HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/14/1980PIANNING C0MISSI0N
4W26379
of Ins Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Ins Altos Hills, California
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
Flednesday, May 14, 1960
i
' Reel 86, Side 2, Tr. 1, 130 to End; Side 1, Tr. 2, 001 to 828
Chairman vanTamelen called the meeting of the Planning CammissIm to order at
1 7:50 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Paan Hall.
POLL CALL:
Present: Cammissioners Carico, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Stewart, Dochnahl, vanTamelen
Absent: Caimissioner Kuranoff
Also Present: City Engineer/Planner John Carlson, Assistant Planner Pat Webb,
Secretary Ethel Hopkins
CONSENT CALENDAR:
' The Minutes of April 23 were removed from the Consent Calendar for correction.
MOTION SBMIDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY! It was moved by Commissioner Stewart and
seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl to approve the remaining items on the Consent
Calendar, namely:
1. Approval of the Minutes for the Adjourned Meeting of April 17;
2. Setting of Dates for Planning Commission Meeting of May 28:
(1) LAMS OF NFS'1WIIID FARMS, File $CU 8022-77
' (2) Amendment of Section 9-5.502 entitled "Zoning" of Title 9 re
Building Coverage Definition and Tirpervious Surface Limitations
' (3) Amendment to section 9-5.209 and Section 9-5.503 of Title 9 re
Building Height Definition and Building Envelope Limits
(4) Abandonment of nmf rgency Access Easement, Lot 2, Tract $5762
(5) Proposed General Plan Amendment to Include Pathway Element
3. Acceptance for Filing of Tentative Map: Lands of Huth, File #TM 3-80
Fremont and Burke Roads, Paul Nowack, Engineer
The Minutes of April 23 were amended as follows: Page 4, Item 1 in listing in
last paragraph should read:'No fence within thirty feet (30') of the center line
of any roadway right-of-way.' Also, on Page 5, Camaissioner vanTamelen requested
that the third paragraph under "Ridge Lines" be stricken, and the following added
instead: Commissioner vanTansIcn recamended that one way of dealing with the
ridge line problem would be to allow no building on a lot with more than 158 slope
to rise more than twenty feet (201) above the highest point on that lot. This would
allow only one story houses on ridges and hilltops.
The Minutes of April 23 were declared approved on the motion of Commissioner Stewart,
seconded by Camdssioner Dochnahl.
4W REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF May 7: Commissioner Stewart discussed the
following actions of the City Council at their May 7th meeting: 1) City Council dis-
cussion on whether the Tuan should have its own Police and Fire Departments, and
` PLANNING CC"IISSION MnN= - May 14, 1980
Page two
` REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEE=G UP K%Y 7: (continued)
2) City Council's desire to have Counci]nan Hillestad and Councilman Perkins meet
with the Tennis Court SubcammittBe to clarify recamexidations on the placement of
tennis courts next to public roads.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. LAMS OF DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY, File #CU 1-80, 26000 Altamont Road, Paul Nowack
and Associates, Engineers, Request for Recampndation of Approval of Conditional
Use Permit for Caretaker's Dwelling: (continued fnzn April 23)
Mr. Carlson discussed the above request, noting that the applicant had changed the
location for the proposed structure, and that the Pathway Committee had requested
an additional ten foot pathway easement in order provide a safer pathway along a
very steep area of the Daughters of Charity property. Thereafter the hearing was
opened to the public discussion.
Carol Gottlieb, Pathwa COwittee, discussed her meeting with Sister Emily of the
Doug ters of Chari convent. Mrs. Gottlieb related that the path request was
acceptable but would have to be approved by the Daughters of Charity Board of Directors.
It was also requested that the granting of the path easement not be a matter that would
hold up the issuance of the building permit. 1Irs. Gottlieb also suggested that if the
path easamnt is not granted with the above request, that the request retain in the
file and be a requirement of any future amendment of the Conditional Use Permit. Staff
was requested to write up a description of the easement.
4*0 The public hearing was closed, and discussion returned to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner vanTamelen noted the need for the Conditional Use Permit to reflect
current conditions (the first nine conditions having been conplied with). The
following conditions were amended or added:
Condition #10: Change the date of the map to the Grading and Drainage Plan map
dated May 1, 1980 and the aerial photograph dated May 9, 1980.
Condition 411: Added: if acceptable to the owners, the Daughters of Charity shall
dedicate a ten foot (10') path easement from the most westerly corner
of the property to the driveway serving the Town.
Albert Uhalde, Elena Road, reported that in talking with Sister Emily he saw no
problem with the granting of the pathway, but asked that the path easement not
hold up the issuance of the building permit for the caretaker's residence.
�MION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIt7DUSLY: It was moved by Connissioner Lachenbruch
and seconded by Commissioner Stewart to recamend approval of the Conditional Use
Permit for the Daughters of Charity, File OCU 1-80, with conditions as amended.
Mr. Carlson discussed the above ordinance changes, noting that an amendment to
the Subdivision Chapter of the Municipal Cade does not require an advertised
public hearing, as do zoning matters.
planning Commissioners discussed the above ordinance changes, particularly the
size to be required for the bulbs of cul-de-sac. Thereafter, the public hearing
was opened and closed with no one speaking for or against the proposed ammnchmnts.
PLANNING COD44ISSION MIINUTFS - May 14, 1980
Page three
`, PUBLIC HFAPiNG.S: (continued)
2. ORDINANCE AM GING SECTIONS 9-4.703, SUBSECTIONS (a) and (b) OF SECTION 9-4.704,
OF CHAPTER 4 ENTITLED "SUEDIVISIONS" OF TT'1'f.F' 9: (continued)
MOTION SMMED AND PASSED UNANIMDUSLy: It was [roved by Commissioner Dochnahl and
seconded by Commissioner Iachenbruch to change section (f) on page two of the
proposed ordinance to require that cul-de-sac rights-of-way turnaround areas
have a minir mm radius of fifty feet (50') instead of sixty feet (60').
MOTION SECOMED AND PASSED UNANTMOusLy: It was moved by Commissioner Stewart and
seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl to recommend that the proposed ordinance as amended
be adopted by the City Council as the ordinance next in order.
3. LADIDS OF RI(Y , File #TM 2095-77, Moody Road at Chaparral Way, D. Ahlgren,
Engineer, Request for Recamiendation of Approval of Tentative Map, i.e, Grading,
Drainage, Driveway Safety and Improvement Plans, 2 Lots:
Mr. Carlson reviewed background information on the above request. He noted that
the request before the Conmission was to review the grading, drainage, driveway
safety and detailed improvement plans for the proposed subdivision. The City Council
had also requested that a determination be made as to whether the grading of the
driveway was a violation of Site Development, and Mr. Carlson reported that the City
Attorney was reviewing the matter and would make a determination on it. He continued
with a review of the improvement plans submitted, noting that he assumed that whoever
L installed the sanitary sewer would also make up a reimbursement agreement for those
connecting to the sewer. Also discussed were revised conditions, the timing for
the installation of storm drainage improvements (he did not know the timing on this),
Mr. Carlson's concurfence with the traffic engineer's recommendations, and Mr. Carlson's
recommendation that a turnout half -way up the driveway be retained. He noted that
if Alternate I is selected, the berm at the driveway -entrance would not be needed,
and that the applicant's engineer had recamuended the curved alternate alignment
for that entrance.
Commissioner vanTamelen asked about which of the driveway alternatives required the
least grading and was told that Alternate I required the�least amount; Commissioner
Dochnahl asked about the effect of drainage on the drainage basin and whether this
was in conflict with the General Plan. He was told that drainage would have to
be collected at Chaparral Way in that area. Finally, Commissioner Iachenbruch asked
why the traffic engineer had suggested varying amounts of pavement widths back from
the intersection. Thereafter the hearing was opened to the public discussion.
Dexter Ahlgren 20320 Highway 9, Houlder Creek, responded to Commissioners' questions
on the extra width of driveway at the driveway entrance, drainage pickup, discussed
the various illustrations on his map and noted that there would be no beim if the
traffic engineer's recommendations were adopted. He noted that a large amount of
grading would be required with Alternate II and noted that the sections on Exhibit A
pertain to Alternate I and a barrier of reinforcing concrete wall or a guard rail.
He responded to Commissioners' questions by noting that the already cut driveway not
be landscaped when the driveway is realigned, noted that the final road will not
exceed 258 slope, and that the purpose of the arc =.was to provide for people turning
right up the hill.
Cmmission discussion determined that the engineer should bring revised maps to the
next Planning Commission meeting with the following information included on the map:
PLANNING COMMISSION PMI VrFZ- May 19, 1980
Paq_e four
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued
3. LANDS OF RIG(MNN, File #'al 2095-77: (continued)
1. Alternate I of the roadway to be shown on the Tentative Map with
deflecting barrier to remain.
2. Amount of grading and fill area is to be located on the Tentative Map.
3. It was the consensus of the Ccnmission that the storm drainage plan
within and without the subdivision is to be shown on the Tentative Map,
9. The Rathjen House is to be shown on the Map also.
Commissioners then turned to a review of the conditions and the response to the
eight items noted by Mr. Carlson's February 19 letter to the engineer, Mr. Ahlgren:
�a) It was noted that Item 1 on the driveway violation is being determined.
(b) Storm drainage facilities: It was noted that Condition 1(b) of the
approved conditions was to be changed to reflect the date of the
latest map.
(c) Landscaping - Condition 6(a), second sentence, was to be revised to read:
'The landscaping plan shall consider drainage and erosion control and the
screening of cut and fill.' Ccnmissioner lachenbruch noted that it was
inq�ortant to soften unsightly grading scars.
Condition 6(b)- Mr. Carlson was to make up a new condition on landscaping
requirements when the revised map is sUmitted.
(d) Revised Condition 7(c) from the May 9th ma:mrandum by Mr. Carlson was to
be included in the list of conditions.
(e) Driveway Improvements - It was the consensus of the Coadssion that lmTv
black should be used to color the concrete (Condition 8(c) to be amended
on this?)
Amend Condition 8(d) shall be amended to include Alternate I for the
driveway, and applicable sections noted. (See May 9th condition recmnendation.)
Condition 8(e) was to be eliminated.
(f) Mr. Carlson was to make up a condition requesting a conditional exception
for the improvement of Chaparral Way (Condition 9(b)).
(g) Lastly, the Coamission asked for more specific recommendation from the
traffic engineer on the barrier and whether it was an effective safety
device for the Rathjen residence, was the barrier capable of deflecting
a run -away vehicle? Will the barrier be a hazard to other vehicles using
the road. Mr. Larson is to review the proposed map and make a reconmendation
on the safety of the roadway and to make a recaanendation on whether the
barrier is needed or not. Are the guard rails needed? What is the basic
overall safety design, what liability could be incurred with the use of
the road. The Commission also expressed the desire for a curve at the
bottom of the driveway to protect the Rathjen residence.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUPFS - May 14, 1980
Page five
4 PUBLIC HFARIIVGS: (continued)
3. LANDS OF RIGGEN, File #TM 2095-77: (continued)
MOTION SECONDED AND APPRgkW UNANIMODSLy: It was [roved by Commissioner Rydell
and seconded by Commissioner Iachenbrvch to continue the Lands of Riggen, File
#TM 2094-77.
A short recess was taken at 9:50 p.m.; the cannission reconvening at 10:00 p.m.
4. jTJg OF BURDLCK, File #T41 2101-78, (formerly Lands of Manuel), Elena Road,
Paul Nowack aid Associates, Recammerdation of Denial Without Prejudice, 5 Intl:
Mr. Carlson reviewed the background of the above request, noting the City Attorney's
response on the question as to whether the size of the houses to be built on the
subdivision could be restricted by an agreement with the subdivider. He stated
that the City Attorney had indicated that the Planning Commission can impose conditions
on the size, location, exterior siding, etc. for building on the subdivision. After
some further discussion on conditions, Mr. Carlson reiterated Staff's position that
the subdivision was too intsnse, that it should be a four lot subdivision rather than
five lots.
Planning Commission discussion began with Crnmissioner vanTamelen asking Mr. Carlson
to recamrend what lots might be eliminated if the nuTber of lots were reduced, and
it was his suggestion that Lots 2 and 3 might be combined into a single lot because
of the slope of Int 2 (over 308), because of the access problem off Elena, and
because of the stability of the soil inn the area off Elena Road. He continued the
review of problems of individual sites, i.e., noise problems on Lot 4 (mitigation,
however, had been provided), restricted building sites (Lot 5), conservation easement
over much of the subdivision, and geological fault areas. Thereafter the hearing
was opened to the public discussion.
John Lunch Paul Nowack and Associates 127 Second Street, Ios Altos, requested that
the Planning Comussion recamend approval of the Lands of Burdick as proposed with
the information they had already submitted. It was his feeling that mitigation had
been provided for Planning Commission concerns on access off Elena, site distance
for stopping, soils reports, and noted that he had met with Planning Commissioners
to discuss the map before then and had felt that his map could be approved by them.
Co missioner Iachenbruch noted the need for accurate slope density calculations,
the public hearing was closed, and Oannissioners discussed their concerns on the
difficulties of the site and what reccumendation they might make on it. Cormussioner
Iachenbruch noted that the revised map was an improvement on the previous one.
Other Commissioners stated that while there were two good building sites, there
were three problem sites, that oak trees in the septic tank drainfield area were
of great concern, that much of the land was subject to the problems of steepness,
proximity to the freeway, and fault traces.
A motion by Commissioner Carico to continue the Lands of Burdick and to request
the applicant to care back to the Planning Cemnission with a four lot subdivision
died without a second. On this nation, Camdssioner Carico gave as her reasons
for making this motion her concern for access onto Elena, slope and potential damage
from grading on Lots 2 and 3. Commissioner Carico stated her concern on the 'special"
environment of this subdivision.
Paul Naaack,Paul 2lowack & Associates, 127 Second Street, Los Altos, discussed
reasons or the Planning Comnrssion to recommend approval of a five lot subdivision
for the site, the size of houses that could be designed for the site, and ways to
prevent damage to oak trees on building sites.
PLANNING comiSSION 14mUrFS - May 14, 1980
Page six
PUBLIC HEA.RRr3S: (continued)
3. L4NID5 OF UMICK,File #TNS 2095-79: (continued)
Nlonran Burdick, Applicant, discussed the kinds of houses that could be designed
for lots with limited development.
Commissioners voiced their willingness to recomend approval of a five lot subdivision
if Lots 1, 2, and 3 could be restricted on the amount of development permitted. Can-
missioner Caries, however, asked how further development could be prevented on Lots 1,
2, or 3 after the original site development takes place. Cacmissioner Lachenbruch
felt ir%)ervious surface limitations should be applied to any development in the area
and Ccnmissioner Stewart asked Mr. Solaron, an adjacent property Owner, what the
square footage on his dwelling was.
Ernest Solomon, 27500 Elena Road, stated that his hams was 3,000 square feet in area.
After requesting that Commissioners call Mr. Carlson on their suggestions for limiting
development on Lots 1, 2, and 3, the following motion was passed:
MOTION SEMMED AND CARRIED: It was roved by Commissioner Lachenbruch, seconded by
Co:missioner Rydell, and carried, to continue the Lands of Burdick, File #TM 2095-79,
and provide conditions to constrain the subdivision so that the Site Development
and drawings for hares built on Lots 1, 2 and 3 be subject to approval by the whole
[ Planning Commission. Guidelines on what will be looked for when plans are reviewed
were to include the following:
1. Houses built on Lots 1, 2, and 3 should not have an area exceeding
3,500 square feet.
2. They shall have minimized grading.
3. The house and subsidiary development will generally be constructed to
conform with the natural terrain and swales.
4. The homes shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission.
VOM: AYES: Commissioners vanTamielen, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Dochnahl
NOES: Commissioners Carieo and Stewart
ABSTAIN: None
A short recess was taken at 11:37 p.m., the Planning Commission resuming their
meeting at 11:50 p.m.
5. LANDS OF THowSON, File #TM 4-80, Summerhill Read, John 24arkl, Enainser,
Request for Remm:endation of Approval of Negative Declaration and Tentative
Map, 2 Lots:
Mr. Carlson reviewed the above rust from details sutmitted by his May 9th
staff report, the esserent across Lands of Thompson, and the City Attorney's
n
recoendations on the matter. He noted that the subdivider was in the process
of re -grading the easement area, and that because of problems with adjacent neighbors
the Planning Commission should delay consideration of the Tentative flap request until
the matter of the correct location of the easement is settled, leaving the 160 foot
circle area on the lot to be subdivided unencumbered by any trace of the easanent
in question.
PLANND,r, ConLISSION MINUTES - Play 14, 1980
Page seven
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
5. LANDS OF TMU?SON, File #TM 4-80: (continued)
The hearing was opened to the public discussion.
villa
the bistory�of the Lands of Claude subdivision as it related to the Lands of Thompson
request, the results of a survey of the easement area and the intent to restore the
easement to its proper location. He requested that the Planning Cc m ssion consider
the subdivision and condition approval on the re -location of the roadway.
Forrest Blue, 24520 Sumrerhill Avenue, stated he had tried to resolve the conflict
over the easarent in a number of ways, that he had been using the easement in its
present location for seven years, and that he was seeing his attorney on the matter.
Cemmmissioner Lachenbruch ccrplimented the engineer on the quality of his map, and
Commissioners discussed various ways of dealing with the problem and with the
subdivision. Ccnmissioner Lachenbruch asked for more specific information on the
,aserent and for advice from the City Attorney on ways that the issue could be
settled. Commissioner Stewart suggested that a conditional exception might be
requested.
NDTION SDCUNUED AND FA=: It was moved by Caanissioner Stewart and seconded by
Cammissioner Carico to schedule Lands of Thorpson for the next meeting with some
480 clearance from the City Attorney as to whether the matter of the easement can be
handled by a conditional exception or sane other equitable means.
vUTE: AYES: Commissioners vanTamelen, Carico and Stewart
NOES: Caamissioners Lachenbruch, Rydell, and Dochnahl
ABSTAIN: None
CATION SECONDED AID CAP2,IFD: It was moved: by Camiissioner Rydell and seconded by
Commissioner Dochnahl to continue the Lands of Thomason, File #Th". 4-80, until
sore clear direction is received from the City Attorney, or until the easement con-
fusion between the two property Owners is satisfied.
VOTE: AYES: Ca Fnissioners van'Tamelen, Carico, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Dochnahl
NMS: Commissioner Stewart
ABSTAIN: None
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Public Use ofSports Facilities at Foothill Colledie: It was the consensus that
a letter recce emmg a ccoperatrve arrangement between Foothill College and
Town Residents on the use of sports facilities at the College be worked out
by the City Council.
2. Ridgelines: No new information was sutmitted at the meeting, but Cammissioners
requested copies of Mr. Mader's report on ridgelines. Commissioner van'Tanelm
( asked for volunteers to work on a Committee on Ridgelines, and for Planning
Ccnmission approval to do some research on the matter.
3. Fences: Mr. Carlson said that he would have an ordinance on fencing.
pAANNIING OD MISsioli jU NUTES - May 14, 1980
Page eight
r OID BUSDESS: (continued)
4. IAMS OF TAYLOR, UOS ALTOS, 80-PUD/Cluster 19: Cammissioner Steuart discussed
the results of his talk with the City Planner in Los Altos regarding this
developrent, the fact that the project had been recamended to the City Council
for approval based on the contingency that access cal. off Foothill Expressway,
and that there is nothing further that the Town can do on the Project.
5. E�moles of Lmrnnrious Surface Limitation: It was reported that a result�oo
M
study on kir3:i property develolsent would be affected by proposed
limitations that the Lands of ThcrVson house and tennis court would not have
been allowed, and that the Lands of Janklow on a steep lot had no difficulty
ccuplying with the new formula.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Letter from Alan Lambert Gerard Bores, dated May 1: Commissioner vanTamelen
rusted that the Planning Ccmnmisslon receive copies of a letter regarding
slope density calculations and proposed ordinances.
2. Bike Paths: Nr. Carlson gave a short report on budget proposals for bike paths
1n the Town.
Carol Gottlieb Pathway Committee, discussed projects proposed by the Pathway
Committee and noted that Path -in -lieu funds had been combined with the general
funis, and so she was unaware of what the total funds available to the Town
for path irprovenents.
3. Development along Arastradero Road: Commissioner Stewart informed the Planning
Comission about potential industrial and apartment development along the Palo Alto
side of Arastradero Load. He wanted to go on record as being opposed to any
high density apartment development, as this was spot zoning. He also suggested
that the City Council go on record as opposing this development and promised
that he would contact P9r. Crowe to see if he had received any information on the
proposed development.
4. 25th Birthday Celebration - Historical Society: Commissioner vanTamelen noted that
the Historical Society was asking for help in planning events for the Town's
25th Birthday Celebration.
5. Election of Officers: The following motions were passed to elect a Chairman and
vice-Chaiii for 1980-81 for the Planning Comission:
Cawdssioner Dochnahl moved, seconded by Camm.ssioner Lachenbruch, to nominate
Chain, vanTenelen to continue on as Chairman of the Planning Cammfdssion.
The nominations were closed on the motion of. Cammiissioner Dochnahl, seconded
by Cammissionner Lachenbruch. Comissioner Stewart moved that a white ballot
by cast for Chairmazr vanTamelen. This motion was seconded by Commissioner
Lachenbruch. Chairman vanTamelen was re-elected as Chairnman for 1980-81.
It was moved by Cuamissioner Stewart and seconded by Camnssioner Lachenbruch
that a white ballot be case fir Commissioner Kuranoff as Vice -Chairman of the
Planning Cardssion. Commissioner Kuranoff was declared Vice -Chairman for 1980-81.
PLANNING CODAIISSION 14INOTES - May 14, 1980
Page nine
Cw NEW BUSINESS: (continued)
i. Parking Int off I.S. 280: Cort ssioner iachenbruch noted his concern with
a parking lot being constructed at I.S. 280 and Page Mill Road, that landscaping
was much needed, that the Torun had not been sent site development plans, and
that the Mayor should be informed and asked to request that landscaping be
provided for the area. He noted that the parking lot was to provide parking
space for people who camute by carpool, and that with mitigating landscaping
appropriate screenixig could be provided, but it was imoerative that action by
taken on the matter as soon as possible.
7. Changes on Proposed Ordinance: Caanissioner Lachenbmch noted that he had some
suggestions on changes for the ordinances to be discussed at the next meeting,
and that he would call Mr. Carlson on this.
ADJOURN6IELII':
There being no further new or old business, the meeting was adjourned by Chairman
vanTamelen at 1:20 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Ethel Hopkins
Secretary