Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/2002 Minutes of a Regular Meeting November 7, 2002 Town of Los Altos Hills City Council Regular Meeting Thursday,November 7, 2002, 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road 1. CALL TO ORDER,ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Fenwick called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Casey, Cheng,Finn and O'Malley Absent: None Staff: City Manager Maureen Cassingham, City Attorney Steve Mattas, Planning Director Carl Cahill, City Engineer/Director of Public • Works Mintze Cheng and City Clerk Pat Dowd Press: Sharon Noguchi, San Jose Mercury News; Christina Bellantoni, Palo Alto Daily The Mayor recognized Pat Dowd's twenty-three years of service with the Town as City Clerk and noted that this would be her last Council Meeting. The Mayor congratulated Breene Kerr and Dean Warshawsky on being elected to the City Council at the November 5th election. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to limit the length of time for public comment to three minutes. 2. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT The Planning Director reported that at the 10/10/02 Planning Commission Meeting the following applications had been heard: Lands of Poole, 26041 Moody Road: request for a lot line adjustment—recommended approval; and Lands of Seiver, 27869 Saddle November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 1 i Court: request for a site development permit for an addition and a variance to exceed the 27' maximum height allowed — approved. The Planning Director reported that at the 10/24/02 Planning Commission Meeting the following applications were heard: request to revise the tentative map for a six-lot subdivision for the proposed relocation of the approved public cul-de-sac, Twin Oaks Court, in proximity to Arastradero Road, Lands of Huang, 27580 Arastradero Road — recommended approval; request to delete the approved subdivision condition requiring conservation easements on the six lot subdivision and instead pay the required park land dedication in lieu fees, Lands of Huang, 27580 Arastradero Road — recommended denial; and Lands of Evershine, 13310 La Paloma Road: request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool and spa—approved. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Item Removed: 4.7 (Cheng) MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Finn, seconded by Casey and passed unanimously to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar, specifically: 4.1 Approved Minutes: October 17, 2002 4.2 Approved Warrants: $598,487.27 (10/9/02— 10/31/02) • 4.3 Concurred with Fast Track Application: approved by the Planning Director: Lands of Brassington, 26020 Elena Road: request for a new residence and secondary dwelling 4.4 Concurred with Fast Track Application: approved by the Planning Director: Lands of Schreiner, 12774 Leander Drive: request for a first and second story addition 4.5 Awarded contract for off-road pathway repair near Central Drive - Reso#101-02 4.6 Approved the proposed revision of position description—Public Works Maintenance Superintendent Item Removed: 4.7 Request for an extension of a site development permit for a new residence at 13828 Moon Lane, Lands of WytheNitu, (161-98-ZP- SD-GD) Council asked what the length of the extension was and was advised that it was for one year. It was also confirmed that this was the regular procedure for extension requests. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 2 4.8 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by O'Malley, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to grant the request for a one-year extension of a site development permit for a new residence at 13828 Moon Lane, Lands of WytheNitu, (161-98-ZP-SD-GD) The Mayor announced that a bomb threat had been received and a recess was announced while the buildings were searched. After a fifteen minute recess it was stated that nothing was found and the meeting would continue. At a later time the bomb sniffing dogs would make a sweep of the Town Hall buildings. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 Update on Mayor's Goals (1) Break ground for the new Town Hall,partially funded by donations The Mayor noted that the probability that the Town Hall project as approved would be completed was unlikely. He suggested that the newly elected Councilmembers Breene Kerr and Dean Warshawsky meet with the architect and go over the work that had already been done to see what parts could be incorporated in a new design. Casey agreed that the new Councilmembers should come back to the Council with the process they planned for this project. Finn also noted that the new Councilmembers could put a new architect in place if they • wanted to. O'Malley and Cheng noted that public input was critical and suggested a committee of seven or eight work the new Councilmembers. The Mayor said he would discuss this issue with the new Councilmembers. (2) Undergrounding of utility wires in Los Altos Hills The decision was made at the 8/1/02 meeting not to put this on the November ballot. The Mayor will be reintroducing his earlier proposal on undergrounding after the new Council is in place. The Mayor also stressed the importance of this issue particularly in light of the fire that burned three acres in Town just this week as a result of utility wires falling to the ground. (3) Complete the update process for an accurate 2002 master pathway map The Master Path Plan will be discussed at the 11/17/02 Council Meeting at a public hearing as part of the General Plan amendment process. (4) Consider the possibility of adopting a view ordinance for the Town Staff was reviewing view ordinances from other cities including Tiburon. The Planning Director noted that they would move forward with this issue as other long-range planning assignments were completed. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 3 5.2 Amendment to the Pathway Element of the Town of Los Altos Hills' General Plan for the adoption of the proposed 2002 Master Path Plan (a revision of the 1981 Master Path Plan) and adoption of the project negative declaration—Resolutions# Fenwick stated that it had been a long painful process to update the 1981 Master Path Plan and create a new map. He considered the path map dated 10/15/02 to be a working drawing which could be used to create a master path plan. This master path plan would become a part of the General Plan and would also be the map used by the public to locate paths in Town. He noted that the map did not show any path easements which were not open to the public. Addressing the statements that the map was inaccurate, Fenwick stated that this map was about as accurate as possible given the available information. The existence of all easements could not be documented in Town records. Fenwick reiterated his earlier comments that if anyone had any documented information on paths they should bring it to the attention of Town staff working on this project. Concerning why Council should take any action on this issue at this meeting, Fenwick stated that it was to see that it got done at all. He noted that the Council would not be vacating any pathway easements at this meeting. He also stated that any action taken tonight could be changed by a future Council. O'Malley commended the City Engineer and her staff for the excellent work done on • this project. He expressed concerns about the proposed removal of 54 easements and urged Council to keep additional trails in as deer trails. O'Malley did agree that this map should be considered at tonight's meeting. Casey noted that the master path plan had been under discussion since 1989. At that time the Council had attempted to go through the map section by section but there was a negative response from the public regarding additional off-road pathway easements and the process was stopped by past City Councils. She noted that in 1981 there had been no public input. This Council had held public hearings, study sessions and had sent Town-wide mailings to get input. Casey commented that if the new Council wanted to start a new process that was fine but they should start with a new map. Cheng and Finn concurred that a lot of time had been spent on this project and the proposed map should be addressed at this meeting. Les Earnest, 12769 Dianne Drive, stated that Council had to open this item to public hearing as there had been changes in the last two weeks which the public had not had an opportunity to address. The City Attorney stated that Council had conducted a public hearing on this issue and they were not obligated to have another one There had been no changes in the last two weeks and responses had been made to comments received during the advertised twenty-day review period. The City Attorney further commented on the process. Each Councilmember would step down as the paths located within 500 feet of their homes were discussed. After that was accomplished Council would address the overall map. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 4 • Bifurcated Area 1: Councilmember Finn stepped down. There were no changes in this area. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by O'Malley and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the initial study/mitigated negative declaration including the findings therein and the mitigation and monitoring program for the area included in Bifurcated Area 1. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Casey, Cheng and O'Malley NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilmember Finn Bifurcated Area 2: Councilmember O'Malley stepped down. There were no changes in this area. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Cheng and • passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the initial study/mitigated negative declaration including the findings therein and the mitigation and monitoring program for the area included in Bifurcated Area 2. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Casey, Cheng and Finn NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilmember O'Malley Bifurcated Area 3:. Mayor Pro Tem Cheng stepped down. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Fenwick and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the initial study/mitigated negative declaration including the findings therein and the mitigation and monitoring program for the area included in Bifurcated Area 3. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Finn and O'Malley NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Pro Tem Cheng Bifurcated Area 4: Mayor Fenwick stepped down. November 7,2002 Regular City Council Meeting 5 Casey recommended deleting the path on the Radlo property at 28040 Elena Road. This path was not walkable and not a feasible path. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the initial study/mitigated negative declaration including the findings therein and the mitigation and monitoring program for the area included in Bifurcated Area 4, as amended to delete the path on the Radlo property at 28040 Elena Road. AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Cheng and Councilmembers Casey, Finn and O'Malley NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Fenwick Council then addressed the remaining portion of the path. O'Malley referred to the path along Christophers Lane and recommended leaving the map as is for this area. He also commented on the path at Country Way to Edgerton and stated that this was a fire road and should stay. O'Malley objected to the path connecting into the open space lands. He believed the pathway system was a circulation system in Town but such access would lead to cars,traffic issues, etc. Casey referred to the petition signed by property owners along Elena/Robleda to remove the • off-road easement along 280. Fenwick, Cheng and Finn also commented on the path along 280. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by O'Malley, seconded by Cheng and passed by the following roll call vote to keep the future path along 13100 and 13111 Country Way as a potential path in future. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Cheng and O'Malley NOES: Councilmembers Casey and Finn ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Casey stated that the residents along Country Way did not want the easement. Council discussed the easement along Byrd and Middle Fork. O'Malley stated that it was important to keep this easement. If it was removed the animals could be landlocked if residents fenced their property. He wanted to be sure this area could not fenced. Casey commented that the lots were very small and the residents may want to fence. Cheng thought the easement intrusive and Fenwick believed there were other alternatives. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Moved by O'Malley, seconded by Cheng and • failed by the following roll call vote to keep the future path at Byrd and Middle Fork. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 6 AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Cheng and Councilmember Mike O'Malley NOES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Casey and Finn ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by O'Malley, seconded by Cheng and passed unanimously to keep the future paths from 28014 Natoma to 27228 Elena and to delete the future paths on the other two sides of 27200 Elena. Breene Kerr, 27261 Sherlock Road, asked Councilmembers not to refer to removing easements. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by O'Malley, seconded by Cheng and passed by the following roll call vote to keep 27610 Natoma to 12119 Foothill Lane as a future off-road pathway. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Cheng, Finn and O'Malley NOES: Councilmember Casey ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Council discussed the easement from La Paloma at Golden Hills Court to Robleda. Cheng noted this went through someone's property and Fenwick commented that this • had been recommended against by the path consultant Brian Robinson. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND: Moved by O'Malley to keep the future path from LaPaloma at Golden Hills Court to 12869 Robleda. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and failed by the following roll call vote to remove the path along 26105, 26123, 26101 and 26201 Elena and 12469 Robleda. AYES: Councilmembers Casey and Finn NOES: Mayor Fenwick and Councilmembers Cheng and O'Malley ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #102-02 to adopt the initial study and mitigated negative declaration for 2002 General Plan Master Path Plan as amended by Council. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 7 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #103-02 to amend the General Plan Pathway Element Master Path Plan by deleting and adding certain off-road pathway routes and adding certain roadside pathways routes townwide. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Approval of Town Emergency Plan This item was continued to the next meeting. 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES 7.1 Finance and Investment Committee 7.1.1 Letter to the City Council and Town Residents on the financing for the new Town Hall This item was continued to the next meeting. 8. STAFF REPORTS • 8.1 City Manager 8.2 City Attorney 8.3 City Clerk 8.3.1 Report on Council Correspondence 9. COUNCIL-INITIATED ITEMS 10. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR Les Earnest, 12769 Dianne Drive, commented that changes had been made to the map and to the staff report with no opportunity for input. He objected to the process. Mike Schoendorf, 13145 Byrd Lane, commented that there had been an overwhelming vote for change at the recent election. He urged that the pathway issue be delayed until December and that no money be spent on Town Hall. Mike Scott, 27856 Black Mountain Road, inquired how Council Meetings and committee meetings are organized. How could the residents get questions answered during a meeting. He suggested a procedure be put in place that would allow this. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 8 • Richard Lam arter 12864 Viscaino Road, noted that the master path plan was being updated at this meeting and he recommended that it was important to have a document that showed all easements. Steve Bristow, 11235 Hilltop Drive, thanked the Council for making the decision not to vacate easements until the new Councilmembers were in place to address this issue. He also commented that he though it was bad policy to give people things after they had agreed to a contract such as giving back a path after it was agreed to in the project approval. Kirke Comstock, member of the Portola Valley City Council, commented on the benefits of paths in a community. They were neighbor friendly, safe for children and provided ways for pedestrians and equestrians to move about the community. He referred to the trail maps in Portola Valley and noted that some of the trails were developed and some were not. Ginger Summit, 13390 Lenox Way, noted that she hoped there would be opportunity for more public input on the path issue. It appeared everyone's mind was already made up about this issue. She did not feel the public was being listened to. Nancy Couperus, 13680 Page Mill Road, supported the path system in Portola Valley. She hoped to protect the open space in Los Altos Hills and noted that they would have their initiative in the Town Hall parking lot every Saturday for those who wanted to • sign it. She also hoped that the Council would withdraw their resolution on this issue and support theirs. Nancy Ewald, 26131 Altadena, noted that Council had referred to eight public hearings on the path issue and wondered if someone could give her the dates for these meetings. Kim Cranston, 27080 Fremont Road, questioned whether there could be a process limiting the length of time Council meetings could be held. It was very difficult to stay and address these issues when the meetings ran very late. Michael Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, stated he was opposed to the path decision made at this meeting. Jolon Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, referred to a letter from the Pastor at St. Nicholas in which he stated that the school had a completely neutral position on the path issue in Town. She noted that any decisions made on paths in this area should be reconsidered. Jim Downey, 26000 Newbridge, commented that he was also speaking on behalf of Anne Duwe. They urged Council to postpone any decision on the pathway map before them which they believed was inaccurate. A committee should be established to create an accurate map including an overlay to see how the easements work together. They did not think it was appropriate for a lame duck Council to make this decision. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 9 Nancy Ginzton, 28012 Natoma, thanked Council for making the change on the map regarding the path on Natoma near Poor Claire's. She had talked to the neighbors about this issue. Dot Schreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain, noted that Council had received a letter dated November 7, 2002 from Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger asking Council to defer a decision on the path issue until the new Councilmembers were seated. It also stated that the map was inaccurate and an environmental impact report should be done. Jane Kawaski, 27078 Fremont, noted that she could stay at this meeting until Lands of Huang was going to be discussed but she registered her opposition to selling conservation easements for recreational funding. Carol Gottlieb, 24290 Summerhill, reiterated the comments made earlier by Jolon Wagner and read the letter written by the Pastor of St.Nicholas. Sid Hubbard, 25228 La Loma Drive, stated that he would like Council to defer the decision on the path issue until the new Councilmembers were seated. He believed that voting on this issue at this meeting was insulting to the residents. Lalla Carsten, 13761 La Paloma, thanked Council for studying the path issue. It needed to be done. Patty Ciesla, 11990 Page Mill Road, supported Sid Hubbard's comments. Council should get input, make sure all the easements were on the map and defer action to the next Council. Peter Evans, 25229 La Paloma, concurred that a decision on this path issue should be deferred to the next meeting. Peter Ng, 12770 .Leander, thanked Councilmembers Casey and Finn for their contributions on the City Council. Mr. Ng also congratulated Breene Kerr and Dean Warshawsky on their recent election. He further congratulated Pat Dowd on her 23 years of service to the Town as City Clerk. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.1 Request for a two-lot subdivision on a 3.07 acre parcel and reuse of a mitigated negative declaration,Lands of Blair, 27161 Fremont Road This public hearing was continued from the October 17, 2002 City Council Meeting. Robert Blair, applicant, commented that this project had been approved a few years ago but the permits had expired as he had not realized the difficulties involved with getting seven agencies to work together. He requested approval of the project. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 10 • MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to adopt the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring program and approve the proposed tentative parcel map for a two-lot subdivision, subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission for Lands of Blair, 27161 Fremont Road. 11.2 Request for approval of a three-lot subdivision and proposed mitigated negative declaration, Lands of Malek, Buena Vista Drive This public hearing was continued from the October 17, 2002 City Council Meeting. Moosa Malek, applicant, commented that he had purchased the land nineteen years ago and was now looking forward to living there with his family. Robert Savoie, 11640 Buena Vista Drive, believed that access to this subdivision should be off Central and not Buena Vista. Buena Vista was a 9' dirt road in part and it was a cul-de-sac with the Malek property at the end. Mr. Savoie was concerned about access for emergency vehicles Patty Ciesla, 11990 Page Mill Road, noted that she lived at the end of Central and she wanted clarification of the pathway being discussed. The Planning Director referred her to condition #7 which stated that the applicant shall dedicate pathway easements as • shown on the proposed tentative map and as modified by an additional easement across Berrocal Creek from Central Avenue to connect to Zappetini Court. Ginger Summit, 13390 Lenox Way, commented that this was a critical pathway link between Zappetini Court and Central and she thanked Mr. Malek for this connection. Polly Savoie, 11640 Buena Vista Drive, did not want to see any construction allowed until access was obtained off Central. Art Lachenbruch, Buena Vista Drive, agreed that Buena Vista was a long cul-de-sac and only 9' wide in part but this subdivision would improve Buena Vista making it a 20' road with 14' pavement and 6'shoulders. Bill Cinquini, applicant's engineer, commented that access off Central was very difficult because of the topography. Moosa Malek, applicant, commented that he had looked into access off Central and concurred that it was almost impossible. The Planning Director noted that the recommendation from the Fire Department had not included access off Central. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 11 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Finn, seconded by Casey and passed unanimously to approve adopt the mitigated negative declaration and approve the proposed tentative parcel map for a three-lot subdivision subject to the conditional of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission for Lands of Malek, Buena Vista Drive. 11.3 Request for approval of a two-lot subdivision on a 21.34 acre parcel and negative declaration, Lands of Kerns, 11885 and 11888 Francemont Drive This public hearing was continued from the October 17,2002 City Council Meeting. The City Attorney stated that in 1988 a condition had been placed on the property that prevented further subdivision of the property. He noted that this was not a binding condition. The City Attorney also noted that in 1993 a site development permit had been approved for a 4,000 square foot home for Lands of Harker but it had never been built. In response to an inquiry from Councilmember O'Malley the City Attorney noted that the Council did not have to show compelling community need for this project just compliance with the code. Casey reiterated that both in 1988 and in 1997 the City Attorneys had confirmed that the condition put on restricting further subdivision was not binding. • Susan Roberts, Giuliani & Kull, stated that the application before Council was in conformance with Town codes. She also asked that in condition 2 the sentence reading "The Kerns are required to submit the revised conservation easement prior to approval of final map."be changed to "The Kerns are required to submit the revised conservation easement concurrent with approval of the final map." Daniel Haas-Laursen, attorney for the applicants, commented that his client was in full compliance with all of the Town codes, the subdivision map act and CEQA. This project did not require an environmental impact report and his clients had no future development plans. Sean Morley, Morley & Company, referred to the letter he submitted to the Council dated 11/7/02. He asked that Council deny this project or at least defer decision until all of the issues had been addressed. Mr. Morley did not believe the project met Town codes nor had the required findings been made for approval. In addition the environmental impacts had not been mitigated. Steve Bristow, 12355 Hilltop Drive,recommended denying this project. Breene Kerr, 27261 Sherlock Road, recommended not approving this subdivision. He noted that the 21 acres were in a highly sensitive environmental area and there was no compelling reason to change the condition made earlier that this property would not be further subdividable. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 12 Kim Cranston, 27080 Fremont Road, referred to the conservation easements and asked if this condition could be changed by a future Council. Liz Goodman, 11989 Rhus Ridge, stated that Council should encourage people to abide by the law and keep agreements. A deal was a deal. Richard Lamparter, 12860 Viscaino Road, noted that four members of the current Council had supported Bill Kerns in the recent council election. He recommended deferring this issue until the new Council was seated. Jolon Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, did not believe this was just an issue of drawing a line on the map and believed there was no guarantee the applicants would not further subdivide or sell. She also commented that there was a path on this property which no longer existed. Jim Abraham, 12831 Viscaino Road, stated his support of this project and commented that it was vitually impossible to do any further subdivision on this property. John Radford, 13180 La Paloma, commented that the majority of this Council had supported Bill Kerns in his recent candidacy for council. He did not think it was appropriate to discuss at this meeting and the issue should be deferred. • Sandy Humphries, 26238 Fremont Road, noted that this subdivision should be denied because of devastation to property because of the driveway and the house itself. This was a sensitive area. She also noted that now this property could not be subdivided because of the LUF (lot unit factor) restriction but if the LUF factor was changed, further subdivision was possible. Robin Kennedy, attorney for the Kerns, commented on her clients financial need. They were not planning on selling the lot. They simply needed confirmation for the bank loan that the lot was legally subdividable. She also noted that 87% of the 21 acres was in conservation easements. Pete Nieh, 25765 Bassett, noted that Sean Morley was representing him in this matter and further noted that his backyard was the Kerns' lot. He did not see any good reason to remove the condition that this lot was not further subdividable. He also did not believe proper analysis had been done and that proposed development should be included. Mr. Nieh believed that an environmental impact report should be done. Mr. Nieh refered to sections of the Town Code which he did not believe had been followed and he also commented that grading had been going on after the Town's November 1St deadline. Mr. Nieh did not think it was in anyone's best interest to make this decision at this meeting. They were prepared to file a lawsuit which would only cost the Town and the Kerns a lot of time and money. He thought it was a better course for the applicants to go back and review and rework their project. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 13 Steve McDonald, 11800 Francemont, had supported the Kerns building on the top lot and putting the guest house below. He did question however if the parents were going to be living in the guest house why would you put in a mobile home. He argued that he had purchased his property with the understanding that the Kerns lot was not subdividable. Kim Cranston, 27080 Fremont Road, noted that if the Kerns fail to make the payments the bank would take the property back and would sell the lots. Cynthia Hollering, Corona del Mar, expressed concern about the Council placing more emphasis on the interests of an individual rather than the whole community. She referred to the ongoing development in Southern California and warned against Northern California becoming more of the same. She commented that the applicants had known of the deed restrictions when they bought the property. The City Attorney stated that the Town had responded to the issues raised by Mr. Morley, the negative declaration had been adequate, the Town had taken additional steps beyond the subdivision map act, the analysis of the project had been adequate and the correct procedures had been followed. Casey stated that the decision before them should be based on whether they have a • legitimate subdivision request before them and it made no difference if the applicants were planning on selling the land. In 1988 the condition was put on the property that it was further subdividable. It was not a binding condition according to the then City Attorney and in 1997 the City Attorney at that time confirmed that it was not a binding condition. In 1993 a site development permit had been approved for the lower site. Fenwick stated his concerns were was it legal, in conformance with Town codes and did this project have any significant negative impacts on anyone. O'Malley was not comfortable with the fact four of the Councilmembers had supported the applicant in his recent council election. Cheng stressed the importance of whether this project conformed to the Town's codes and had nothing to do with political issues. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Finn, seconded by Casey and passed by the following roll call vote to (1) adopt the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring program with the following language for mitigation number one: "To avoid even minor environmental impacts, the west portion of Lot 1, as more fully described in the attached legal description and map, will be placed in a conservation easement. The Kerns are required to submit the revised conservation easement prior to approval of final map. The Town's geotechnical consultant will review and future development on Lot 1 when and if any plan is submitted, in accordance with Title 10 of the Municipal Code and all other applicable laws."; (2) modify or remove the condition of approval of the original parcel map approved in 1988 that prohibits further subdivision of the subject parcel,to allow the subject two-lot November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 14 subdivision; (3) make the findings required by Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act for the approval of the tentative map, as revised; and (4) approve the proposed tentative parcel map subject to the conditions of approval in attachment 1 to the 11/7/02 staff report, as revised, with amended condition 2 to include substituted language for mitigation number one and the deletion of condition four. AYES: Mayor Fenwick and Coucilmembers Casey, Cheng and Finn NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilmember O'Malley 11.4 Request to revise the tentative map for a six-lot subdivision for the proposed relocation of the approved public cul-de-sac, Twin Oaks Court, in proximity to Arastradero Road, Lands of Huang, 27580 Arastradero Road Mayor Fenwick stepped down from consideration of this item. The City Engineer noted that today the office had received the geotechnical mitigation plan for this project and the plan was to the satisfaction of the Town Geotechnical Consultant and the City Engineer. The City Engineer noted that this plan may not have • to be so severe but it was a mitigation plan to an environmental document and needed to be approved. Sophia Huang, applicant, stated that she agreed to including the geotechnical mitigation plan in the conditions for this project. Bud Shor, applicant's engineer, commented that the ingress/egress already on lots one through four should be moved to off lot one. This would assist with sewers to lots two and three. Ginger Summit, 13390 Lenox, noted that a path along 280 had been removed earlier in the evening even though it had been recommended by Brian Robinson, the path consultant. She was sorry to see that path removed and she believed the fence erected on the Huang property was really obtrusive. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed by the following roll call vote to approve the proposed relocation of the approved public cul-de-sac, Twin Oaks Court, in proximity to Arastradero Road, Lands of Huang, 27580 Arastradero Road including the ingress/egress off lot one and the including the geotechnical mitigation plan. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 15 • AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Cheng and Councilmembers Casey, Cheng and O'Malley NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Fenwick 11.5 Request to delete the approved subdivision condition requiring conservation easements on the six lot subdivision and instead pay the required park land dedication in lieu fees, Lands of Huang, 27580 Arastradero Road Mayor Fenwick stepped down from consideration of this item. Sophia Huang, applicant, explained why she wanted to limit the conservation easements to lots with a 50% slope. She believed this was in line with recent discussions and recommended changes made by the Planning Commission and Council on the issue of conservation easements. She also believed this was consistent with the intent of conservation easements. Mrs. Huang noted that they had letters of support from neighbors on file and they were trying to work with Mr. Mills regarding the fence. On the issue of the fence Mrs. Huang noted that this had been approved by the Town. Mr. Paul Huang, applicant, commented that they done what was allowed by Town Code and had preserved the quality of the project. He also noted that almost all of the neighbors approved of their project. Kirsten Powell, addressed the Council representing the Mills family who reside at 14414 Saddle Mountain Drive, immediately adjacent to lot two of the Huang subdivision. Ms. Powell referred to her letter to the Council dated November 6th and the four points she raised in that letter. These included: 1) inadequate environmental review for map revisions, 2) elimination of conservation easements is inconsistent with the Town's General Plan, 3) conservation easements cannot be exchanged for cash under the Town's parkland dedication ordinance and 4) the fence the currently surrounds the Huang subdivision should be reviewed. Sandy Humphries, 26238 Fremont Road, referred to the list submitted by the Planning Director of properties with slopes over 30% on which conservation easements had not been put. She noted that this was not according to the code and the Environmental Design and Review Committee had always understood this was being done. She noted that this made the process very subjective and asked why the conservation easements were not on these properties. Duncan McMillan, 27245 Natoma, commented that the Planning Commission had seen no reason to delete the conservation easements and he questioned why it would be done now. He also referred to the fence and believed the Mills' view should be addressed at • site development review. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 16 Steve Bristow, 11235 Hilltop, noted that conservation easements and in lieu fees were different things. The applicant had received recommended approval from the Planning Commission for this subdivision based on conditions of approval which included the granting of conservation easements. Now it appeared the applicants wanted to get more allowances from the Town for their project. Dot Schreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain, noted that this was a different application than the one the Planning Commission saw. The Commission had not seen the applicant's proposal to put conservation easements in on areas with a 50%slope which resulted in changes to the negative declaration. Such changes to the negative declaration would require fiirther review. She commented that conditions of a subdivision were very detailed and involved a legal process. Mrs. Schreiner also commented that Arastadero was considered a scenic highway and the fence was obtrusive. Carol Gottlieb, 24290 Summerhill,noted that a subdivision could be approved based on certain mitigation measures. including conservation easements and open space conservation easements on certain lots. These cannot be removed without going back and reviewing the subdivision. Scott Vanderlip, 13851 Fremont Pines, stated that this was a new request and should go back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission had made a strong recommendation to keep these conservation easements. • Sandy Humphries, 26238 Fremont Road, commented that she had traced the conservation easements and the reasoning for moving them did not make any sense. He noted that conservation easements were also water shed easements which assisted a healthy eco-system and healthy animals. Chris Vargas, 13825 Templeton asked why this needed to be done. The applicants can still build their homes and the Town can still get their easements without making these changes. Patrick Ng, 12770 Leander, stated his support of this project. Breene Kerr, 27261 Sherlock Road, recommended denying this request. The applicants had an approved subdivision which the Planning Commission had reviewed and this request was inappropriate. Jolon Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, believed Council was discussing a different issue than the one listed on the agenda. She noted that there was an historic landmark in the area of this property and she urged Council not to agree to this request. Ian Earnest, Stirrup Way, recommended denying the request concerning the conservation easements. He also referred to the fence and noted that it was a popular place for graffiti. He suggested that an open neck fence would be much better. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 17 William Downey, 14330 DeBell , recommended that the current Council defer this • issue until.the new Councilmembers were seated. Jeannette Foley, 13124 Byrd Lane, recommended preserving the conservation easements. This had not been the recommendation of the Planning Commission and she questioned why they were being asked for now. She also noted that Arastradero was a scenic road and was shocked at the fence. Sophia Huang, applicant, referred to the discussions at both the Planning Commission and City Council regarding conservation easements. She planned to follow the intent of conservation easements by putting them on lots with slopes of 50%. The City Attorney noted that the negative declaration for this project should have been recirculated to address the specific issue of reduction of conservation easements. He noted that the public hearing on this issue was closed and a twenty day review period for recirculation of the negative declaration should take place. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Finn, seconded by Casey and passed by the following roll call vote to recirculate the negative declaration for Lands of Huang for a twenty day review period specifically addressing the reduction in the amount of conservation easements. AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Cheng and Councilmembers Casey, Finn and • O'Malley NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Fenwick 11.6 Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a site development permit for a new residence, carriage house, cabana and pool,Lands of Perrell, 26300 Silent Hills Lane Charles Perrell, applicant, noted that this project had been approved unanimously by the Planning Commission at their 9/12/02 meeting. He had never applied for a variance and had worked very hard to meet all the Town's ordinances. He had also worked hard to address the issues raised by the neighbors the Spohrs and he did not believe his project interfered with their views. Mr. Perrell referred to renderings showing his project and its impact on the neighbors. Mr. Perrell also asked that condition A.3 which states in part that `subsequent to final framing, a landscape screening, landscape lighting, and erosion control plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission' be changed to review by the Planning staff. He did not believed his project had any significant screening challenges and the house would be set back from the neighbors. In addition he noted that he had voluntarily moved the cabana and carriage house further away from the Cleary property. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 18 • Sandy Humphries, 26238 Fremont Road, stated that this condition had been placed on the project because there had been problems with this project before. Tony Spohr, 27340 Julietta, noted that they had attended all the meetings on this property and they were concerned that the siting of the house could impede their view and privacy. He believed Mr. Perrell could easily move his house down the hill which would be a good compromise. Mr. Spohr asked that it be made a condition of this project that the landscaping be maintained in such a way that their view would not be affected, for example no higher than the rooftop of his house. Jolon Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, commented that it was very important to check on on the landscaping for the protection of views. Dr. Gary Cleary, 26410 Silent Hills Lane, spoke to two areas of concern. He recommended that conditions A3 and A5 include a statement about `landscaping along Silent Hills lane with trees' described in one of the Eshner development maps. The wording that the `applicant will provide reasonable screening as viewed from the Cleary residence' was fine as stated. Dr. Cleary also recommended that Condition A10 should make a statement about drainage that relates to the impact on the Cleary property. Such a statement could read that `water damage from the Perrell property (uphill from the Cleary property) will be satisfactorily addressed to eliminate potential water runoff that • may damage the Cleary property.' Dr. Cleary commented that this request was being made so that if in the future there were any issues with the Perrell property relating to drainage and/or landscaping there would be specific references in the conditions of approval to the concerns he had raised. Leo Quilici, 27350 Julietta Lane, noted three areas of concern: 1)the wine cave into the hillside should be minimized to prevent drainage problems; 2) the recommended planting screening along the ridge where their property met the Perrells and the McReynolds would block their view to the east and south; and 3) the height of the trees along the ridgeline concerned them as their view could be blocked. Nobuko Cleary, 26410 Silent Hills Lane, noted that there had been water issues over the past year with this property and construction damage to the water meter. Mr. Perrell wanted to move the water meter and she supported moving it to the other side of the path. Mrs. Cleary also referred to the 1999 Eshner subdivision map and noted that trees were to be planted along Silent Hills,preferably evergreen. Tod Cole, project landscape architect, noted that the choice of olive trees had been made because they thought these trees were native plantings, sensitive to views and best for screening. • November 7,2002 Regular City Council Meeting 19 • Casey asked why the landscaping would go back for Planning Commission review and the Planning Director reported that it was believed at the Planning Commission that this was a better course to take. She also asked about the requirement for the placement of certain trees and was advised that oaks had been removed from the property and the code requires that five trees be replaced for each removed. Cheng commented that the applicant had taken.into consideration the siting of house and the landscape plan would be going to Planning Commission for approval. Fenwick stated that he was very impressed with the landscaping plan for this project. Mrs. Spohr, 27340 Julietta, urged everyone to come to their house to see the impact this project would have on their views. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Cheng and passed unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission's approval of a site development permit for a new residence, carriage house, cabana and pool, Lands of Perrell, 26300 Silent Hills Lane subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission. 11.7 Appeal of Planning Commission's approval of a site development permit for a new residence and pool, Lands of Evershine, 13310 La Paloma Road • The Planning Director's staff report included the notation that this project had been determined to be categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Article 19, Section 15303(a), "New construction' that allows one single-family residence in a residential zone." The Planning Commission also determined that the exception to the grading policy, with a proposed cut of up to 27', was an acceptable method of lowering the profile of the proposed 26,709 square foot residence, provided that at the completion of the project the visual alteration of the natural terrain was minimized. Mr. Chan, applicant, commented that he had lived for sixteen years in Los Altos Hills and had designed this unique home to fit into the lot. It was eleven acres and no variances were being requested. All but one of the neighbors was in favor of the project. Tom Klope, landscape architect, believed they had successfully arrived at a solution for this unique site regarding the home. They had integrated the house into the hillside. Natural landscaping was being used on most of the lot; mature trees were being placed and no existing trees were being removed. Terry Eger, 13050 Alta Lane North, stated that he did not have a problem with the proposed house but he did with cutting down into the hill 27'. He was concerned that this could be precedent setting. He not agree with cutting into the hill so extensively and did not believe that anyone had looked carefully at the impact this would have on the surrounding lands. Mr. Eger asked that if Council allowed this project they have a • definite plan in place for the dirt. November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 20 Rudolph Alfinito, 25870 Westwind Way, commented that this was a steep hill and • keeping the dirt on it was going to be a major project. He also commented that other neighbors were concerned about this issue. Chris Vargas, 13825 Templeton Place, believed their was an ecological problem with moving this much dirt on a project and he stressed that a plan for the dirt was needed. Breene Kerr, 27261 Sherlock Road, referred to the estimated 33,500 trips to move the dirt from the project, the impact on the roads and the residents, and did not think it was reasonable to approve this project. Carol Gottlieb, 24290 Summerhill, noted that this was a huge amount of cut and not in keeping with the ambiance of Los Altos Hills. Garth Pickett, 24555 Bella Ladera, supported this project. He noted that he had known the Chan family for years and he urged everyone to be realistic about this project. The condition on what to do with the dirt could be worked out and if not then the project could not be done. Paul Hogan, attorney representing Terry Eger, referred to his letter to the Council dated November 7, 2002 asking Council to defer decision on this project for sixty days. Mr. Hogan believed this project required environmental review since section CEQA • guideline 15300.20 states that a categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Mr. Hogan noted that the City Engineer had not had an opportunity to make a determination on what to do with the dirt. He commented that the applicant proposed cutting 33,000 cubic yards of dirt from the hill and using 24,000 cubic yards of fill on site. Mr. Hogan did not believed all necessary information was available for this project. Jolon Wagner, 26786 Robleda Court, commented on the possibility that this property could be subdivided in the future. Robert Blum, Fremont Road,believed the design of this project was a good one and one house was better than three or four. Susan Roberts of Giuliani & Kull and Pong Ng addressed the issue of cut and fill and distribution of the dirt. Ms. Roberts commented that a lot of time had been spent on the options available for the dirt. The current plan allowed for distribution of the dirt along the slopes including benching into the hillside. John Fry, applicant's geotechnical engineer, noted that this property was in category A and was not subject to geologic hazards. Not all the area was a steep slope. He also noted that erosion would be handled during grading November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 21 i Wayne Acubo, 13680 Golden Hills Court, expressed the support of Los Altos Hills resident Larry Chu for this project. Michelle Wu, 11642 Dawson, also supported this project. Sonia Ransom, applicant's attorney, referred to her letter to the Council dated November 7, 2002. In this letter she stated their reasons for supporting this project and reiterated that this residence was categorically exempt from CEQA. Ms. Ransom also stated that the Chans were willing to include a condition that they would pay the costs if the project was challenged by CEQA. Paul Hogan, attorney for Terry Eger, noted that this was incorrect in that this project required maximum not minium grading. The City Attorney noted that the volume of truck trips involved with this project should be evaluated. If the material stayed on the property it was a grading issue. He did not believe there was anything unusual about this project to take it out of the categorical exemption status. Further environmental review could be required by the Council. Casey noted that she believed this was a good design and less obtrusive than stepping down. This plan will keep the natural hillside and she noted the applicants had agreed • to the condition for indemnification. Fenwick commented that he preferred this single house to six but was concerned about the ability to distribute the dirt properly. He believed more information was needed on this issue. O'Malley and Cheng did not agreed that this was minimal disturbance to the land. It was a beautiful house but they could not agree with moving this amount of dirt. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to continue this public hearing to the next Council Meeting and to direct the applicant to provide a report on how the dirt resulting from the grading involved with this project will be handled. 12. CLOSED SESSION: REAL ESTATE NEGOTIATIONS: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8: Property: 26375 Fremont Road: Negotiators: Maureen Cassingham, City Manager and Steve Mattas, City Attorney: Under negotiation: Lease This item was continued to the next meeting. • November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 22 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further new or old business to discuss, the City Council Meeting was adjourned at 2:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Dowd City Clerk The minutes of the November 21, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting were approved at the November 21, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting. i November 7, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting 23