Laserfiche WebLink
Town Of Los Altos Hills October 28, 1998 <br /> Staff Report to the Planning Commission <br /> RE: REVIEW OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE A <br /> SECONDARY DRIVEWAY; LANDS OF SHIDELER; 27994 VIA VENTANA; <br /> FILE#175-98-ZP-SD. <br /> FROM: Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner SD <br /> APPROVED BY: Curtis Williams, Planning Director, <br /> RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: <br /> Approve the request for a site development permit for a secondary driveway over a <br /> private access easement, subject to the recommended conditions in Attachment 1. <br /> CODE REQUIREMENTS <br /> Section 10-2.301(b)(6) of the Site Development Ordinance states that after notice and <br /> public hearing, the Planning Director shall review and act on applications for construction <br /> of a private vehicular access or driveway which results in a new or relocated access point <br /> to a public or private road. The proposed driveway is already existing, but is not <br /> presently paved. <br /> BACKGROUND <br /> On September 15, 1998, a site development hearing was held to consider the subject <br /> application. A number of interested neighbors attended the hea:ing, with both concerns <br /> and support being stated for the project. Following discussion and a presentation by the <br /> applicant, the Planning Director approved the application subject to conditions (see <br /> Attachment 2). <br /> DISCUSSION - <br /> As noted in the minutes of the September 15, 1998 site development hearing, there was <br /> considerable discussion and participation on the part of neighbors who access their <br /> properties from Via Ventana. The majority of neighbors supported the request to pave <br /> the lower portion of the access easement. Concerns about the proposal include <br /> preservation of oak trees, the visual impact of paving the driveway, drainage and safety. <br /> Tree Preservation <br /> The applicants submitted a letter from the project arborist stating that the oak tree on the <br /> Kells/Curtis/Gilbert property would not be adversely impacted (see Attachment 4). The <br /> letter also comments that excavation could damage tree roots, although none is proposed <br />