HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/1984 (2)PLANNING OC A'IISSION
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California
luno �� • : e n e: uia•1
Wednesday, September 26, 1984
Reel 111, Side I, Tract II, 200-11nd
Chairman Kuranoff called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. in the Town Hall
Council Chambers.
I,1�:A0�Y..�
Present: Cormi.ssioners Carico, Gottlieb, Lachenbruch, Siegel, Struthers,
Yanez and Chairman Kuranoff
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager George Scarborough, City Engineer Michael Enright,
Staff Planner Nancy Lytle, Secretary Leslie bfu fins
I:�K•A fCf�� IYTY��ID�TA•
h1OTI(N SDC(NDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Struthers and
passed unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar, specifically:
1) Variance & Permit and Planning Commission Minutes of September 12, 1984;
2) Setting Public Hearings for October 10, 1984:
a) Lands of Pinewood Private School, Conditional use Permit Annual Review
•w••• •• •a•� ars
Chairman Kuranoff reported the Variance & Permit Commission denied without
prejudice a variance request for Lands of Barbour, File #VAR 4-84 for
pool equipment in setback; V&P Commission also made a motion to have
all V&P natters at full Planning Commission and Would like a consensus
from the Cmmission.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Kuranofff and
passed by the following roll call vote to have Variance & Permit Commission
public hearings at the full Planning Cannission level.
ROIL CALL:
AYES: Conmissioners Carico, Gottlieb, Lachenbruch, Siegel, Yanez and
Chairman Kuranoff
NOES: Oonndssioner Struthers
Commissioner Lachenbruch indicated the Variance & Permit Commission was
formed when the Planning Commission agendas were very full with public
hearings on tentative maps, etc., noting there wanld be no problem now
tw that the agendas have been much lighter.
Planning Commission Minutes - September 26, 1984
Page Tno
D. REPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 1984:
Caamissiomer Yanez reported the Council has directed Commission to define
detached vs. attached (second units); granted an extension for Lot #20
Matadero Creek Subdivision for swimming pool approval by Site Develor mnt
Committee; discussed Capital LTprovement Budget and will ask for input
frau Roads & Drainage Committee on the items included; and concurred
with decision of Commission on the Lands of Griffiths Conditional Use
Permit.
Commission and staff discussed the intersection of Burke and Fremont Roads,
i.e. stop sign installation and safety.
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. IAMB OF PMENOOD PRIVATE SCHOOL, FILE #CUP 8014-76, 26800 Fremro t Road,
Annual Review of Conditional Use Permit
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Iachenbruch, seconded by Struthers
and passed unanimously to continue public hearing for Pinewood Private
School, File #CUP 8014-76, be continued to October 10, 1984.
2. Amendment to Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, Chapter 3, Title 9,
Site Development Ordinance Revisions
Ms. Lytlereferred to her staff reportof September 21, 1984, noting this
is a public hearing to consider a prelininary draft of the revised Site
Development Ordinance. Ms. Lytle recommended that the Commission review
and comment on the proposed draft and make a motion to continue the
public hearing for one month which would allow staff to make an in-depth
analysis of the draft. Ms. Lytle gave commission a brief background
on the preparation of the draft, discussion of pros and cons of the
proposed draft, and a sunniaiy the major revisions to the Site Development
Chapter.
Mr. Scarborough informed ca mnission on the amount of time to process an
item through zoning and site development, noting with the new proposal
staff's time would greatly increase, asking commission to look over this
proposal very carefully.
Conmdssioner Caries indicated she reviewed the entire draft and had
discussions with Canaissioners Gottlieb and Struthers and Mary Stutz
Chairman, Pathway Committee, noting the commission should go over the
draft and give comments to staff. Commissioner Carico expressed
dissappointment over the proposed draft, noting she did not feel it
was very thought out.
Commissioner Yanez asked the chairman to give cacmission direction on
how to proceed before reviewing the draft page by page.
Cmmissioner Gottlieb expressed the draft was lacking organization, noting
it could re -organized into categories.
( ommissioner Seigel questioned if the new proposal would increase the
�r nuTber of applications staff would have to review. YX. Scarborough
indicated yes infact it would,referring to page #8 of the proposed draft.
Planning Commission Minutes - September 26, 1984
Page Three
E. PUBLIC HEARINCS:(continued)
1. Site Development Ordinance Revisions
Commissioner Lachenbruch expressed some concern over what this proposed
ordinance is to achieve, how it relates to other ordinances and will
staff be able to handle the work load.
Chairman Kuranoff stated he was surprised by the "PURPCSE" Section of
the proposed draft, noting this is a vast change from current ordinances,
much more specific. Chairman Kuranoff noted there are several different
points being mentioned this evening: 1) What are we trying to accomplish
with this ordinance?; 2) consideration of the volum of work this ordinance
will generate; 3) to understand the purposes in great detail; 4) haw will
the work be split between staff and committee, asking commission in
what direction they would like to proceed? Should we all write down
our comments and route to staff for coordination? Should be hold a
study session and all core prepared with comments? Suggesting commissioners
all re -read the proposed ordinance based on discussions held this evening.
Commissioner Carico suggested that the next meeting scheduled for Site
Development be held during Planning Commission meeting so that all
members of the planning commission be involved and see the process
of Site Development.
Concussion and staff discussed mDA and drainage concerns, indicating high
priority should be given to drainage within the town.
It was passed by consensus to conduct a Study Session at the October 10,
1984 Planning Commission meeting for further discussion of the proposed
Site Development ordinance draft, cammssioners should core prepared with
highlighted comments on the draft, staff is to prepare convents and
include in the next packet for commission review prior to the meeting.
Commissioners requested staff present a couple case studies for camiission
review of current site development permit applications.
F. OLD BUSINESS:
1. Clarification of Planning Commission recamendation to City Council
on Int Line Adjustment Policy
Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report of September 21, 1984, informing commission
this is a request for clarification of Planning Commission recommendation
to the City Council on Int Line Adjustment Policy, noting the question
raised at the 9/12/84 meeting concerning item 1, sentence 3 of memo to
City Manager from Staff Planner dated August 31, 1984.
It was passed by consensus to amend Item 1 as follows:
1) A map with the title "Tentative Map for Lot Line Adjustment" and application
must be filed which meets the Town's Subdivision Ordinance Standards. The
applicant will at or prior to filing be informed of the standard condition
for filing a parcel map. The staff may waive certain requirements of the
Tentative Map when in their judgement, they find that such requirements
are not relevant to an application for Lot Line Adjustment.
Planning Ca=ission Minutes - September 26, 1984
Page Four
F. DID BUSINESS:
2. Commissioner Carico informed camiission at the last site development
meeting an application was heard on the Lands of Reiser (current owner
Sotir) for a new residence, requesting that all future developrent
proposals for the MAPS area be heard by the full planning cwmdssim.
Mr. Scarborough indicated a motion would be necessary to be made by
the Site Development Cmmittee and forwarded to the Planning Cmudssion
for consensus.
3. letter prepared by Mary Stutz dated September 25, 1984 referred to
comnission on site development meetings and procedures. Commission
expressed their appreciation for a well thought out su[mary, noting
this letter will be very helpful with the study session on October 10.
G. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Discussion of staff's recommendation on zoning ordinance revisions
Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report dated September 26, 1984, noting
this is a partial listing of code sections in zoning ordinances which
staff recomends be revised; asking that cacmission schedule a public
hearing to formally consider proposed revisions at their October 10,
1984 meeting. Items of concern: 1) Section 9-5.227 Natural Ground
Level as it relates to Section 9-5.210 Building Height; 2) Section
9-5.502(b)2 Floor space in excess of 2,000 sq. ft. ; 3)Section 9-5.503
limiting height within 30' of each setback line.
l Commission and staff discussed the current ordinances on building heights
and has they are to be interpreted.
MOTION SEO7fIDID AND CARRIM: Moved by Gottlieb, seconded by Struthers
and passed unanimously to set public hearings for Items 1, 2 and 4 of
the September 26, 1984 staff report for October 10, 1984.
2. Cammission Report for City Council neeting of October 3, 1984
Co missioner Gottlieb volunteered to attend the mceting. Commission
requested she inform Council the Pinewood School Annual Review was
continued to October 10th; Variance request was denied without prejudice
for Lands of Barbour for placement of poolequipment; and give then
a brief review of cmmissionsworking on ordinance revisions.
3. Discussion of McCandless Report, currently in the City Engineer's
office for him to set-up a meeting with McCandless to discuss
possible update of the report.
4. Chairman Kuranoff informed comission he met with the City Manager
to discuss Code Enforcement, noting they broke concerns down into
two major areas: 1) ordinance problems (i.e., height limitations,
setback violations, etc.) and 2) plantings in pathways, signs, discing.
Chairman Kuranoff ird icated a co mittee needs to be formed of three
commissioners and two councilnenbers to propose solutions and return
with input to either Commission or joint session.
Camussioners Carico, Siegel and Struthers were appointed to committee,
with Carico as Chairperson. Chairman Kuranoff indicated as part of
Co missioner Cnttliebs report to Council to include this information
requesting the Council appoint two members for the cmmittee.
Planning Ca¢nission Minutes - Septenber 26, 1984
Page Five
G. NEW BUSINESS: (continued)
4. Co miissioner Siegel informed commission there was a good article
in the Los Altos 'loan Crier on the City of Los Altos hiring a
Code Enforo..aent Officer to work 20 hours per week.
5. Ownussioner Struthers requested information be passed on to her
and Co mtissioner Carico regarding El Retiro when received at
Total Hall, indicating the Planning Cmmussion in Los Altos held
a public hearing last week.
H. ALUOUISPEW:
There being no futher new or old business, the meeting was adjourned
at 10: 45p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Leslie Mullins
Engineering/Planning Secretary