HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/11/1980PIANNINC COP1MISSION
tawTo+m of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEEPINC
Wednesday, June 11, 1980
Reel 87, Side 1, Tr. 1, 001 to End; Side 2, Tr. 1, 001 to 545
The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman vanTamelen
at 7:47 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Town Hall.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Crn ssioners Carioo, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Stewart, Dochnahl, Chairman `ran
Tamelen
Absent: Commissioner Kuranoff
Also Present: City Engineer/Planner John Carlson, Assistant Planner Pat Webb, Secretary
Ethel Hopkins
Press: Florence Pallakoff, Los Altos Thum Crier
CONSENT CALENDAR:
ZVTION SECONDED AMID PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: On the motion of Commissioner Stewart,
seconded by Commissioner Rydell, the follavina items on the Consent Calendar were
approved:
1. Approval of Minutes : Minutes of May 14
2. Setting of Dates of Public Hearings for June 25, 1980:
Variance and Permit Cmmission: Lands of vonHuene, File #VAR. 4-80
Planning Cm ission: Lands of Avila, File #TM 2-80 and CU 2-80
Lands of Huth, File #TM 3-80
REPORT .F�1 CITY COUNCIL j=jINC OF MAY 21: No report was given because of Commission-
er Lachenbrnoh's inability to attend the meeting.
REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE BY THE CITY OF PALA ALTO FOR ARASTRADERD ROAD:
Mr. Carlson reviewed information on the abow_,r nest from a report dated Mav 9th
frac. the City of Palo Alto. He noted that a Public hearing would be held on June 25
at 7:30 to consider the rezoning proposed in the May 9th report, that a report on
the Arastradero Road rezoning would be available on June 20th from the City of Palo
Alto, that land being proposed for rezoning was Stanford Land within the City of
Palo Alto, and that the rezoning proposed was for multiple family residential or
research/office-housing uses. He noted that a number of people were present to
express concern on the issue.
A short discussion among Comaissioners followed, and the hearing was opened to the
audience for com t.
a �s HelcTesson 26925 St.Francis Drive. wanted to know if an Environmental Impact
AW Report had been prepared, questioned whether the housing being proposed was appropriate
for the Arastradero Road area, expressed concern on additional traffic that would be
generated with more develops t, and urged that the City Council be directed to oppose
further development vigorously.
PLANNING COMISSION M=ES - June 11, 1980
Page two
REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO FOR ARASTRADERD ROAD: (con-
tinued)
Jce Seiger 27987 Old Trace Lane, submitted an article on the rezoning that had
been printed in the Palo Alto Tvmes and noted that there was confusion on the specific
area planned for rezoning, pointed out the lack of sufficient notification on the
matter, the need for information on environmental impacts, fire and police protection,
density proposed, setbacks, height limitations, etc., and stated that he and a group
of people concerned about the issues were not necessarily opposed to the rezoning but
lacked sufficient information to respond to the proposal• He requested that the
Planning Commission reammend a resolution urging a delay in the zoning changes,
that a citizens committee be formed to make suggestions on the zoning changes, and
that officials of the Tuan be included in that conrdttee.
Mel Anderson, 27881 Baker Lane, expressed concern on additional traffic generated
by the rezonrxmq, and uointed out that this was a danger to children who no longer
had bus transportation to school. He suggested, however, that the problem could be
solved if there were some other way other than Arastradero Road for children to travel
to school.
Heinz Erzberger 13457 Thendara Lane, discussed areas that were being Proposed for
rezoning as well as those that might also be rezoned, pointed out that the rural
character of Los Altos Hills was under attack, and stated his opposition to any re-
zoning of adjacent Palo Alto land unless it was for sinale family housing. He
urged the Planning Commission and City Council to opposed the rezoning, requested
that the resolution submitted by Mr. Seiger be strengthened to express this opposition,
and stated that once further development takes place there will be a drive for commercial
development.
Isidro A. Diaz�Poss, 835 [7esa Court, Palo Alto, stated that he worked in the research
park on Arastradero Fuad and that the area was attractive as it is presently developed.
He urged the Town to oppose further development, and noted that more information should
be made available on what is being proposed.
Barn+ Willis 26970 Arastradero Road, discussed past development along Arastradero Road
as it affected life rn Los Altos Lulls and the proposed development as an effort to
do something about the housing -jobs imbalance in the area. He discussed what the pro-
nosed development could mean in terms of traffic, commercial development, etc., cited
the lack of time to consider the issues, and urged opposition, and noted that the area
should remain as it is.
Vince Liu, 27241 West Fremont Road, discussed the impact of further development, re-
cuested that an EIR be prepared, and stated his opposition to further development be-
cause of the horrendous impact of the amount of traffic that would be generated.
Paul Borg 13452 Carillo Lane, urged opposition to the proposed development.
Gail Okev 28011 Purissima Road, noted that Arastradero Road mould become like Page
Mill Read.
Mrs Hong 13452 Carillo Lane, noted the need to know when the '1.00 foot setback along
Arast adero Fuad was out unto effect, noted that only two story development was to take
E ulace on Stanford land, noted also that the 200 foot setback had been voted on by area
�/ residents, and asked about making an effective protest on Palo Alto's rezoning.
Commissioner Carico requested that persons concerned about the Arastradero Road issue
list their names for the record.
PLANNING COr1MISSI0N MINUTES - June 11, 1980
Page three
kw REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE BY THE CITY OF PAIL? ALTO FOR ARASPRADERO ROAD: (con-
tinued)
MOTION: It was moved by Cmmissioner Rydell and seconded by Commissioner Stewart
to adopt the resolution submitted by Mr. Seiger with the additional statement urging
opposition to the proposed zone change. Reasons given for the opposition were the
following: 1) the need to investigate traffic impact of the proposed development,
2) the need to ensure safety along Arastradem Road, and 3) the need for an Environ-
mental LTpact Report.
Mr. Rydell stated that the Minutes of the meeting should be sent to the City Council,
along with anything that the residents can submit in writing, and that this info=tion
should be presented at the next City Council meeting. Mr. Carlson added that letters
should be addressed to the City Council and were to be suhndtted by noon on Friday,
Jame 13th.
In discussion before the vote on the motion, Commissioner Lachenbruch noted the need
to obtain further information on the rezoning and the need for communication, par-
ticularly at the Mayor's level to be established between the Town and the City of
Palo Alto. He suggested that the deep concern of the Tuan should be conveyed to
the City of Palo Alto as well as the need for information. He noted that Staff should
undertake a study and gather up the facts and prepare a report for distribution to
the City Council and the Planting Comussion, and also make it available to the public
so that we know what the issues are and can devise a strategy for dealing with the
issues. Cammissioner Lachenbruch endorsed Cc missioner Rydell's suggested that
4 the persons present endorse the resolution presented and that their signed resolutions
should be presented to the City Council as a separate lever, but he emohasized that
he felt the need for the actions he had outlined before the passage of a resolution.
Cammdssioner Carico noted the critically short time period and the need for organization
for effective representation at the July 25th meeting.
Jack Fogle, Old Trace Road, noted his strong support for the original resolution
but cautioned opposition before having rare information from Palo Alto. He suryported
the formation of a cormittee and noted that Palo Alto was under strong pressure to re-
duce the imbalance of lobs and housing, this pressure caning from County, State and
Federal government. He noted his support for the resolution proposed but was against
the statement of opposition to the rezoning that was added. He noted the need for
more information.
Commissioner vanTamelen appointed Commissioner Stewart to the Cmmittee cited in
point three of the resolution and noted that she would contact the Mayor and others
on this matter and that Staff should see what information they can collect.
Commissioner lachenbruch noted that Commissioners should obtain copies of the June 20th
report and any staff report issued.
v=: AYES: Cun<dssioners Carico, ^ydell, and Steuart
NOES: Commissioners vanTamelen and Dochnahl.
ABSTAIN: Ca ssioner Lachenbrnch
Commissioners noted their reasons for voting against the resolution - Camnissioner
Doch nahl stated that he agreed with Com nissioner Lachenbruch, that he could not vote
in favor of opposing the redevelopment when he did not have enough information to
make a decision. Cmmissioner vanTamelen stated that she also voted against the
motion for this reason.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - June 11, 1980
Page four
REPORT ON PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE BY THE CITY OF PAI!o ALTO FOR ARASPRADERO ROAD: (con -
taw tinued)
Commissioner Stewart suggested that Commissioner varframelen also consult with former
Mayor McReynolds on the rezoning, as he had been involved with the county on housing
studies.
Lvnn Wvlett, IaCresta Drive, noted that she still has children in the Palo Alto
School District and that that district works very closely with the City and their
needs. She noted that Fremont Hills and Turman Schools had been closed and questioned
where schools would come from if more housing is constructed. She suggested contacting
Neaman Walker of the Palo Alto School District if it would benefit the Town.
Commissioner Carica stated for the record that she had voted for the resolution be-
cause a change is being remmended for adjacent properly without the benefit of an
environmental impact report and that charges are being recommended that would affect
all of the area residents.
The Secretary was directed to send Mr. Joe Seiger a copy of the June 20th report
from Palo Alto when it was available, and the discussion was concluded. A short
break was taken at 9:12, the meeting resuming at 9:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
After a brief summary explaining the intent of the proposed ordinance changes, the
hearing was opened to the public discussion. No one addressed the issue from the
audience and the hearing was closed. Chairman vanTamelen called attention to a
letter from Alan Lambert, Gerard Homes, Inc., dated May 1, 1980 regarding the ordinance
proposal, copies of which were distributed to the Commissioners. Thereafter the
following motion was passed:
MOTICN SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Rydell, seconded by
Commissioner Carico and carried that the above ordinance amendment be recc mended
for approval as amended by Commissioner Iachenbruch's suggestions on May 22 and
distributed to the Planning Comni.ssion thereafter.
VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Carico, Iachenbruch, Rydell, Dochnahl, vanTamelen
NOES: Commissioner Stewart
ABSTAIN: None
Commissioner Stewart noted, in voting "no" that in previous review of the proposed
ordinance changes, it was found that very few of the homes already under construction
in the Town would be significantly affected by the changes, that the ordinance changes
in effect puts a "blanket" over the Tann that would possibly exclude a few homes, that
innovative architecture might be prevented by the changes, and that the ordinances
in effect hit a smell bug with a big fly sprat.
2. LANDS OF THOMPSON, File #TM 4-80, Su, hill Road John Markl Engineer, Request
nr n 01 WVMV..o ego ve Ik'`.lazarlon *ta r .S
Mr. Carlson reviewed with the Commission the contents of Mr. Markl's letter of
May 22 and the proposed relocation of a portion of the driveway crossing the
PLANNING C9 IISSION MINUTES - June 11, 1960
Page five
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
t 2. LANDS OF TM1PSON, File 071 4-80: (continued)
`
Thompson property. He cautioned against getting between the property owners Thompson
and Blue and advised that the Planning Cammi.ssion continue the above request until
the matter is settled. He noted further that one attempt to relocate the driveway
had been stopped by Mr. Blue and that the Town had not been notified as yet that the
driveway had been moved. later in the discussion on the Thmpson matter, Mr. Carlson
reconrended against a condition granting a conditional exception for the driveway.
Commissioners discussed various ways to dealing with the Thompson subdivision, i.e.,
whether to delay the filing of the Final Map until the roadway is relocated or to
grant a conditional exception for the driveway.
John Markl Engineer for the Applicant 1030D Castleton Terrace, Sunnyvale, discussed
the results of his imiestigatron and aerial survey showing that a portion of the
driveway had been moved recently, his inability to meet with Mr. Blue's attorney,
and asked that the Cammission consider the Tentative Map request.
WrION SECONDED AND FAILED: It was moved by Commissioner CariCD and seconded by
Commissioner Stewart that the Planning Commission consider the Tentative Map for
the Lands of Thompson and condition it that a Final Map could not be filed until the
driveway was relocated outside the 160 foot circle or that the Planning Commission
recamrend a conditional exception to the ordinances.
VOTE: AYES: Cammi.ssioners Carico and Stewart
NOES: Cannissioners vanTamelen, Iachenbruch, Rydell and Dochnahl
ABSTAIN: None
It was noted by tr1r. Carlson that the Planning C nrdssion must act on the Tentative
Map by June 25, as the time expires on June 30th, and recommended that at the
June 25th meeting the Planning Commission continue the matter, deny the map or
recmrtend approval.
Commissioners requested that before they take action that Mr. Carlson obtain from
the City Attorney the following: Commissioner vanTamelen asked for specific wording
on a condition for the Tentative Map that the final map could not be filed until the
driveway is removed £ran the 160 foot circle, Commissioner Iachenbruch requested that
Mr. Gillio advise if conditioning the map in such a way would be an appropriate way
of dealing with the issue, and Commissioner Stewart requested Mr. Gillio's advice
on whether the Commission could recc mend a conditional exception to the ordinances
on the driveway area that infringes same eight (8) feet into the 160 foot circle.
It was noted that this information was to be available for .Planning Commission
action at the meeting of June 25.
3. LADIDS OF RIGGE21, File #TD1 2095-79, Moody Road at Chaparral Way, D. Ahlgren,
Engineer, Request for Recamewation of Approval of 'tentative Map, 2 Lots (i.e.,
Grading, Drainage, Driveway Safety and Ltpro . nt Plans):
Commissioner Carim questioned whether the Plannina Commission should consider first
the site development violation listed under "Old Business" for the Lands of Figgen.
Dexter Ahlgren Engineer for the Applicant 20320 Highway 9 Boulder Creek, pointed
out that the City Attorney's letter of May 23 had affirmed that the Tentative Map
for subdivision and the issue of whether there was a site development violation were
two separate issues. He urged the Camtission to continue with the consideration of
the subdivision request.
CC ssioner Carrco withdre� her but # was noted that the question of a Site
DeTMopment violation should be I sten under New Business rather than Old Business"
PLANNING M4vaSSION MINUTES -June 11, 1980
Page six
kw PUBLIC u=A G9: (continued)
3. LANDS OF RIGGEN, File #,IDI 2095-79: (continued)
Mr. Carlson reviewed the most recent information submitted by Mr. Ahlgren with his
letter of May 21, i.e, revised maps, recommendations of the traffic consultant
Mr. Larsen, and revised conditions submitted to the planning Ctamission for the
June 11th meeting. He recce Tended re -approval of the Negative Declaration.
The public hearing was opened and closed, with no one speaking for or against the
Negative Declaration. The following motion was passed:
K)TION SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANDUUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Steuart
and seconded by Cmmissioner Rydell to reapprove the Negative Declaration dated
December 12, 1979 for the Lands of Riggen, File #TM 2095-79.
Commissioners began a review of the revised conditions, with discussion on storm
drainage improvements, location of retaining walls and materials to be used in their
construction, whether a barrier should be required to protect the Rathjen residence
and when plans for improvements wouldf be reviewed by the PlannLnci Cmrission.
Dexter Ahlgren, Engineer, discussed the need for retaining walls to be re -enforced
concrete block at the hairpin turns, that walls going up the curve could be redwood
timber, plans to correct roadway deficiencies and reduce the steepness of the driveway,
the permanence of re -enforced concrete block walls, and the time when improvement
plans could be submitted to depend on what is decided by the Planning Commission and
4W city Council.
The following changes were made to the conditions:
Condition B.E.(1): PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To amend Condition 8.E.(1) to read: Yellow
reflective pavement markers on both sides of the driveway reflecting
in both directions.
Condition S.E.(2): PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To eliminate Condition 8.E.(2) as the previous
condition was sufficent to handle roadway marking.
Condition 9.A: PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To amend Condition 9.A by deleting the word "wood"
from the fourth line, as unnecessary. It was noted that the kind of
material for the retaining walls should be left to the engineer.
Condition B.F: (added) Considerable discussion occurred on the need for a barrier to
protect the Rathjen residence, whether the traffic consultant had effec-
tively addressed this question, and whether plans and landscaping should
be reviewed before the filing of the final map. The following condition
was added:
MOTION SBMNDED AND APPROVED BY CONSENSUS: It was moved by Commissioner
Dochnahl and seconded by Commissioner Stewart that the following be
added as Condition B.F: There shall be a barrier designed by a traffic
engineer for the area on the south side of Chaparral Way. Plans for the
barrier shall be reviewed by the full Planning Commission before the
filing of the final map.
`. Cecil Riggers, Owner, requested that the Planning caw ssion recamend approval of
the Tentative Map.
MOTION SBMMED AND APPROVED UNANIMARSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Stewart and
seconded by Commissioner Carico to recommend approval of the Lands of Riggen, File
#TM 2095-79, with conditions as amended.
PLANNING C%24ISSION 1,M4UTFS - June 11, 1980
Page seven
( PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
�r Because of the time involved, the Lands of Burdick, File #'IT7 2101-79, was deferred
until later in the agenda in order to complete shorter items on the agenda. Consent
of the applicant and engineer was received before continuing with later items.
5. LANDS OF &X�ARD, Ursula Lane, Lot 2, Tract 5762, Re3mlest for Recmuendation of
Approval o£ Atxandonment and Modification o£ Ease ent:
Mr. Carlson discussed the above request as outlined in his staff report dated
May 23.
John Lynch Paul Nowack and Associates, 127 State Street, Los Altos, spoke for the
applicant and requested tnat his client not be required to install a Type II pathway,
as a gravel pathway and headerboards would be obtrusive for the site.
Carol Gottlieb, Pathray Committee, requested that the pathway area be designated
as a pedestrian -equestrian path, and noted that the path should be a 'Type II B
as this would prevent the disappearance of the path.
M3TIGN SECONDED AND PASSED UNANINDUSLY: It was moved by Camussioner Stewart and
seconded by Commissioner Lachmbruch to recommend approval of the Lands of Bogard
request for Abandonment and hbdification of Easement for Lot 2, Tract 5762, Ursula
Lane, with the following changes in the staff report and recommendations:
1. The title of the request of to be changed to read: Emergency Access
Easement Abandonment, Reduction in Path Easement, and Construction of
Pathway, Lot 2, Roo Subdivision, Tract 5762.
2. Conditon 2 shall be revised to read: Revise the path easement as shown
on the attached map dated April 14, 1980 and construct a 'type IIB path.
3. The map dated April 14, 1980 is to be revised to show the pathway
easement to be both for pedestrians and equestians as indicated on
the subdivision map for the Lands of Roo, Tract #5762.
6. LANDS OF EIIERZIAN, Dawson Drive, Lot 24, Tract 6461, Rancho San Antonio Subdivision,
Request for Recommendation of Approval o£ F+ Zl—,On of Restriction on Horses
for Lot #24:
Mr. Carlson reviewed background of the above request, noting the conflicting lot
nudDers due to changes in these numbers between the Tentative and Final Map stages,
and the lack of follow-through to inform potential buyers in CC&Rs of the prohibition
of keeping horses on certain lots in the subdivision. Mr. Carlson made no recOMMen-
dation one way or another and referred the matter to the Planning Commissioners.
Harry EYnerzian 1478 Tronas Avenue Los Altos, Applicant, reviewed for Co missioners
Mi slope of the lot and areas where a horse mrght be kept on the lot and requested
that Commissioners recommend approval to the modification for Lot #24.
Jitze Com>r` - 13680 Page Mill Road, spoke in favor of the request to have a horse
on Lot 424, noting that there would be roan for even two horses on the lot.
Carol Gottlieb,Pathway Committee, spoke for herself and Fran Stevenson and moammen-
�r ded that the request be granted.
MOTION SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANLMOUSLY: It was [roved by CmMssioner Dochnahl and
seconded by Commissioner Carico to rec:amend approval of the request for modification
PLANNING CC"4ISSION NDINPE`S - June 11, 1980
Page eight
♦r PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
6. IANDS OF RIE RZIAN, Dawson Drive, Lot 24, Tract 6461: (continued)
of Condition 22 of Tract 6461 and to delete Lot 24 from the list of lots where
horses will be prohibited. The following conditions were added:
1. The Emerzians shall corral the horse at the location noted on the
transparency and map dated April 1, 1980.
2. The corral shall be reviewed by the Site Development Camdttee before
the house is finalled, and at that time the map submitted shall have
the correct contours for the corral map designated on the map.
At 12:10 the Planning Crnmission took a short recess, reconvening at 12:25 p.m.
7. LANDS OF WESIWIND FARMS, File #CU 8022-77, Altamont Road, ReTiest for Recamendation
of Approval of Amended Conditional Use Permit:
Assistant Planner Pat Webb reviewed pertinent information on the above matter as de-
tailed in her memos dated May 23 and June 6th. She noted that the Health Department
had reguested that septic and leach lines on the property be clearly identified, that
this had been done and that there is no problem with the proposed shelter being in
conflict with the location of these items.
Chuck Marsh, 12933 Tripoli Court, discussed the design and colors for the proposed
buildrnnggs, and re3uested that the additions proposed be reccmTended for approval.
40 Nancy Cot�erus, 13680 Page Mill Read, discussed similar kinds of buildings on the
Berry Hill Farm property.
Commissioners Lachenbruch and vanTamelen underscored the need to find a suitable
color for the roof of the proposed structure that would not be a problem with
surface glare and to provide appropriate screeninq. The following motion was passed:
YMON SBCONDED AID PASSED UNAND40USLY: It was :roved by Ca ssioner Carico and
seconded by Camussioner Dochnahl to reamnend approval of the amendments to the
Conditional Use Permit For lands of Westwind Farms, File #CU 8022-77 as proposed
in the May 23 staff report and as amended:
Condition B.6: Add to this condition the following statement: The plan for the
shelter shall be reviewed by the Site Development Ca mi.ttee.
Condition B:7: irecarenended as proposed on Play 23)
Condition B:8: (added) The applicant shall supply trees for landscaping to mitigate
the physical impact from off site. Such landscaping shall not iner-
fere with buildings or the program at the site.
Commissioner Carico contended the Friends of Westwind for their efforts and volunteered
a tree for the landscaping at the shelter.
S. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDIENT FOR PATHWAY ELME : Mr. Carlson reviewed for
the Commissioners the proposed General Plan Aimiximent for Pathways that would
accoupany a large overall map of Town pathways that the Pathway Ccn ttee had
been giving a great effort to. No action was taken, as the review by Mr. Carlson
was an informational one for the Planning Camdssioners.
9. ARNOrRADERD BIKE PATH: Mr. Carlson reviewed plans received from the City of
Palo Alto on the above bike path, noting that the plans before the Ca udssion
PLANNING CC144IISSICN MINUTES - June 11, 1980
Page nine
PUBLIC BFARINGS: (contined)
9. ARASTRADERO BIKE PATH: (continued) had been reviewed by both the Pathway and
Traffic and Public Safety Committees. The plans reviewed were for a path extension
along Arastradero Road from Foothill Expressway to Deer Creek Road, with three
ccwLu .ties granting portions of the pathway area. He noted that he had made
suggestions to the City of Palo Alto on minimizing the grade of the pathway,
and asked Commissioners to review the plans and get any comments to him before
Wednesday, June 18, when the City Council would review the plans.
4. LANDS OF BURDICK, File #TM 2101-79, (formerly Lands of Manuel), Elena Road,
Paul Nowack and Associates, Engineer, Recaa[endation. of Denial Without Prejudice,
5 Lots:
W. Carlson reviewed information submitted with his memmrandw of May 23 and June 3.
As a first item of business he reoammended consideration of the Negative Declaration
for the above request, noting however, that Condition 10.D should be deleted from the
list of mitigating measures. He reviewed proposed mitigating measures for the Nega-
tive Declaration. Mr. Carlson discussed with Camussioner vanTamelen whether the
Commissioner would make a recammermdation on the Negative Declaration before con-
sidering the conditions or defer it until after the conditions were reviewed. It
was decided that the Tentative Man would be discussed, and the public hearing was opened.
Norman Burdick, Developer, requested that the amount of living space allowed in
revised Condition 10.E.2 on the June 3 memo be changed to 3,500 square feet as
agreed to previously and then reviewed for the Ccumissioners a proposed dwellings for
Lots lard 3 ofthe subdivision. He noted that the building area for Lot 1 was approxi-
mately 5,0000 square feet.
Mr. Carlson reviewed revised conditions, and reviewed with Cammissioners their con-
cerns on square footage for building on Lot 1, drainfields for septic tanks in the
conservation easement areas, landscaping requirements for the noise berms, and pathway
requirements.
Paul Nowack, Engineer for the Applicant, 127 Second Street, Los Altos, noted that
it was preferable to trade easements for the pathway area, since a parcel map ex-
changing land between Mr. Burdick and Mr. Solanon was a cxmulicated process.
Carol Gottlieb, Pathway Committee, explained the location of the pathway along
the Solonnn property, noting that the path should be constructed at the toe of the
slope on the Burdick property; this would relieve Mr. Solemn of a pathway near
his home. She spoke for approval of the pathway requests as proposed in the conditions.
Camussioners began a review of conditions with the following changes made:
Condition 1.D.1. (to be added to Condition 1.D.1) If the owner of Parcel 182-10-042
grants a ten foot (109) pedestrian/equestrian easement along
Elena Road to the satisfaction of the Pathway Canni.ttee, the twenty
foot (20') easement shall be abandoned. It was the Consensus of
the Commission that the above condition be added.
Condition 4.1): PASSED BY CONSENSUS: It was moved by Camnissioner Stewart and the
Consensus of the Commission that the following be added as Condition 4.D:
The initial drainfield for each lot will consider avoiding oak trees
on the property.
Condition 7.B: (Remains in the list of conditions): MDTION SECONDED AND FAILED:
It was moved by Comnissioner vanTamelen and seconded by Commissioner
pLAMMU 0ObMIsSION MINUTES - June 11, 1980
Page ten
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
4. LANDS OF HJRDICK, File #21 2101-79: (continued)
Condition 7.8: (continued) Stewart to delete Condition 7.B.
VOTE: AYES: Cammissioners vaNTamelen, Lachenbruch, Stewart
NOES: Commissioners Carico, Rydell, Dochnahl
ABSTAIN: None
Condition 10.E.2: MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was raved by Cannissioner Stewart
and seconded by Commissioner Lachenbruch to amend Condition 10.E.2
to read that living space, excluding the garage, shall be limited
to 3,500 square feet.
VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Carico, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Stewart,
and Dochnahl
NOES: Cammissioner vanTamelen
ABSTAIN: None
Commission 10.2.2 of the June 3rd revised conditions was adopted
with the revision noted above.
Condition 10.E.4: Condition 10.E.4 as proposed in the June 3rd revised condition was
not adopted. Condition 10.E.4 of the list of conditions remains
as a part of the conditions.
Condition ll.(b): It was consensus that road -in -lieu fees should be charged for the
Burdick subdivision.
In closing discussion, Commissioner vanTamelen noted that Condition 1.F and 1.G,
easements for storm drainage and landscaping, should be shown on the Tentative Map.
Commissioner Carico reminded the Commissioners that the issue of secondary dwellings
had not been discussed, but no further action was taken on this matter.
MITION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Lachenbruch and seconded
by Commissioner Dochnahl to recamend approval of the Negative Declaration, with
the amendments of the elimination of Condition 10.D because it was not applicable,
and the revision of Condition 10.E as amended by the Camussion.
VOTE: AYES: Commissioners vanTamelen, Lachenbruch, Rydell, Stewart, Dochnahl
NOES: Commissioner Carico
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION SBCOMED Am CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Lachenbruch and seconded
by Commissioner vanTamelen to recommend approval for the Lands of Burdick, File #TM
2101-79, with conditions as amended.
VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Dochnahl, Stewart, Rydell, Lachenbruch and vanTamelen
NOES: Commissioner Carico
ABSTAIN: None
Commissioner Carico noted for the record that she had voted against the recommendation
of approval for this subdivision because she felt that a five lot subdivision will
have a negative impact on the special conditions of this subdivision: the unstable
soil, the natural drainage swale, the wildlife, and the earthluake fault.
L MYTION SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY: On the motion of Commissioner Stewart
�r it was moved to continue any further new or old business to time meeting of June 25.
AAIOURN IM:
Chairman vanTamelen adjourned the meeting at 2:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
E
Cannathelta Hkins