The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4.1 Ic TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS February 8, 1995 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: REQUEST FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW GRADING,RETAINING WALLS AND FENCING FORA GRASS PLAY AREA (POSSIBLE FUTURE TENNIS COURT); LANDS OF HWONG; 12813 CLAUSEN COURT. FROM: Susan Manca,Planner RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission EITHER: 1. Deny the requested site development permit due to the`volume of grading,height of retaining walls and encroachment into the side setback; OR 2. Approve the requested Site Development Permit,subject to the recommended conditions. BACKGROUND: This application was originally reviewed on the January 25, 1995. At that meeting the applicant presented plans for a receded play area which may be converted to a tennis court at a later time. The Commission had a number of concerns. They requested that the applicant revise plans to reflect the concerns and the application was continued to February 8,1995. Revised plans were submitted on February 2, 1995 for Staff and Commission review. The Planning Commission's concerns and the applicants' revisions are listed below: a. There is too much grading, cut and fill on the property for a play area. The revisions reflect a finished play area pad elevation 2.5 feet higher than the previous submittal. b. The retaining wall located within the setback is not allowed at 11 feet in height. The revisions reflect a 5 foot 6 inch retaining wall rather than an 11 foot retaining wall at the rear and a 3 foot 6 inch to 4 foot high retaining wall at the front of the lot rather than a 1 foot 6 inch to 2 foot wall. c. The design of the play area resembles a tennis court rather than a play area and is too large a flat graded area (3,000 square feet) for this use. No changes have been made to the design or dimensions of the play area. Planning Commission February 8, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 2 d. In regard to the possibility of a tennis court in this location in the future, the Planning Commission noted that the Council had discussed a new material but may not allow more than 50% exemption. Even with the 50% exemption, tennis court could not be constructed on this property within the allowed MDA. Additionally, the Planning Commission noted that a tennis court is not permitted to encroach into any setbacks. As noted,the applicant has not changed the location of the proposed graded area. e. The Commission expressed concern for a tennis court fence around the play area and in the setback. The applicant has deleted all fencing. f. The Commission wanted to know how the walls would be screened. The applicant is proposing some planting on the revised plan. Staff requests that the Commission review the planting and direct the applicant accordingly. g. The Commission expressed that there is too much cut and fill for a play area. The applicant has reduced the amount of cut from 1,646 cubic yards to 428 cubic yards and increased the amount of fill from 157 cubic yards to 420 cubic yards. DISCUSSION The applicant has redesigned the grading cut and fill for the project but has not changed the design of the grading on the project. The size and elevations of the area are very similar to a tennis court and could be easily converted. At the previous meeting,the Commissioners expressed a concern that the play area need not be flat and the proposed grading is inappropriate for this type of use. Although many of the Commissioner's concerns were addressed by the applicant,the basic design of the project has not changed. The Planning Commission may want to consider requesting that the applicant remodel the recreation area to eliminate the section that is within the side setback. This will eliminate the possibility of the conversion of the area into a tennis court within this setback. The previous submittal to the Planning Commission included more grading into •the hillside to provide minimal fill near the sidewalk. The Planning Commission was concerned about the amount of grading and the height of the retaining wall within the setback. The applicant has redesigned the play area by raising the elevation of the pad from 319 feet to approximately 322 feet. This results in a Planning Commission February 8, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 3 reduction of the height of the necessary retaining walls. The change in elevation of the pad requires less grading but additional fill. As noted in the previous report, the decking around the pool has bee constructed without approval in the setback. The encroachment in the setback is a total of 24 square feet. Staff requests that the Planning Commission give direction as to whether the encroachment should be removed or allowed to remain. As a reminder,the developer is responsible for this error, not the new property owner. Staff is available to answer any questions from the Commission or any member of the community. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Development plans: site plan, topography,floor plans,roof plan,sections and elevations (eight sheets) 3. Previous Staff Report dated January 25, 1995 cc: Larry Hwong 12813 Clausen Court Los Altos Hills,CA 94022 Peter Fu Peter Fu &Associates,Inc. 200 Covington Road Los Altos,CA 94022 Planning Commission February 8, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR RETAINING WALLS, FENCING AND GRASS PLAY AREA HWONG - 12813 CLAUSEN COURT A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. Additional landscaping may be required. Prior to final inspection staff will visit the site to determine if additional trees or shrubs are needed to mitigate the retaining walls. A landscape deposit may be required to assure that any approved landscape is planted and maintained. 3. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Clausen Court, Voorhees Drive and other roadways in the area;storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; clean-up area (see Engineering Department for specifications); parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster),shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 4. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways,private driveways,public and private roadways prior to final inspection and release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. • Planning Commission February 8, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 5 B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 5. Any and all changes to the proposed grading and drainage shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (November 1.to April 1) without prior approval from the Town Engineering Department. No grading is permitted within ten feet of property lines. 6. The site drainage must be designed to meet the goal of reducing the rate of run off associated with the proposed development. The drainage outlet needs to be detailed and tied into the street drainage; A final grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for review of the required revisions (including full topography to the edge of pavement in the vicinity of the improvements) and shall be approved prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. As-built drainage shall be inspected prior to final inspection, and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. 7. The decking around the pool shown on the site plan must be revised to reflect the actual conditions in the field. Revised plans must show all existing landscaping along Clausen Court in the vicinity of the improvements and the existing pathway along Voorhees Drive. Revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. 8. Any areas on the site that have had the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final approval. 9. The project engineer shall submit a dated,stamped and signed grading of drainage plan for approval by the Engineering Department,prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.. 10. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Town Planner and the City Engineer two weeks prior to final inspection. CONDITION NUMBERS 3,4, 6, 7 AND 9 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK Planning Commission February 8, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 6 BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION. NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until February 8, 1996). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. • TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS January 25, 1995 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: REQUEST FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW GRADING, RETAINING WALLS AND FENCING FOR A GRASS PLAY AREA (POSSIBLE FUTURE TENNIS COURT); LANDS OF HWONG; 12813 CLAUSEN COURT. FROM: Suzanne Davis, Planner RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission EITHER: 1. Deny the requested site development permit due to the volume of grading,height of retaining walls and encroachment into the side setback; OR 2. Approve the requested Site Development Permit,subject to the recommended conditions. BACKGROUND: The subject property is lot 2 of the Clausen Subdivision (Tract 8217) and is located on the southeast corner of Voorhees Drive and Clausen Court. The residence on the property was completed earlier this year and was subsequently purchased by the applicant. The project as built is within 3,139 square feet of the Maximum Development Area (MDA) for the property. The property has frontage on both Voorhees Drive and Clausen Court. Clausen Court has a 30 foot setback and the 40 foot front setback is on Voorhees Drive as that street is the most heavily travelled road. DISCUSSION: Site Data: Net Lot Area: 1.04 acres Average Slope: 13.6% Lot Unit Factor: .96 Floor Area and Development Area: Area Max. Prop. Exist. Incrs. Left Devel. 13,104 -0- 9,965 -0- +3,139 Floor 5,587 -0- 5,583 -0- +4 Planning Commission January 25, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 2 The applicant would like to construct a clay tennis court, but does not have enough development area remaining. The City Council has been considering allowing a special clay material with up to a 50 percent exemption for purposes of counting MDA. The Council has formed a Sub-Committee to look at the issue further,but has not yet made a decision on the matter. If the Council does approve the material to be counted as less than 100% of the area it covers, the applicant would then propose to install a tennis court. Under current Town policy it would also be possible for the applicant to remove other development area on the site to gain additional MDA for a tennis court. The applicant's proposal under this application is to install retaining walls and fencing, along with a grass play area. A wood trellis is also proposed to be added between the existing pool and the play area. Staff has several concerns about the proposal. Another resident in Town was granted a site development permit to put in fencing and a lawn area the size of a tennis court last year. Since that resident did not have enough development area to allow a tennis court if it were counted as 100% coverage,he agreed that he would plant a lawn for a play area and would request approval to install a tennis court at a later date if the code was changed. A clay tennis was subsequently installed without permits. While the same thing would not necessarily happen on the subject site, staff is concerned that it would be difficult to monitor the property and to enforce a violation if a tennis court were installed illegally. Also of concern is the volume of grading (1,646 cubic yards of cut and 157 cubic yards of fill) and the height of the retaining wall (11 to 12 feet at the highest point). The applicant believes that the play area will not be visible from surrounding properties. Although it may not be directly viewed from surrounding properties, staff is concerned that the play area would be seen from El Monte Avenue. The development of a large 8,040 square foot area surrounded by a fence with retaining walls on two sides will appear as development area regardless of whether it is actually counted as MDA. Even though grass is not a solid impervious surface,the City Council has indicated that a grass tennis court should still be counted as MDA since it appears as a large developed area. The appearance of development area is as important a consideration as the permeability of a material. However, the Council has not adopted a formal policy on this issue. Staff is also concerned that 1,005 square feet (15' x 67') of the play area will encroach into the side yard setback. While a lawn within the setback is acceptable, a tennis court would not be approved in the same location. Also, the retaining wall within the setback would be higher than six feet. The portion of the wall within the setback scales at 12 feet high on the section (see sheet 2 of the • Planning Commission January 25, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 3 plans). The code allows walls or fences within setbacks up to be a maximum of six feet high. Although one side of the wall would be backfilled, the interior side would have an exposed wall up to 12 feet high. The retaining walls being proposed would have a similar appearance to the tennis court that was built at 11632 Rebecca Lane. Several Commissioners have expressed concern about the visual impact of that project as viewed from the road and adjacent properties. Also of note is the site plan shows the pool decking to be within the side setback. The approved building plans show the pool with a 30 foot setback and the decking with a 25 foot setback (the Zoning Ordinance allows decking to encroach five feet into the setback). The location of the pool and decking is likely shown incorrectly on the present site plan. There is also the possibility that the pool was constructed in the wrong location. The foundation of the house was certified at the time of construction,but the location of the pool was not verified by a civil engineer or land surveyor. Staff will visit the site prior to the January 25 meeting to try to make a determination as to whether the pool and decking was built within the side setback or not. If the pool deck is actually 15 feet from the property line as indicated on the site plan,it would not justify placing additional development in the setback. Staff is-available to answer any questions from the Commission or any member of the community. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Development plans: site plan,section and elevations (two pages) cc: Larry Hwong 12813 Clausen Court Los Altos Hills,CA 94022 Peter Fu Peter Fu &Associates,Inc. 200 Covington Road Los Altos,CA 94022 • Planning Commission January 25, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR RETAINING WALLS, FENCING AND GRASS PLAY AREA HWONG - 12813 CLAUSEN COURT A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. Additional landscaping may be required. Prior to final inspection staff will visit the site to determine if additional trees or shrubs are needed to mitigate the retaining walls. A landscape deposit may be required to assure that any approved landscape is planted and maintained. 3. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust,noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Clausen Court, Voorhees Drive and other roadways in the area; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; clean-up area (see Engineering Department for specifications); parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster),shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box,since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 4. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, public and private roadways prior to final-inspection and release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. • ,Planning Commission • January 25, 1995 Lands of Hwong Page 5 B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 5. Any and all changes to the proposed grading and drainage shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (November 1 to April 1) without prior approval from the Town Engineering Department. No grading is permitted within ten feet of property lines. 6. The site drainage must be designed to meet the goal of reducing the rate of run off associated with the proposed development. A final grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for review and approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. As-built drainage shall be inspected prior to final inspection, and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. 7. Any areas on the site that have had the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final approval. 8. The project engineer shall submit a dated,stamped,signed grading plan for approval by the Engineering Department,prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. This plan shall include full topography to the edge of pavement in the vicinity of the improvements and details of the drainage system where it daylights. 9. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Town Planner and the City Engineer two weeks prior to final inspection. CONDITION NUMBERS 3,4 AND 8 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION. NOTE:. The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until January 25, 1996). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. • 3 • .1 4 i • •• ' I.,,,. , .'4 1' ' , '''� ':15 , 11. ' ' ''1 r,_.,...,...,e,.. .,.,„,/ .,, ..,• , • • ; : : ., , . , . , 1 :. : : . . • • • , .. -A-D- .7.5 1144'''rjle'Ll :' .a7:7; (i..). .. . ›....4: ' .'i'l' ' ' '''V ''.• ,' ' �' ` 0'7,---b 4.R� 'l-'fig"f .�?1.9�';,'' Ir 1,�' •y'�`' 'I' �T�j- , ((•tt �C.'i S i i i ' �'y'4 - ''O� �� T�'F.T (j/y,17�� • �• I• 61YI 1 r t ,.��.�J�i ` • 1 1 C lY • ").-1,tig 4.- I-, .,.,,p- --e-,-,,,,,4,7,•,:i • . . .! ; • • • • A? ti.Fr (Ape/ ?v tea;,, �- -i7, 11 ? ,•1 ';, :' '�' , ; • • • I• i , ti "ae"• r, y+ // ,i.HI,. ...i .?vrry� • • • L••G7,..''t'f�' ►-�k, ,I t'�•r l.y.I',7,-.. , • • , . -4576/1/r 1 -)A1 ., . . iiiviig . 4.,,,, ,:„.„.,...„e„. _•,„, ....,9, ,•i ,y• .. : • • • • • • • • • • • • i e •• •