within six feet of a creek in a flood plain. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Jeff Lea, 26229 Eden Landing Road, Hayward, project engineer, noted if a conservation easement is placed over the channel, he asked that the wording include that reconstruction of the channel limits be allowed. A rock lined channel which will go through some settling in. The channel during its lifetime will need some repair as opposed to having a concrete lined channel which will not need repair but will have other drawbacks. He asked for language to be included to allow reconstruction to occur even if they call it a conservation easement. He further discussed the suggestion to increase the buffer between the channel and driveway to eight feet noting they could only increase the buffer to 6.6 feet. Anything beyond that would force them to go below the 160 foot building circle figure. He did not feel there was a safety issue. Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 6 Tom Puorro, 26296 Fremont.Road, would like to see the land developed, however, he was concerned with the development of the natural swale. Safety wise, it was not appropriate to put the driveway.next to the swale. Also, the clumping of redwood trees would need to be removed with the existing driveway design. He requested the driveway be placed on the east side of the property. Fred Osterlund, 26238 Fremont Road, has reviewed the plans and referenced his letter of November 13, 1997. He felt a straight driveway along a flood control channel was not the best solution. He was concerned with the safety of children and vehicles. A straight driveway along a swollen creek could be too inviting for adventurous youth. Regarding vehicular traffic, a straight design on the driveway will increase the speed associated with it. If the major portion of the subdivision drive must skirt the creek as proposed, then the entrance/exit should be positioned to the east of the Maurer redwood grove. This would entail a "snaking" of the drive as it approaches Fremont Road. This would distance the creek from the drive at the point of access. He felt children would be less inclined to associate these two features with one another if they are separated by a grove of trees. The snaking effect will also aid in keeping vehicle speed- to a minimum. Due to the access that needs to be maintained for this channel, there needs to be at least a utility road along there. Commissioner Schreiner asked if the driveway was moved to the other side of the property, will this still give access to.the whole lengthof the channel. The assistance engineer responded any time you have a road next to a channel, it makes it easier to maintain. Sandy Humphries, Environmental. Design Committee, stated even though she is in close proximity to this project, the Committee requested she be their representative. She had knowledge of the tree shown to be removed, providing some history. The concern of the committee is with the road being cut to the left side of the tree, and a cut being made to the right side of the tree for the drainage situation, potentially not having enough root space remaining on the redwoods. They have a very shallow root system going no deeper than six feet into the ground. She felt this tree is a survivor. She has not seen the arborist report provided by the applicant, as yet. The Planning Director reviewed the arborist report. Ms. Humphries noted that there are a number of small seedling trees which are establishing themselves under the redwood tree which the committee would like to promote this in this area. The committee was not as concerned with the Russian olive tree as with the 50 year old redwood since the olive tree is not native. Dave Pefley, 26169 Maurer Lane, has been working with the Town for approximately three years regarding the drainage channel. His first choice for safety and better property usage would be to put an underground storm drain system through this troubled area, although the Town is not going in this direction. His second choice for solutions would be to have an underground system to the tri-point of the Silvestri, Maurer, Pefley properties, then open up, going straight along the Maurer and Pefley border, which he felt would be the next best solution, 'although he was told Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 7 this was not technically possible. He further discussed other options previously discussed with the Town. He would like to make sure before this subdivision is approved that the entire drainage system is approved, and not misleading people into signing easements. He does not feel the drainage situation is 100%resolved. He further voiced concern with any two story structures in the La Paloma corridor. Jeff Lea, project engineer, addressed safety issues regarding the driveway as he did not see any safety benefit by moving the driveway over to the other side of the property. Tom Puorro, 26296 Fremont Road, again voiced his preference for the placement on the other side of the property. The Planning Director commented there would have to be some type of road for channel maintenance. Staff or the project engineer do not feel that the amount of water that would collect on this road creates a safety problem with people getting in and out of these lots. They do understand a road coming in so close to the creek may be more inviting to children then having the road go around the redwoods, then paralleling the creek. This is not the kind of location were you will have five feet of water over the roadway. If there is water here, it is only a few inches of water covering a broad flat area. The Chairman suggested a low fence to offer some protection. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Schreiner asked for more clarification regarding the drainage system which was reviewed by the assistant engineer. Commissioner Schreiner further discussed setbacks and the placement of homes. Fremont Road is considered a scenic road, stating the following: a larger setback from Fremont Road (55-60 foot setback); height restrictions; proposed two feet of fill in the central area on the property; the impact on raising the pad and height of future homes; and impact on the area(La Paloma basin and Fremont Road). Another issue is if the access easement is revised, it would decrease the development area on lot 1 which would require a lot line adjustment to adjust the numbers. It was noted that there is not a map of the La Paloma corridor. Commissioner Cheng felt there was no reason for two driveways on the property. She did like Mr. Osterlund's driveway suggestion. She also felt only Parcel A was in the La Paloma corridor. Chairman Gottlieb discussed the proposed circular driveway in a school area asking for only one driveway for the two lots, the development figures for the two lots be more equal, height restrictions for both houses, and a larger setback from the road for Parcel B (scenic road). Regarding construction, restrict all off street parking, especially during school hours. Commissioner Jinkerson supported the driveway next to the swale although he would not want this to be policy as there are unique circumstances surrounding the La Paloma basin. He made the following recommendations: only one driveway; a 60 foot setback for Parcel B; a lot line adjustment between the two parcels; no basements on either lots; maximum height of 23 feet measured from the existing grade; and the clarification that the La Paloma corridor ends at Fremont Road. Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT " December 10, 1997 Page 8 RE-OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Nader Zatparvar, applicant, felt this was more of the Town's project then his. From the beginning, all recommendations came from the City Engineer or the Planning Director, and staff. He felt this project could help the Town regarding the drainage problem. They have volunteered to work with the Town in any regard and were expecting a little more flexibility with this project. He did not understand why they would have to build something lower than the neighbors when views are not being blocked. He asked that the height be measured after the fill to have the same as the surrounding neighbors. They were planning a one story house (23 feet) on lot 1, but because of the higher floor area numbers on lot 2, they were planning a two story structure. Regarding the roadway, the City Manager was the first person to ask for the roadway next to the channel for ease of maintenance. Jeff Lea, project engineer, clarified that the proposed one to two feet of fill is not directly intended to get up to the 100 year flood height. The City Engineer felt with Mr. Zatparvar funding a civic/capital improvement both with land and money for the benefit of the Town, he should not be penalized by having to haul away the dirt that is coming out of this channel that is being built for the benefit of the Town. They should simply be able to move those spoils directly over into an area that obviously needs to be higher anyway. He clarified that there will not be two feet of fill maximum over the entire site. The finished floor is shown at the 100 year flood height plus one foot. As a separate issue, he has 1100 cubic yards of dirt that they either haul off the lot or dispose of. He can spread it out uniformly over the entire lot seven inches deep as part of the development of these two parcels in a more effective manner with dirt in some areas being zero and in some areas 1 1/2 to 2 feet deep. The plans show for Parcel A, a finished floor at 212; the natural grade ranges from 209-211 elevation. The amount of dirt that is coming out is very close to what they need to make the building pads were they meet flood compliance, rather then using foundation walls. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Discussion and consensus ensued regarding the following: driveway to go around the redwoods; joint driveway; split rail fence along the driveway; easement over the channel allowing maintenance and reconstruction; revise lot configuration to meet code; both lots considered in the La Paloma corridor; 60 foot setback from Fremont Road; no basements as long as in the flood plain; and height 23 feet above finished grade, finished grade two feet above existing grade (consistent with other approvals in the La Paloma corridor). Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT December 10, 1997 Page 9 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Jinkerson and seconded by Commissioner Schreiner to recommend approval the Negative Declaration and Tentative Parcel Map for a two lot subdivision, Lands of Maurer (Nuveen (Zatparvar) Construction) with the following changes/additions to the conditions of approval: add to condition#9 that the CC&R's shall also specify that future construction must result in finished floors for all habitable areas in excess of one foot above the 100 year flood plain, and that no basements are permitted in any location where such a flood plain is designated; add to condition #20 that parking for construction vehicles and personnel shall be restricted to the site and out of the right-of-way during the school year to avoid conflict with schoolchildren using the adjacent pathway; add a condition stating the applicant shall construct a split rail fence, not to exceed four feet in height, between the driveway and the drainage channel for the length of the driveway, and providing access to the channel as approved by the Engineering Department; add conditions to include relocating the access to the site to a point at least ten feet east of the redwood trees, showing the driveway as a joint access driveway to both lots, and to reconfigure the lots to assure that the provisions of the Town's codes regarding lot size and lot unit factor are met; add to condition #29 that the height of any structures on Parcel A and Parcel B shall not exceed 23 feet,measured from finished grade, so long as the finished grade is not greater than 2 feet above existing grade (as shown on the tentative map; add a condition stating the front setback on Parcel A shall be at lease 60 feet from Fremont Road; Findings #3, changing "septic" to "sewer"; and correcting Negative Declaration,page 2, #7 and page 14, #7 adding"conservation easement". AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Schreiner, Cheng & Jinkerson NOES: None This item will be scheduled for the January 2151 City Council public hearing agenda. 5. OLD BUSINESS 5.1 Report from subcommittees-none 6. NEW BUSINESS The Planning Director stated the joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting scheduled for February 2"d has been changed to February 10th at 6:00 p.m. The next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for January 14th will start at 6:30 p.m. to accommodate a site analysis review. Chairman Gottlieb volunteered to be the Circulation Element subcommittee Planning Commission representative. Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT * December 10, 1997 Page 10 7. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7.1 The following items were discussed at the November 19th City Council meeting: The General Plan process; the status of the Parcel Data Base; off-road pathway plan process; clarification of the Town's involvement with the architectural review Committee of the Matadero Creek Subdivision; Lands of Ferrari; and the proposed Housing Element of the General Plan and proposed Negative Declaration(informational meeting only). 7.2 Planning Commission Representative for January 7, 1998-Jinkerson 7.3 Planning Commission Representative for January 21, 1998- Gottlieb 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 8.1 Approval of the November 12, 1997 minutes PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the November 12 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. minutes with Commissioner Cheng abstaining. 9. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT HEARINGS OF NOVEMBER 25 AND DECEMBER 9, 1997 9.1 LANDS OF PEIRCE, 12008 Emerald Hill Lane (237-97-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape and hardscape plan. Approved with conditions November 25, 1997. 9.2 LANDS OF WAI, 24940 Oneonta Drive (160-97-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a minor addition. Approved with conditions December 9, 1997 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lani Lonberger Planning Secretary