Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/10/1974 (2)TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETI16 April 10, 1974 cc: Reel 24 - Side 1, Tr. 1 - 133 -End Side 2, Tr. 1 - 000-174 Chairman Mueller called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:45 P.M. in the Council Chambers of Town Hall, 26379 Fremont Road: ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Carico, Perkins, Phillips, Spencer, Young, Chairman Mueller. Absent: Commissioner Lachenbruch, Magruder. Staff: City Manager Bruce Lawson, City Engineer Alex Russell, Planning Consultant Tom Vlasic, Deputy City Clerk Norma Hislop. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 27, 1974 Commissioner Spencer stated that on Page 1, under MINUTES, first para. !,� should read, "Commissioner Spencer stated on Page 1 of the March 13th 1I Minutes, under MINUTES, first paragraph, it was he, not Commissioner Perkins who stated that it was Commissioner Perkins who was appointed to the Open Space Committee. Commissioner Spencer also stated that under CURRENT BUSINESS on page 3, that in view of the fact that every Commissioner spoke on the Geological Study, that this fact should be noted in the Minutes. Commissioner Carico said the Minutes of March 27th omitted her request that the Minutes should state the position of those persons speaking from the floor. Commissioner Perkins noted that on page 1, last paragraph, the date of the Minutes should be March 13, 1974. Commissioner Spencer questioned if the wording was correct in the last statement under "Five Year Capital Improvement Program." City Manager responded that it was correct. Commissioner Phillips stated that on page 3, bottom paragraph, that it was he, not Commissioner Magruder, who had raised this question. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Commissioner Carico moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer and unanimously carried that the Minutes of March 27, 1974, be accepted as corrected. Commissioner Perkins abstained since he was not present at that 4b meeting. u PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 10, 1974 DISCUSSION ITEMS: Chairman Mueller stated that Mr. George Mader, Planning Consultant, was out of Town for this meeting, and since it was he who was prepared to discuss the Town Committee Organization Report, this item would be continued to the meeting of April 24, 1974. Commission instructed Staff to include an organizational chart in the packet for that meeting. A report from the Town Historian, Mrs. Florence Fava, will also be discussed at the next meeting. CURRENT BUSINESS: 1. Dawn Ric Tom Vlasic, Planning Consultant, stated that on February 22, 1974, the Planning Commission had approved recommendation that this subdivision be accepted subject to conditions imposed by Staff. The approved Subdivision was then forwarded to City Council for the* appro 1. After discussion by Council, the subdlvi� den#ed w#Ef�eutPrejwd#ee and sent back to the Planning Commission. Council expressed concern that the net area of property that could be developed on the proposed four lot subdivision could not accommodate a house, swimming pool, barn and two horses, should they be desired by the property owner. Mr. Vlasic stated that the applicant was requesting a policy statement which the Staff could not do, and asked the Commission to hear Mr. Rexworthy, who would make a presentation for the applicant. Speaking from the Floor: Mr. Rexworthy explained that Mr. Hetzell was out of town presently, and he was speaking in his stead. He stated that the developer had indicated on a schematic how the proposed four lots could accommodate all structures. Discussion then ensued between Staff, Commission, and Mr. Rexworthy relative to the drainage problems, the subdivision requirements of the Municipal Code, and slope density requirements. Mr. Rexworthy addressed the problems of the drainage channel requirements, and felt that if the subdivision were to be reduced from four lots, the cost of the drainage channel would be completely out of line. Further discussion ensued; subsequently, Commissioner Perkins moved that the Planning Commission deny this tentative map without prejudice, and that the Commission would consider a three lot subdivision as opposed to four. Commissioner Spencer seconded the motion and it was carried by the following roll call vote: -2- AW PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 10, 1974 DAWN RIDGE SUBDIVISION (continued): AYE: Commissioners Carica, Perkins, Spencer, Mueller NO: Commissioners Phillips, Young ABSENT: Commissioners Lachenbruch, Magruder. Commissioner Phillips requested that his comments appear in the Minutes for the record; however, the Secretary was unable to decipher the tape because the Commissioners do not speak into the microphone. Commissioner Young stated that he wished to endorse Commissioner Phillip's statement. Discussion followed regarding possible re -writing of the Subdivision Ordinance, and Commission consensus was that they should have some input as to the language to be used in such a revision, and that the Commission should work with Staff in this regard. The City Manager commented that if the Commissioners felt that any section of the Subdivision Ordinance needed more work, that Staff should have their thoughts so they could come up with particular ideas. Discussion ensued which pertained to wording. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. LANDS OF STEDMAN Bahl Homes Developer, File #393-72 G. Nolte, En neer, ont nue Planning Consultant Tom Vlasic commented on the Field Trip taken by himself, Commissioners Young, Carico, Spencer, Perkins, and Mr. Bahl. He said that the Commission was grappling with philosophical questions, and at this time he suggested that Staff and Commission go through the recommended list of conditions which had been proposed so they could get an idea of where things stood, and what problems were yet to be resolved. Following is the numerical list of conditions and their status as of this meeting: 1. Public vs. private road - still to be clarified in terms of Commission approval. 2. Standards for right-of-way has not been resolved. 3. Right-of-way open because of private vs. public road status of Country Nay. 4. Still outstanding. S. Emergency access easement - Commission had found the alternative providing for connection from the cul-de-sac along the general alignment of what would be the proposed driveway through Lot 8 and along the southern boundary of Lot 7 would be more logical road for emergency connection. Additional information has been generated and will be available for next meeting. -3- r PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 10, 1974 LANDS OF STEDMAN (continued) 6. Conservation easement - has essentially not been dealth with. 7. Still open because of status of emergency connection. 8. Pathway - recommended as public pathway, but still open. 9. Conservation easement - still open. 10. 20' pathway easement - the applicant is questioning this and matter is not resolved. 11. Applicant is not opposed to improving prior to sale, so not open for question. Commissioner Young requested that the word "lots" in this recommendation be changed to "lot." 12. Fire hydrants - agreed to by applicant. 13. Stand-by fees for hydrants - no question. 14. Bridge across creek. After discussion, City Engineer recommended that the bridge should be designed to highway standards for bridge load. 15. 12' clearance, etc. - no question. 16. No question. 17. Commission questioned reason for this recommendation by Fire Dept. Staff was requested to get further information from the Fire Dept. since this requirement was not made on other subdivisions. 18. Sewers - no question. 19. Nater - no question. 20. Taken care of. This item can be deleted from recommendations. 21. Net area - Commission consensus was to change wording to "and the source of the excess water shall be ascertained and the problem corrected as it should affect the road." 22. No question. 23. Fault trace. Revised report of Nov. 1, 1973. 24. In -lieu fees - no question. 25. No question. 26. Final improvement plans. Chairman Mueller said that in light of Deer Park Acres, this should be looked at. After review of the list of recommendations, Chairman Mueller asked if there was anything on this land of historical significance that should be taken into consideration. The Planning Consultant responded in the negative. Speaking from the Floor, Mr. Bahl, Developer, asked what the Town's policy was regarding underground power lines along Page Hill Road. The City Engineer responded that the Town required undergrounding of utilities in -tract only. Tom Vlasic commented that the problem that should be resolved at this point was the public or private road status of Country flay, since so many of the recommendations hinged on this decision. Discussion ensued regarding problems of private roads between Staff and AMV Commission, with Commissioner Young commenting that a private road status -4- `rI 4W PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 10, 1974 LANDS OF STEDMAN (continued would eliminate any possible connection with school property. Following further discussion, Commiscinner PhilliPc movod that Country way be declared a public road. Commissioner Young seconded the motion. Further discussion revolved around pathway status on a private road, with the developer stating that he felt essentially that if the road was declared a private road, then the paths should be private also. staff commented that easements could be obtained for public paths, even though the road might be declared private. After general discussion the question was called, and failed by the following roll call vote: AYE: Commissioner Phillips, Young. NO: Commissioner Carico, Perkins, Spencer, Chairman Mueller. ABSENT: Commissioners Lachenbruch, Magruder The Commission turned next to a study of emergency access roads and which lots lent themselves to access and which did not. After brief discussion the City Engineer commented that if an access easement was not obtained at this time, the Town could not get it in the future. Discussion followed on future development of school property, and in terms of whether the Commission wanted or did not want access to the school property in the future. Commissioner Spencer suggested the emergency connection between the subdivision and the stho6l'district,property be between lots 1 and 2. Commission consensus was to agree with Commissioner Spencer. The Conservation easement and pathway easements could not be discussed this evening, so the Commission went to Condition 3 on the right-of-way. Following discussion regarding pavement, width and construction between Commission, Staff, and developer, Commissioner Perkins suggested that Staff should recommend width to the Commission. Staff was directed to come back with recommendations based on the decision made this evening to have Country Way a private road. After further discussion on an access along the creek boundary, Commissioner Perkins suggested that the Commission find out what the long-range plans of the fire district is in terms of the fire road. Staff was directed to write letter for the Chairman's signature requesting that a Fire District representative attend the next Commission meeting to clear up questions on their requirements for this subdivision. -5- 4W PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 10, 1974. LANDS OF STEDMAN (continued): Commissioner Phillips requested that his comments read into the record regarding the cul-de-sac decision. His comments were as follows: Commissioner Phillips stated that he was opposed to the philosophy of closed towns with gates on roads, and thought the Commission was subject to criticism for developing that kind of society. He said he thought we have to live in the larger world and not just the Los Altos Hills world. Commissioner Young wished to go on record as endorsing this statement. Following the above actions, this public hearing was continued to April 24, 1974. ADJOURNMENT: The Commission adjourned at 11:35 to their next regular meeting date of April 24, 1974 at 7:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Norma J. Hislop 0