Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/08/1978 (2)PLANNING COMMISSION Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, February 8, 1978 Reel 66, Side 2, Tr. 2, 441 to End; Reel 67, Side 1, Tr. 1, 001 to 677 Chairman Stewart called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:50 P.M. in the Council Chambers of Town Hall. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Stewart, Perkins, VanTamelen, Dochnahl, Kuranoff Absent: Commissioners Carico and Lachenbruch Also Present:City Manager Robert Crowe, Town Planner/Engineer John Markl, Secretary Ethel Hopkins CONSENT CALENDAR: It was requested that Item 2(c) on the Consent Calendar be removed for separate consideration. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Dochnahl, seconded by Commissioner Stewart, and carried that the remaining items on the Consent Calendar be approved, namely: (1) Minutes of January 25, 1978 (2) Acceptance for Filing of Tentative Maps: (a) LANDS OF ARMES, Parcel C, File #TM 2076-78, Saddle Mountain Drive, John Clegg, Engineer (b) LANDS OF NOLLER, File #TM 2080-78, LaPaloma and Alta Tierra Roads, Paul Nowack and Associates, Engineer All Commissioners voted for the motion. However, Commissioners VanTamelen and Perkins abstained from voting on the approval of the Minutes of January 25. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Stewart, seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl, and carried that LANDS OF BAHR, File #TM 2079-78, South Fork Lane, Paul Nowack and Associates, Engineers, be accepted for filing. All Commissioners voted for this motion except Commissioner Kuranoff who abstained. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Owi ht Me er, Bas Homes, General Partner and Partnership, Saddle Mountain Estates, reques s4 tia omission move to the second item under "Unfinished Business". 2. Letter of December 13 1977 from Santa Clara County re Jobs and Housing: { Commissioners concluded, after discussion, that they had insufficient information on hand to respond intelligently to Councilman McReynolds' request for a statement. NOTION SECONDED AND UNANIMOUSLY PASSED: It was moved by Commissioner Perkins and seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl that Item C-2 under "Unfinished Business" re Jobs and Housing be continued until more information is available. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 8, 1978 Page two UNFINISHED BUSINESS: (continued) 1111' 1. Lands of Saddle Mountain Estateass Fite #TM 2060-77, Review of Entranceway o a eMountain saes ram rra ero oa Mr. Markl reviewed the history of the plans being shown to Commissioners, noting that the plan before the Commission was the result of opinions expressed by the Planning Commission, members of the City Council and the results of the traffic study done for the subdivision. Present at the discussion of the entranceway plans were John Clegg, Engineer for Saddle Mountain Estates and Dwight Meyer, Bas Homes. Commissioners raised various issues not adequately addressed by the proposed plans. They were: 1) that no provision had been made for getting around the entranceway by bicycles, 2) that bots dots be used to delineate the centerline of Stirrup Way while the area on Arastradero Road be striped, 3) the need for stop signs to be placed appropriately, 4) whether the berm area should be planted or left as a dirt area (Commissioner VanTamelen specifically requested that the area be planted.), 5) ways that a left turn lane and bike path could be accommodated. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Perkins, seconded by Commissioner VanTamelen, and passed by unanimous vote that the matter of the Entranceway review for Lands of Saddle Mountain Estates be re -considered and new plans with the above items considered brought back to the Planning Commission at the meeting of February 22. `r 3. Model Community Noise Ordinance: Commissioner Perkins made the suggestion that each Commissioner and also the Chair- man of the Noise Abatement Committee Mr. Gregorwich make up a summation of their thoughts on the proposed noise ordinance. These would be submitted to the Planning Commission and the Noise Abatement Committee for consideration at the next meeting of the Planning Commission. MOTION PASSED BY CONSENSUS: It was moved by Commissioner Perkins, seconded by Commissioner Kuranoff, and the consensus that the matter of the Model Community Noise Ordinance be continued until a representative of the Noise Abatement Committee was present to discuss it with the Commission. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. LANDS OF MUELLER File #TM 2072-77, Natoma Road, Paul Nowack and Associates, ng neer, equest or Recommendations of Approval of Negative Declaration and Tentative Map Mr. Markl reviewed pertinent information on the above request as contained in his staff report dated January 27, 1978. Specific items discussed were the intersection and site distance of the proposed Mueller Court and Natoma Road and various pro- posals for dealing with the blind curve area on Natoma Road, and pathway requests. He. noted that new pathway requests wtfre made in the Pathway minutes of February 6. ` Mrs. Fiksdal Chairwoman Pathwa Committee, noted that the new pathway request did no— ci Donee o oEiier pa ways, u also sad that the only gap would be with the property of the Poor Clares. The Alexanders would be willing to have a path on PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 8, 1978 Page three fir' PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued) 1. LANDS OF MUELLER, File #TM 2072-77: (continued) their property, _and she felt that this could connect to the Casterson property which would soon be under discussion. She introduced Mrs. Stevenson who discussed further the new pathway request. Fran Stevenson Beaver Lane, interested citizen and volunteer on the Pathway ommi tee, s a e a e Alexanders had indicated a willingness to have a path on their property, and this in turn could connect to the Casterson property which would soon be under discussion. She spoke for the new pathway request. Several Commissioners expressed consternation at having to consider a new pathway request on such short notice and without definite word from the Alexanders or the Castersons on their willingness to provide easements for paths. Discussion turned to the matter of the various alternatives for the entry way into the sub- division. Mr. Markt spoke in favor of plan submitted because it utilized the abandoned quarry area for the roadway, but he discussed the alternatives submitted and noted that they were two good alternatives. Thereafter, the hearing was opened to the public. Paul Nowack En ineer, discussed the roadway alternatives, noting that he did not favor erna ve , that Alternative A would necessitate more earth moving, and spoke in favor of the road as proposed because it was routed through the quarry area and minimized unsightly scarring, etc.. MM�ar,yy �Muulleer_��Ap�l__ic�ant, spoke against the new pathway request. She said that the p l ed b a real invasion of privacy as one arrived at Lot 3, and would be obtrusive to the Lands of Palm. She noted that people on horses would be able to look into owners' pool areas. Jean Palm 12770 Dawn Lane, expressed strong opposition to a horse trail on any par o proper y e ind them. She noted the problem of privacy was involved because of a pool and bedroom area that would be accessible to the view of horsemen. Fran Stevenson Beaver Lane, spoke for the pathway request. She noted that it was a way or i ren o go lap, one area to another in a safe manner. She noted that the Alexanders were strongly in favor of a trail, and there would be no problem of getting land from them. The public hearing was closed, and discussion returned to the Commission. Chairman Stewart asked about the disposition of several buildings on the property and was told by Mrs. Mueller that there was no plan to take these family farm buildings down. Thereafter, the Connnission began a review of the Conditions, with the review beginning at the proposal submitted by the Pathway Committee at the beginning of the meeting. Commissioner Dochnahl stated that the Town should be careful not to extend its paths to the point that they become a nuisance, noting that he objected to paths that went through people's yards. He .felt that paths should get one in and out of a t subdivision and onto other paths. �r MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Stewart, seconded by PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 8, 1978 Page four PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued) 1. LANDS OF MUELLER, File #TM 2072-77: (continued) Commissioner Perkins, and carried that there be no path along the northern boundary of the Mueller property as proposed by the Pathway Committee Minutes of February 6, 1978. AYES: Commissioners Stewart, Perkins, Dochnahl, Kuranoff NOES: Commissioner Van7amelen ABSTAIN: None Considerable discussion occurred on Condition 9(a) on whether it was helpful to have a pathway along Mueller Court, and whether or not it should be a natural path or a Type IIA path. It was the consensus, after discussion, that Condition 9(a) be left as written. Chairman Stewart expressed his feeling that a constant charge should be made on road in -lieu fees rather than a fluctuating charge of $3.50 per lineal foot for those roads recently re -surfaced and $10.00 per lineal foot for roads not recently resurfaced. Commissioners and Staff discussed the reasons for the varying contri- butions required to the road -in -lieu fund. It was the feeling of the Commission, however, that the Council should be approached and a study made on whether to equalize funds charged for road -in -lieu fees. No further action was taken on this matter. KATION SECONDED AND DEFEATED: It was moved by Commissioner Stewart and seconded by Commissioner Perkins that Condition 10(b) fees be changed from 90.00 per lineal foot to $3.50 per lineal foot. AYES: Commissioner Stewart NOES: Commissioners Perkins, VanTamelen, Dochnahl and Kuranoff ABSTAIN: None MOTION SECONDED AND UNANIMOUSLY PASSED: It was moved by Commissioner Perkins, seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl, and passed unanimously that Mueller Court be constructed as shown on the tentative map dated January 27, 1978. All Commissioners present voted for the motion. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Perkins, seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl and passed unanimously that a negative declaration be recommended for the Lands of Mueller, File #TM 2072-77. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Dochnahl, seconded by Commissioner Perkins, and passed by unanimous roll call vote that the Lands of Mueller, File #TM 2072-77, be recommended for approval with conditions as amended. 2. LANDS OF GERARD INVESTMENT LTD. File #TM 2071-77, Moody Road, Paul Nowack an qu Associates, ng neer, Reest for Recommendations of Approval of Negative Declaration and Tentative Map Mr. Markt discussed the above request as proposed in his staff report dated 4W January 31. Specific items discussed were the relationship ofthe subdivision under discussion to a former subdivision across Moody Road, Chaparral Way, and the relation- ship of the subdivision map to the General Plan Diagram. He noted finally that the subdivision was difficult because of steep terrain and various design items involved. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 8, 1978 Page five PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued) 2. LANDS OF GERARD INVESTMENT, LTD., File #TM 2071-77: (continued) Commissioners began discussion by expressing concerns on how the development of the subdivision fit in with the General Plan Diagram, the denseness of the sub- division, and the size of the conservation easements, and whether six lots could be obtained with the amount of area given to conservation easements, the matter of access to the subdivision through Tanglewood Court, and whether the driveway access to Lot 2 was too steep. The Commissioners also asked that after the subdivision was approved, that the grading plans come back for review by the Planning Commission. Mr. Mark] pointed out that the General Plan Diagram was really a broad brush strokeeffort. This was further elaborated on by Mr. Crowe as he pointed out that that the conservation easement should follow the swale on the property and that the General Plan Diagram was in error because it had the conservation areas in the wrong places. Thereafter, the hearing was opened to the public. Alan Lambert, Developer, discussed his subdivision proposals. He noted that pains_a ing cam' are�had-been taken in the design of the subdivision, that the grade of the driveway was 10%, and that retaining walls were being built to minimize the amount of cut and fill needed, and that all building sites proposed are actually excellent building sites. He pointed up that the General Plan Diagram did not accurately show the areas where conservation easements were needed. `r PASSED BY CONSENSUS: The hour being late, it was decided that this subdivision could not be thoroughly discussed at the meeting of February 8. It was the consensus of the Commission that Lands of Gerard Investment, Ltd., File #TM2071-77, be continued until the next meeting when it would be the first item discussed under "Public Hearings". OLD BUSINESS: 1. Proposed Ordinance re Fences: It was the consensus of the Commission that the Ordinance on Fences be listed under "Items of Unfinished Business" for discussion at the next meeting of the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further new or old business, the meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 11:50 P.M.. Respectfully submitted, Ethel Hopkins Secretary