Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/07/2019Approved March 7, 2019 1 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 Minutes of a Regular Meeting Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, February 7, 2019, 7:00 PM Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, CA, 94022 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Absent: Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Patel, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Abraham, Chair Mandle None Staff: Planning Director Suzanne Avila, Public Works Director Nichol Bowersox, Principal Planner Steve Padovan, Planning Technician Cody Einfalt 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR Chair Mandle opened presentations from the floor Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chair Mandle closed presentations from the floor. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS EX PARTE: Commissioner Abraham said he had nothing to report. Commissioner Couperus said he spoke with Chair Mandle. Commissioner Patel said he had nothing to report. Commissioner Smith said he spoke with Don Mattson. Chair Mandle said she spoke with Birgitta Indaco and Commissioner Couperus. 3.1 LANDS OF TANEJA; 13685 La Paloma Road; File #434-17-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening associated with a previously approved single-family residence. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304(b) - new gardening and landscaping. (Staff-Steve Padovan). This item was continued from the January 10, 2019 Special Planning Commission Meeting. Chair Mandle opened the PUBLIC HEARING. Steve Padovan, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. He explained the changes the applicant made since the last time the project was heard by the Planning Commission. Approved March 7, 2019 2 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 The Commission asked questions of the staff and received responses. Commissioner Smith asked about the recommended wildlife corridor that the Commission discussed at the last public hearing. He asked staff why they did not recommend the corridor and why it was not included in the new plans. Mr. Padovan explained that neither the homeowners nor the neighbors wanted to install a wildlife corridor on their properties, and there is no designated corridor in this location. Chair Mandle asked a question regarding the previously proposed sconce lights and if they had been removed from the plans. Mr. Padovan confirmed that the sconce lights in question had been removed with the most recent revision. Chair Mandle asked about the olive trees along the side of the house closest to the roadway. She wondered why the applicant did not plant 48-inch box trees. Mr. Padovan explained that the applicant decided to include more trees of a smaller box size. Chair Mandle invited the applicant to speak on the project. Karen Aken, landscape architect, explained the recent revisions to the plans. She provided a PowerPoint presentation of the proposed landscape screening and explained that the trees selected would grow to a desired height in three to five years. The proposed olive trees were intended for intermediary gaps in the screening rather than for full coverage. She provided the Commission with 3D renderings of the site to illustrate the full plan. She clarified that the olive trees along the La Paloma frontage will be 48-inch box size. Mark Hudak, legal representation for the Tanejas, spoke on the requested wildlife corridor. He said that there is no ordinance within the Town's code that would require a wildlife corridor and there is no agreement with the neighbors to install a corridor on either of their properties. The existing plants in the area restrict incorporating the corridor and it would require the removal of native landscaping. He asked that the Commission remove this condition. He spoke of the waterlines that broke and stated that the lines are located outside of the easement, to which to Tanejas have offered to relocate them within the dedicated easement. Chair Mandle opened the floor to public comment. Birgitta Indaco, Los Altos Hills, stated that she would not like any planting to be located within the driveway easement. She spoke in favor of redwood trees and Approved March 7, 2019 3 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 said they would be a great addition to the property and that a wildlife corridor on the Tanejas’ property would benefit the neighborhood. Commissioner Abraham asked a question regarding planting within the 32-foot driveway easement. Ms. Indaco stated that it was her understanding that there could not be anything planted in this area. She said that she was concerned that the Engineering Department may reject the trees in the easement. Director Avila stated that the Engineering Department would not recommend planting anything in the public right of way, but it might be allowed in the easement if the trees do not conflict with the driveways. Mr. Padovan clarified that the trees are not located within the driveway easement. Ron Nagy, neighbor, said he would like the Commission to be compassionate to the rural character of the Town. He said that Los Altos Hills is a rural community that should advocate for wildlife preservation. The existing fence and landscaping on the property is in disrepair and should be replaced. He suggested the fence be set back three feet from the property line to allow for deer to visit the creek in the rear of the property. Don Mattson, neighbor, said that the placing a waterline under a road surface is a bad idea because it is makes the line hard to reach. He spoke in favor of the wildlife corridor and said that deer have been using that land for a long time and should not be forced to use the main road to move about the neighborhood. He said that both properties need to give three feet on either side so that there is a six-foot clearance. He asked the Commission to protect the rural atmosphere. Anat Kremer, neighbor, stated she was concerned about the driveway on the property which would require the homeowners to back-out onto the street causing a safety concern for oncoming traffic. She spoke in favor of the wildlife corri dor and stated that the trees being planted on the property need to be mature so that privacy can be given as soon as possible. Carol Gottlieb, Environmental Design and Protection Committee, said that moving the proposed trees closer to the house is always a good idea for screening purposes. She said that the proposed olive trees should be a bigger box size and that the redwood trees should stay on the plans to provide screening. She also said that she hopes the neighbors will come together to install the wildlife corridor. Mr. Hudak responded to the comments made by the public. He said that this property has been fenced for 50 years and there is no reason to create a new corridor. He stated that the waterlines should be located within the easement. Approved March 7, 2019 4 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 Jessica Taneja, property owner, stated that she is committed to establishing privacy for her neighbors. She said that her project has been built to Town standards and she hopes that the Commission will approve the project. Mr. Hudak said that the project has exceeded Town's requirements for screening requirements and the plan should be approved. Chair Mandle closed the PUBLIC HEARING. Commissioner Abraham said that this applicant has done well over what is expected for screening purposes. He did not agree with all of the comments from the neighbors. He said that planting redwoods is the wrong decision to make because they are not native to the area and they raise a fire concern for future land owners. Additionally, redwood trees also create a large amount of shade and this could restrict the addition on solar panels on the property in the future. He spoke of the waterline issue and stated that the water companies in the Hills place their lines under roadways and this is where the lines in question should be installed. He was happy that the applicant is willing to replace the waterlines in the correct location. He sees no justification for the Town to require the applicant to install a wildlife corridor on the property. He does not want this requirement to set precedence for future development projects. He said that the deer have many other routes to get around the neighborhood. He said he supports the project as it stands. Commissioner Patel said that he is happy with the changes made by the applicant and believed the proposed trees/plants will do a great job screening the property. He said that he likes the redwood trees, but acknowledges that they do have their issues. He stated that screening this property as soon as possible is his biggest concern. He recommended that the applicant work with the Environmental Design and Protection Committee to discuss replacing the redwood trees with other trees that would grow as large and fast as redwoods. He said that moving the waterlines under the roadway is the right way to go. He said that he would like to hear his fellow Commissioners’ thoughts on the wildlife corridor before stating his opinion. Commissioner Couperus spoke of the requested wildlife corridor. He said that the Town was founded to preserve a rural environment. He said that historically speaking, there were little to no fences in the Town, but in recent years every house has installed a fence on their property. He explained that in 2007 the Town researched the highways for wildlife traffic and the best solution would be to not install a fence at all on this property. He explained that deer travel the path of least resistance and the applicant should leave an undisturbed three-foot corridor for wildlife. Chair Mandle thanked the applicant for the changes that were made with the recent revision. She said that she still supports the three-foot fence setback for the Approved March 7, 2019 5 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 wildlife corridor. She said that the fence can meander around the existing screening to accommodate the landscaping the applicant wished to keep. She explained that the Planning Commission has placed a similar condition on other properties, so this in nothing new. She said she would like to see 3 feet on either side of the property line. Commissioner Smith stated that the wildlife corridor should be seen as a pathway because they are used for the same thing. He said that increasing the amount of pathways for wildlife to move around the hills is always a good idea. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Patel moved to approve the requested Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan, subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment 1 with the added conditions that the applicant incorporate a three foot fence setback on the east property line for a wildlife corridor and that all the revisions listed by the applicant are incorporated. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Couperus. MOTION CARRIED: 4-1 AYES: Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Patel, Commissioner Couperus, Chair Mandle NOES: Commissioner Abraham ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 3.2 Consideration of a non-summary vacation of a 15-foot easement for public ingress and egress abutting 25394 La Loma Drive and 25396 La Loma Drive which is not in conformity with the General Plan adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills in accordance with California Government Code Section 65402 and Streets and Highways Code Section 8313. (Staff: Nichol Bowersox). Chair Mandle opened the PUBLIC HEARING. She stated that the Town has received many requests to postpone the item, but the item has already been noticed for a public hearing, so the proceedings must continue. Nichol Bowersox, Public Works Director, presented the staff report. She explained the role that the Planning Commission has in regards to the vacation of the easement. She stated that the Town currently sees the portion of La Loma in question as a private road. Chair Mandle opened the floor to public comment. Carol Gottlieb, Los Altos Hills, said that this portion of La Loma Drive is important to the master pathway plan. She said that the Pathways Committee has Approved March 7, 2019 6 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 been trying to connect La Loma to Laura Court for a long time. She said that this connection would be a great addition to the system. She said that if the Commission recommends vacating the roadway easement, that the pathway easement should stay. Chair Mandle closed the PUBLIC HEARING. Commissioner Couperus stated he would like to understand the motivation of the stakeholders for this vacation. He said that he understands that potions of the roadway alternate between public and private and the intent of this item is to simplify the ownership problem. He said that he understands that the City Council has accepted the road only up to a certain point. He stated he would like to know what differences would take place if the easement was vacated. He said he is curious as to why the neighbors of this street were so concerned with the public hearing tonight -- referencing the several upset emails the Commission received from affected residents. Director Bowersox confirmed that the Town has accepted the long portion of La Loma Drive. Commissioner Couperus asked staff what benefit vacating the easement would have for the Town. Director Bowersox spoke of the “private road” signage at the beginning of the street and how the sign discourages public use. Chair Mandle clarified that this vacation would once and for all determine if this section of the road was public or private. Commissioner Abraham said that if the Town adopted this section of the road, the road would need to be brought up to standard, which would be expensive. He thinks the residents are pushing to get a free road for their neighborhood. Chair Mandle stated she would like to postpone the item to hear from the neighbors who are directly affected by the vacation before making any decision. Commissioner Abraham asked about the public notice that went out. Director Bowersox explained that the notice was mailed, uploaded online, and posted on the bulletin board outside of the Council Chambers ten days prior to the meeting. A legal notice was also published in the Los Altos Town Crier. Director Avila said that the Town was in complete compliance with the Brown Act in regards to noticing for the item. However, she explained that the residents wanted more time. Approved March 7, 2019 7 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 Commissioner Patel said that this item should be forwarded to City Council. He said that the Commission was only making a recommendation and the real decision would be made at the Council level. Chair Mandle stated she believes the residents have information that was not listed in the staff report that should be considered before making a decision on the matter. Commissioner Couperus stated that there is conflicting information listed in email conversations between staff and residents, and what is being presented to the Commission. He said that there needs to be uniform understanding between all parties before making any decision. Commissioner Smith said that continuing the item would be best so the Commission can hear from the neighbors. Commissioner Abraham said that he supports continuing the item, but does not feel sympathetic to the neighbors. The item was noticed properly by the Town and it was their decision not to be at the meeting. Commission discussion ensured regarding continuing the matter to a certain date. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Smith moved to postpone the item to either the March or April Planning Commission meeting by contacting the neighbors and giving them their choice. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Abraham. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 AYES: Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Patel, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Abraham, Chair Mandle NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 4. OLD BUSINESS 4.1 Discussion of Fast Track Guidelines and Process Chair Mandle presented a report that she made summarizing her recommendations for changing the Fast Track guidelines and procedures. She stated there are three changes she would like to see. First, a site development project going through the planning review that has floor area greater than 85% of Approved March 7, 2019 8 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 the Maximum Floor Area (MFA) will trigger a Planning Commission hearing, unless the project includes a second unit. Second, a site development project being reviewed with an amount of grading greater than 2000 cubic yards will trigger a Planning Commission hearing. Third, a notification will be sent to all homeowners on a private road that has a site development project being proposed, regardless of the 500 feet public notice Brown Act requirement. Commissioner Patel said that he was worried the majority of projects would be elevated to the Planning Commission with these new triggers. Chair Mandle said that she believes these triggers will provide incentives to land owners to stay within the Fast Track guidelines and build a smaller house, or at least include a second unit, which she is okay with. Commissioner Couperus said that quantifying the amount of cubic yards being graded on a project is hard to control. He said there are two different types of grading to be discussed: building a basement, and everything else. He said that he supports notifying all the neighbors on a private road when projects go through planning review. He said that he supports the new MFA trigger with the addition of the secondary unit clause. He said that this approach would give Los Altos Hills the ability to say the Town cares about affordable housing. Chair Mandle opened the floor to public comment. Seeing no one wishing to speak, she brought the discussion back to the Commission. Commissioner Smith stated he had no comments on the item but supports the proposed changes. Commissioner Patel said he supports the three changes. Commissioner Abraham said he does not think the new triggers will work with new development projects. He said that houses in the hills are valued at $2,500 a square foot and building a smaller home will bring in less money when sold. He believes builders will always build the largest they can to maximize profits. Commissioner Patel said he agrees with Commissioner Abraham in that people will build what they want to build. He said that another route builders may take when approaching the 85% trigger for MFA would be to build a bigger basement. Director Avila said that basements are limited to the footprint of the house. Anything outside the footprint would be considered a bunker and projects with bunkers are automatically sent to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Couperus said that grading is a large issue and placing a grading trigger would be a good idea so the Planning Commission can weigh in on large development. Approved March 7, 2019 9 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 Commissioner Patel asked if the new triggers would be for addition/remodels, new residences, or both. Chair Mandle said that was a good question and she is open to hear a discussion from her fellow Commissioners. Commissioner Abraham said that he feels these trigger place a large burden for home owners on steeper slopes. Chair Mandle said that she does not see this as a punishment, only a chance for the Commission to weigh in on troublesome projects. Commission discussion ensued regarding how the proposed triggers would provide incentives for secondary units. Commissioner Patel asked staff how large the average second unit is in Town. Director Avila said that she sees mostly 1,000 square foot units being built, but many of them come with basements of the same size below the main floor. She explained that a 2,000 square foot second unit is not affordable in the hills. Commissioner Patel said he can see land owners maxing out their property and adding a second unit to satisfy the Planning Commission. Director Avila said that further discussion on second units and possible incentives the Planning Department can offer is being researched by staff. She explained one of the incentives being researched is removing the pathway fee requirement for second units. She explained that this requirement can add a large fee to the project and cause homeowners to change their minds about building one. Commissioner Abraham agreed that the pathway fee for second units should be reexamined. Commission discussion ensued regarding how to proceed with the proposed changes. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Abraham moved to make a recommendation to the City Council to implement the four following changes to the Fast track Guidelines and Procedures. First, a site development project going through the planning review that has floor area greater than 85% of the Maximum Floor Area (MFA) will trigger a Planning Commission hearing, unless the project includes a second unit. Second, a site development project being reviewed with an amount of grading greater than 2000 cubic yards will trigger a Planning Commission hearing. Third, a notification will be sent to all homeowners on a private road that has a site development project being proposed, regardless of the 500 feet public notice Brown Act requirement. Four, authorize Approved March 7, 2019 10 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 the Planning Commission to proceed with general review of Fast Track guidelines and processes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Patel. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 AYES: Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Patel, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Abraham, Chair Mandle NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 5. NEW BUSINESS - None 6. REPORTS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for January 31 - Commissioner Patel Commissioner Patel reported on his findings from the meeting. 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for February 21 - Commissioner Smith 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for March 21 - Chair Mandle 6.4 Planning Commission Representative for April 18 - Commissioner Abraham 6.5 Planning Commission Representative for May 16 - Commissioner Couperus 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of January 10, 2018 – Special Meeting Minutes MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Abraham moved to approve the minutes as corrected by the commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 AYES: Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Patel, Commissioner Couperus, Commissioner Abraham, Chair Mandle NOES: None Approved March 7, 2019 11 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 8. REPORTS FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETINGS - Jan. 22, 29 and Feb. 5 8.1 LANDS OF JAEGER; 24250 Hillview Road; File #SD18-0047; A request for a Site Development Permit for basement and first floor additions to a single family residence totaling 1,737 square feet and an expansion of the existing sports court; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15301(e) - Additions to an existing structure that does not increase floor area by greater than 2,500 square feet; (staff-Jeremy Loh). 8.2 LANDS OF LAKHANI; 14172 Amherst Court; File #SD18-0043; A request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening for a permitted single-family residence; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304(e) - New gardening or landscaping, including the replacement of existing conventional landscaping with water efficient or fire resistant landscaping; (staff-Jeremy Loh). 8.3 LANDS OF MOORE; 13861 LA PALOMA ROAD ; File #SD18-0048; A request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening associated with a previously approved single-family residence. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304(b) - new gardening and landscaping. (Staff-Dylan Parker). 9. REPORTS FROM FAST TRACK MEETINGS - Jan. 29 & Feb. 5 9.1 LANDS OF YU; 12430 Casa Mia Way; File #SD18-0057; A request for a Site Development Permit for a new 5,216 square-foot residence with a 4,632 square foot basement, new pool, and modifications to an existing tennis court (Maximum height 26’-6”). CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(a) – construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone (Staff-Jeremy Loh). 9.2 LANDS OF WILLIAMS; 13505 Burke Road; File #SD18-0053; A request for a Site Development Permit for a new 5,233 square-foot residence (Maximum height 17’-0”) with a new 598 square foot accessory structure and new 900 square foot pool. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(a) – construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone (Staff-Jeremy Loh). 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:30 PM Approved March 7, 2019 12 Regular Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 2019 Respectfully Submitted, Cody Einfalt Planning Technician The minutes of the February 7th Regular Planning Commission Meeting were approved as corrected at the March 7, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting.