Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/13/1980 (2)PLANNING COMMISSION t Town of Los Altos Hills �r 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, August 13, 1980 Reel 87, Side 2, Tr. 2, 654 to End; Reel 88, Side 1, Tr. 1, 001 to 611 The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman vanTamelen at 7:50 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Town Hall. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Lachenbruch, Rydell, Stewart, Dochnahl, Kuranoff, Chairman vanTamelen Absent: Commissioner Carico (excused absence) Also Present: City Engineer/Planner John Carlson, Assistant Planner Pat Webb, Secretaries Ethel Hopkins and Leslie Penfold CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar: 1) Minutes of July 9 (f and 2) Confirmation of Actions Taken by the Variance and Permit Commission. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Rydell and seconded by Commissioner Lachenbruch that the balance of the Consent Calendar be approved, namely: 3) Setting of Dates for Public Nearina of August 27: No public hearings were set; 4) Lands of Berry Hill Farms, File #CU 8028-77, Viscaino Road, Request for Recommendation of Approval for Annual Review of Conditional Use Permit 5) Lands of Fremont Hills Country Club, File #CU 8010-76, Viscaino Road, Request for Recommendation of Approval for Annual Review of Conditional Use Permit The Minutes of July 9 were amended as follows: 1) On page three, change remarks made by Mrs. Stutz under Condition 1.B. by deleting the phrase after the comma and adding instead: ..and in favor of obtaining a twenty foot easement from the Lands of Kinkead.' 2) On page four, Commissioner Lachenbruch requested that Condition 7.A be revised to read: All fencing within setback lines along road riqht-of-ways shall be no higher than five feet (5') and shall contain no more than 45% of opaque material. 3) On page five, next to last paragraph, chance second sentence to read: Commissioner Lachenbruch expressed concern on the bulk of the building, noting that it would be prohibited by the impending height limitation ordinance. He noted also the need for landscaping to screen the structure. 4) On page six, paragraph six, change the last sentence to read: Commissioner Stewart spoke for an exception to the ordinances in light of the amount of open space being donated to the Town. Chairman vanTamelen declared the Minutes approved as amended. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Auaust 13, 1980 Page two 4r CONSENT CALENDAR: (continued) Confirmations of Actions Taken by the Variance and Permit Commission: Commissioner Dochnahl reported on the recommendation of approval given for the variance request for the Lands of Wolken, File #VAR. 7-80. MOTION SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Chairman van Tamelen and seconded by Commissioner Lachenbruch to re -affirm the recommendation of approval given by the Variance and Permit Commission. Discussion on how the Plannino Commission should implement Section 2.2.204 of the Municipal Code proved to be irrelevant when it was discovered that the City Engineer's Codebook had not been up to date when this matter was scheduled for the agenda. For this reason the discussion is not reported. Section 2.2.204 was amended by Ordinance #227 and the Municipal Code amended by Reprint #9 dated January 31, 1977. REPORTS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JULY 16 and AUGUST 6 Commissioner Lachenbruch reported that ordinance proposals sent to the City Council, specifically the impervious surface limitation measures, had been returned to the Planning Commission for further revision and clarification and that that Council had requested that the ordinance be returned to them by August 20. Commissioner Dochnahl reported on the approval given to the Lands of Avila, File #TM 2-80, at the meetina of August 6; and that Lands of Bellucci, File #TM 2104-79, reviewed by the City Council because time for Plannina Commission consideration had 46y lapsed and the applicant had not aareed to a time extension, had been returned to the Planning Commission by the City Council because of tentative map deficiencies. Chairman vanTamelen agreed to be Planning Commission representative in place of Commissioner Stewart for the meeting of August 20. SITE DEVELOPMENT REFERRALS: 1. LANDS OF BOWLING, File #A 4738, 12205 Menalto Drive, Jack Buktenica, Landscape Architect, Request for Approval of Site Development for Swimming Pool and Pre- liminary Landscape Plan: Mr. Carlson reviewed the above request and recommendations made for denial as detailed in his August 7 staff report. Commissioners discussed various concerns, among them that there had been a previously allocated pool site at the time of site development discussion for the residence, whether setbacks had been indicated on the map at the first site development discussion, the slope of the lot and the fact that an exception had been made for slope density when the subdivision of the site had occurred in 1971, road richt-of-way width at Altamont Road adjacent to the property, appropriate map contours, the drop-off of the property on the Page Mill side, whether the applicant could modify his proposal to fit ordinance requirements and then get site approval, whether there was any neighbor objection to the proposed development and whether impervious surface on the lot would affect existing [ drainfield areas. Thereafter, discussion turned to remarks made by the public. ` Jack Buktenica, Jack Buktenica Associates, 2250 Park Boulevard Palo Alto, reviewed points cited by his letter to the Planning Commission dated July 23, 1980 and requested that the Plannina Commission approve his client's application. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - August 13, 1980 Paqe three 4 SITE DEVELOPMENT REFERRALS: (continued) �I 1. LANDS OF BOWLING, File #A 4738: (continued) Stephen R. Bowlinq, A plicant, stated his preference for a thirty foot setback along ltamont Road, but in noting the need to get on with the landscaping of the property said he would agree to a forty foot setback. He agreed that the front of the property faced alona Altamont Road. Commissioner Stewart pointed out that the Canary Island pines proposed for the landscaping were subject to frost damage and would not be appropriate for the area for that reason. The public hearing was closed and discussion returned to the Plannina Commission. Mr. Carlson pointed out that a substantial amount of grading had occurred on the property to flatten it out to accommodate a pool site proposed at the time of the original site development, and that the dirt from the grading had been distributed across the property, mainly in the direction of the Page Mill -Altamont intersection. Jack Buktenica, requested that the Planning Commission approve a plan with a forty foot setback. MOTION SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Commissioner Lachenbruch and seconded by Commissioner Rydell that the application for the Lands of Bowling, File #A 4738, be denied without prejudice and that the applicant be encouraged to return to the Site Development Committee with a plan that honors the forty foot [ setback along Altamont Road. �r Commissioners and Staff discussed various items to be included in revised Site Development plans. These included the following: 1) Commissioner Lachenbruch asked specific indication of natural and modified contours; and this was amplified by Mr. Carlson who noted that a civil engineer should look at the site and certify the correctness of contours. 2) Commissioner Lachenbruch wanted to see information relative to the grade, elevation of structures and terracing as it related to the road and various off-site vantage points. His interest in this was to assure that when landscaping is designed, both the view from off- site as well as that of the property owner be given appropriate con- sideration. He noted that the Town's concern is that the artificial areas on the site are screened and blended with the area. 3) Commissioners also expressed a preference that the proposed cabana be designed so as not to be visible from Page Mill Road, and that this be demonstrated on the map with appropriate elevations for structures noted. Commissioner Stewart questioned whether Item #2 on the August 7 staff report should be given consideration, but it was Commissioner Kuranoff's view that as the oriainal development had been for speculative purposes, the new owner should not be forced to live with a previous decision on a pool location if he could demonstrate that a better location existed on the property. No further action was taken on this matter. The Commission took a short break at 9:10 p.m., the meeting resuming at 9:25 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - August 13, 1980 t Page four 4r' SITE DEVELOPMENT REFERRALS: (continued) 2. LANDS OF LEE, File kA 4775, 12169 Padre Court, Peter Wriqht Shaw, Landscape Architect, Request for Approval of Site Development for Tennis Court, Pool, Spa, and Gazebo: Mr. Carlson reviewed impervious surface calculations submitted by Architect Peter Shaw. He noted that a house and driveway were in existence on the property, and that because of the tennis court proposed, the whole package of the gazebo, pool, spa and tennis court had been referred to the Plannino Commission. Commission discussion centered on the amount of cut and fill that the construction of the tennis court would require and concern for the natural drainage Swale that the General Plan had suggested should be preserved. The hearing was then opened to the public comment. Ven Lee, Applicant, stated that the tennis court would not be visible from Padre Court or from the dwelling, reviewed landscaping plans and stated that this land- scaping would effectively block the off-site view of the court, and requested that the Commission approve his application. Later in the meeting, Mr. Lee stated that he had purchased the property in the expectation that he would be able to have a tennis court on it. As for the problems of drainage, he felt that either drainage or flooding would circle around the tennis court and return to the drainage Swale area. Commissioner Kuranoff reported, as a member of the Site Development Committee, that Cormnittee's concerns for the drainage swale on the property which the General Plan had noted should be kept ooen,and possible conflict with the Tennis Court Policy Statement because of the gradinq being in excess of that recommended: Commissioner Kuranoff noted, however, that the amount of qradinq in excess of that recommended was about a foot, and that screening and mitigation measures beina,provided were substantial. He added that the tennis court proposer was relatively "close" to being acceptable. Commissioner Lachenbruch drew attention to the fact that,when developed,the lot would be a very "urbanized" lot as the amount of impermeable surface would be more than two times the amount allowable under the newly proposed ordinance on imuervious surface; that the original subdivision had been a very close one; that many of the land contours have been obscured and that the proposed development would be a final blow to much of the natural surface that has already been obscured. As problems to consider with this request and with future requests like it, he cited the following: (1) fill would be in excess of six feet; (2) some of the fill would be in excess of twelve feet; and (3) the natural swale would be obliterated by fill and this would be in conflict with the General Plan. He noted, however, that none of the items he had cited were contained in binding, objective law, that they were contained in guide- lines such as the Tennis Court Policy, or were a part of the General Plan. He questioned whether the Commissioners had a leaal or rational basis for denial of the application. Chairman vanTamelen noted that since some tennis courts such as the Lands of Lynch had been passed, the Town had a Tennis Court Policy where such problems as the amount L of cut and fill and natural drainaae had been addressed. After quoting specifically from that policy relative to her concerns, she stated that she felt the proposal was a violation of the Tennis Court Policy. Commissioner Dochnahl noted that as lot lines had been adjusted to accommodate the preservation of the swale area when the subdivision had been developed, the present PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - August 13, 1980 Pape five SITE DEVELOPMENT REFERRALS: (continued) 2. LANDS OF LEE, File #A 4775: (continued) request would violate what had been affirmed when the subdivision was developed. Peter Shaw, Landscape Architect 125 Uni versit Avenue Palo Alto, discussed the location of the tennis court as it related to the drainage swale, pointed out that any disruption to the swale area would be minimal, and requested that the application be approved. Commissioner Rydell asked about landscaping and how such plans would be implemented and how enforced. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Kuranoff and seconded by Commissioner Stewart to approve the Site Development request for the Lands of Lee, File #A 4775, with the following conditions: 1) The tennis court screening landscaping, as presented on the plan dated July 15, 1980, shall be substantially completed within nine months of the completion of the tennis court. 2) A performance bond in the amount of one hundred percent of the contract cost for the screening landscaping shall be required and shall be administered by the City Engineer. VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Rydell, Stewart and Kuranoff NOES: Commissioners vanTamelen and Dochnahl ABSTAIN: Commissioner Lachenbruch Commissioner Kuranoff commented for the record that the approval of this site did not in fact mean that he approved in general of the development of this intensity of this size of lot, but he felt it did conform in principle to the auidelines as currently made out and when it varied from guidelines, the mitiq_atina measures were sufficient to accommodate those variances. In further comment, Commissioner Kuranoff stated that it was a shame that the applicant was being made to bear the brunt of the non-landscapinq that was occurring in the Town, and while landscaping deposits were being required, the problem was that landscaping installation was not being enforced. Commissioner Dochnahl noted that during development of the subdivision, they had tried to pet houses out of the swale area, but with the present development, the swale was being covered up with the tennis court. Commissioner Lachenbruch agreed with this remark and expressed the hope that appropriate ordinances could be passed to prevent such occurences. OLD BUSINESS: 1. PROPOSED FENCE ORDINANCE: Mr. Carlson discussed the proposed fence ordinance trans- mitted under his memo cfated June 4, 1980. 4w Mrs.Stutz, Pathway Committee, discussed various fencing methods to accommodate horses. Marilyn Long, Pathway Committee, spoke for specific fencing measures to accommodate horses. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - August 13, 1980 Page six `, OLD BUSINESS: 1. PROPOSED FENCE ORDINANCE: (continued) Carol Gottlieb, Pathway Committee, recommended that fencing be required for swimming pools visible from road areas, as this would be a safety measure to protect small children who might wander into the pool area. The following changes were made by consensus of the Commissioners: 1) Paragraph four, page one, was changed to read: No fences or walls shall be located within the road right-of-way. Where the road riqht-of-way extends less than thirty feet (30') from the centerline of the road right-of-way, all fences or walls shall be located a minimum of thirty feet (30') from the center line of the road right-of-way. 2) Paragraph five was amended to read: All fences or walls located within thirty feet (30') of the ultimate road right-of-way shall have at least 75% of the fence surface area open. An exception shall be made for wooden fences with only 50% open and not exceeding five feet (5') in height. Such fencing may have minimum of 50% of the surface open. The sentence beginning "A fence or wall which has a solid portion of the fence greater than 25%...... was modified by deleting the first and second options cited and adding another option, that "—fencing along the roadway may increase gradually from three to six feet." 3) The sentence on cyclone fencing was amended to read: Cyclone fencing shall be constrained the same way as solid fencing. 4) The sentence "Barbed wire fencing is prohibited." was removed from the ordinance. 5) The sentence on pool fencing was left in the ordinance, but the staff was requested to check into what other towns similar to Los Altos Hills were doing about pool fencing, and to get legal advice on any potential liability for the lack of pool fencing. However, the ordinance was not to be held up for this matter. The ordinance was returned to staff for rewriting and return to the Commission at the next meeting. 2. PROPOSED LIGHTING ORDINANCE: As this ordinance was not what Commissioners felt had been proposed, it was to be revised and returned to the Commission at a later date. 3. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LIMITATION ORDINANCE: Commissioner Lachenbruch noted the need for generating further information on impervious surface limitation so that the Town's position on this ordinance would be a legally defensible one. Staff was directed to do the necessary research; and if staff could not accomplish this, it was suggested that Mader and Associates be employed to complete the study. When enough research material was ready so that appropriate formulas and curves could be plotted, another informal meeting with developers Ken Pastrof and Woolworth Construction Co. was to be arranged by the Planning Secretary. Commission- ` ers on Site Development were also asked to suggest lots they felt should be added to the research list. (It was pointed out that meetings with Alan Lambert and Paul Nowack & Associates had already occurred, and some very helpful insights had been obtained.) PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - August 13, 1980 Page seven OLD BUSINESS: (continued) 4. DESIGN REVIEW ORDINANCE REPORT: No discussion occurred on this matter, as it was felt that more work was needed before the matter could be presented for Commission discussion. Commissioners Kuranoff and Rydell volunteered to be a Committee to go over the design review proposal and net it in order to Present to the Commission. NEW BUSINESS: 1. PROPOSED MASTER PATHWAY PLAN: Chairman vanTamelen suggested that Commissioners make written comment on needed chanaes in the Master Pathway Plan, and that these remarks be sent to her as soon as possible. In the meantime, as the plan needed more work before discussion by the Plannina Commission, she stated that she would meet with the Pathway Committee, review the matters of concern, and report back to the Planning Commission as soon as possible. Carol Gottlieb, Pathway Committee, suggested that the Master Pathway Plan be considered at the beginnina of the Planning Commission meeting or at a special meeting of the Commission. Mrs. Stutz, Pathway Committee, asked that Commissioners express their concerns in writing and the Pathway Committee would respond when a joint meeting was arranged. Commissioner Lachenbruch expressed his delight at having the Master Pathway Map before the Commission and commended the Pathway Committee for their efforts. 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT HANDOUT: Commissioner Rydell asked that the Site Development Handout be revised before being distributed any further. ARM IRNMPNT- There being no further new or old business, the meeting was adjourned by Chairman vanTamelen at 12:10 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Ethel Hopkins Plannina Secretary