Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/25/1989PLANNING COMMISSION kw MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 FREMONT ROAD LOS ALTOS HILLS, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25TH, 1989 Chairman Emling called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Council Chambers. 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Chairman Emling, Commissioners Comiso, Jones, Stutz, Noel and Pahl. Absent: Commissioner Carico Staff: Bill Ekern, Director of Public Works and Ann Jamison, Planning Director. 2. CONSENT CALENDER Commissioner Pahl removed the minutes of the October 11th, 1989 meeting from the Consent Calander. He wished to correct the minutes on page 5 under LANDS OF WU, that he did not abstain from the vote to deny the variance, but noted that he was Present. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Moved by Emling, seconded by Stutz, and passed by concensus to approve the minutes of October 11, 1989 as amended. 3. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 18TH, 1989: Commissioner Jones reviewed the items discussed by the Council noting committee appointments, discussion of fees for reciept of agenda and minutes and clarification of the street naming policy. 4. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 17rH AND 24TH. Commissioner Jones noted that the Site Development Committee of October 17th forwarded the LANDS OF NG to the Planning Commission noting that the proposed residence is two stories located on a hilltop. He further noted that LANDS `, OF RAMAN was continued pending resolution of a pathway easement question. ` Planning Commission Minutes page 2 Commissioner Stutz noted that there were no items of significant concern on the October 24th Site Development agenda. 5. PRESENTATIONS. FROM THE FLOOR Betsy Bertram, 11854 Page Mill Road, requested that the staff check into the status of the roads and conditions of approval for the Central Drive subdivisions noting that the roads are in bad shape. Hit Reiser, 27660 Red Rock Road, noted that the roads in the Central Drive area are in better condition than they have ever been and that he did not understand Ms. Bertram's concern. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 LANDS OF THE PURISSIMA HILLS WATER DISTRICT, 26375 Fremont Road, A request for Variances to maximum developable area, maximum floor area and setbacks to allow construction of a mobile telephone structure ( and Site Development Permit for a mobile telephone structure and antenna at the LaCresta storage site. Ann Jamison introduced this item to the Planning Commission noting that GTE is requesting approval of a 220 square foot variance to floor area, a 348 square foot variance to maximum developable area and a variance to the 30 foot rear yard setback requirement to install a mobile telephone equipment building. In addition, they are requesting a Site Development Permit for construction of the equipment building, four panel antenna and a 30 inch dish antenna. Ms. Jamison noted that staff is recommending approval of these variances referring to specific findings described in the staff report. She noted that these findings relate to the unusual existing use of this site, the unique characteristics of the site, its location and present use, that make it particularly well suited this proposed use and the proposed design which recesses the equipment building into the embankment buffering adjacent properties from impact. Ms. Jamison further noted the Site Development conditions which would require additional landscape buffering and natural colors and other specific conditions to further mitigate any potential impact. Planning Commission Disclosures Commissioners Emling, Comiso, Jones, Stutz and Pahl indicated they had visited the site. Commissioner Noel noted he had not visited the site or had any contact with the applicants. ( Planning Commission Minutes page 3 The Public Hearing was opened. Tim Fincham, representing GTE, explained to the Commission the work GTE did with the neighbors to arrive at an acceptable location on this site, noting that all of the neighbors have agreed including the neighbor immediately adjacent to the area of the site where the setback variance is being requested. Mr. Fincham then showed the Planning Commission one of the panel antenna to be placed on the site. In response to Commissioner Pahl's question Mr. Fincham clarified that there would not be room in the equipment structure for other mobile telephone companies to locate their equipment. He further explained that he felt it would be unlikely that an additional company could meet the Town standards or the districts standards to locate on this site. No one else wishing to speak, the Public Hearing was closed. MOTION, SECONDED AND FAILED, A motion by Commissioner Noel, seconded by Stutz, to grant the variances as requested noting the variance findings described in the staff report and revising the Site Development conditions to require the dish antenna to be black. The motion failed to the following vote: AYES: Noel, Stutz and Emling NOES: Pahl, Jones and Comiso Commissioner Comiso clarified that she voted against the motion since she did not believe this request was different than the Lands of Wu request for a floor area variance for a residence at the previous meeting. She further noted that she felt it was inappropriate to grant a variance to GTE when we had denied one to a Town resident. Commissioner Jones concurred noting that he believed the use was unique but the parcel was not. Commissioner Pahl noted that he disagreed with the decision the Commission made on the Lands of Wu request at the previous meeting. MOTION, SECONDED AND FAILED, A motion by Commissioner Comiso, seconded by Pahl, to deny the variance request without prejudice. This motion failed to the following vote: AYES: Comiso, Pahl and Jones E NOES: Noel, Stutz and Emling Planning Commission Minutes 4, page 4 MOTION, SECONDED AND PASSED, A motion by Commissioner Noel, seconded by Jones, to refer this item to the City Council with no Planning Commission recommendation. This motion passed unanimously. 6.2. LANDS OF WONG, 26440 Taaffe Road, A request for a Site Development Permit (referred from the Site Development Committee). Bill Ekern introduced this item to the Commission explaining that the Site Development Committee had refered this item to the full Commission noting their concerns relative to the verticality and bulk of the proposed residence. Mr. Ekern described the downslope characteristic of the site noting that there are large trees to the rear but little vegetation along the front to buffer the appearance of the house from the road. He reiterated that the key concern is the visual impact of the bulk and mass of the structure as proposed. Plannine Commission Disclosures Commissioners Pahl, Noel and Stutz noted they had visited the site. 4 Commissioners Jones and Comiso noted they had visited the site and ask Mrs. Wong if they could walk around the property. Commissioner Ending noted he had not visited the site or had contact with the applicants. Several of the Planning Commissioners noted that they had not received copies of the drawings in their packets. Staff clarified that, due to the earthquake, the applicant had difficulty getting extra copies of the drawings to staff. There were copies of the plans available for review at Town Hall. After some discussion of whether to proceed with review of this project or continue it to the next meeting the Public Hearing was opened. Dot Schreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain Drive, representing the Town's Pathway Committee requested a two way path with a full cross section along Taaffe Road. Commissioner Stutz clarified that the path should be an off-road path to avoid destroying vegetation and to work with the grades in the area. Mr. Martin Hagen, 51 Federal Street, San Francisco, Architect for the project, presented several drawings showing the project and described them to the Commission explaining the proposed floor elevations as they relate to the existing grade. He further noted that the applicant intends to landscape the project to help mitigate the impact on views. �Iv'o one else wishing to speak, the Public Hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes ` page 5 Commissioner Stutz voiced her concerns with the proposal noting that she did not think this was the right house for this particular lot. She noted concerns with the verticality, mass, the flat roof and the proposed light exterior color. MOTION, SECONDED AND PASSED, A motion by Commissioner Emling, seconded by Stutz, to continue this item to the November 8th Planning Commission meeting to give the Commissioner's adequate time to review the proposal. The motion passed with the vote as follows: AYES: Emling and Stutz NOES: Comiso PASS: Pahl, Noel and Jones 6.3. LANDS OF MCCULLOCH, Stonebrook Drive and Prospect Avenue, Review of a Tentative Map extension for 23 lots of a 35 lot subdivision. Bill Ekern introduced this item to the Commission noting that the Planning Commission ad-hoc committe met three times to discuss this subdivision and developed a series of recommendations they believed would address the primary concerns of this site. Those concerns included development on ridgeline/hillsides, visibility from opposing hillsides, barren vegetation, geotechnical hazards and noise impacts. He explained the importance of addressing these concerns to preserve the openness of this very visible hillside and ridgeline. Mr. Ekern further noted that the Commission may want to consider requiring larger lots than the one acre minimum, combined with floor area limits, to ensure that the openness and rural character of the site is preserved. In response to a question by Commissioner Jones, Mr. Ekern explained that he believed the Town's one year Tentative Map expiration overrode the states 24 month expiration time period. Commissioner Jones then expressed that he was concerned with the legality of making changes to the tentative map to the degree proposed by the ad-hoc committee and the staff. Mr. Ekern responded that the proposed changes were legally permitted in granting requests for map extensions. Further, he noted that the Commission in this case is a recommending body to the City Council and should emphasize what is the best use of this site from a policy perspective. Commissioner Stutz reiterated that the role of the Commission in this instance is to come up with the best plan possible for this property and recommend that to the kw City Council. `, Planning Commission Minutes page 6 Plannine Commission Disclosures Commissioners Emling, Noel and Pahl indicated they had visited the site. Commissioners Jones, Comiso and Stutz noted they had visited the site and met with the developer as part of the ad-hoc committee. The Public Hearing was opened. Stephanie Munoz, 13460 Robleda, expressed support for the proposal of the ad-hoc committee noting the importance of promoting new ideas in the Community. Russ Carter, 940 Saratoga Avenue, San Jose, reviewed several concerns he had with the proposed conditions of approval. These included the loss of a lot or lots resulting from the realignment of the upper loop road to better follow the contours, the staff suggestion to reduce the number of lots and the 10 foot roof height above road limitation on lots 19, 20 and 21. Mr. Carter noted that the small loop with a lower cul-de-sac road alignment did have advantages for the developer as well as the Town and that he could support that concept. Dr. Ibrahim Saah, 12000 Stonebrook Road, spoke in favor of the the ad-hoc committee and staff's recommendation. He noted his concern that this development could end up looking like the Dawson Drive development and he questioned whether that was what the Town desired. No one else wishing to speak, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Stutz noted that while the ad-hoc committee did not specifically recommend it she felt the Commission should consider making the lots larger and limiting the MDA/MFA allowed on them over what the code would allow. She further noted that the Town should consider a Conservation Easement for open grassland. It was the concensus of the Commission that staff should further present the concept for reducing the number of lots in the subdivision. Staff presented a map showing a possible reconfiguration and explained the concepts behind it which primarily related to preserving the open natural character of the site in the most visible, open areas. The Commission discussed this proposal in some detail. Commisioners Comiso and Jones both voiced concern with the proposal questioning it's fairness to the developer and consideration of the lateness of the hour. v MOTION, SECONDED AND FAILED: A motion by Commissioner Emling, t Planning Commission Minutes 4W page 7 seconded by Stutz, to approve the extension of a tentative map allowing 14 lots as per the map discussed at the meeting. This motion failed to the following vote: AYES: Emling and Stutz NOES: Pahl, Noel, Jones and Comiso MOTION, SECONDED AND PASSED: Amotion by Commissioner Stutz, seconded by Emling, to approve extension of a map allowing 18 lots on the property as per the map at the meeting. That motion passed with the following vote: AYES: Stutz, Emling and Noel NOES: Pahl and Comiso Commissioner Jones stated that he could not vote on the motion without legal advice. The Commission then discussed the proposed Conditions of Approval noting the following changes: 5a. Clarified to indicate that the proposed path would be on the panhandle portion of the lot. 4W 40.5. Clarified to require all oaks on site over 20 inches to be preserved. 54. Lots 13/14,17,18 and 26 should be added to this requirement to put a deed restriction on these lots noting that they may not actually be able to accommodate all of the development they would numerically be permitted. Add Condition 56. Requiring a letter from a Geotechnical Consultant addressing changes on the site resulting from the earthquake. MOTION, SECONDED AND PASSED: A motion by Commissioner Noel, seconded by Stutz, to approve the conditions as amended. The motion passed with the following vote: AYES: Noel, Stutz, Comiso, Pahl and Emling Commissioner Jones stated that he could not vote on the motion without legal advice. 7. NEW BUSINESS: 7.1 Discussion of the process for selecting chair and vice -chair of the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Minutes page 8 Commissioner Jones noted that he requested this item be placed on the agenda as he is concerned with two issues: 1. Planning Commission members feeling they are required to vote for the vice -chair for chair the following year, and 2. Selection of chair and vice -chair prior to appointment of new Commissioners, thereby, eliminating them from the selection process. The Commission discussed this item and decided by concensus to use a rotation method based on senoirity for selection of the chair and vice -chair. The Commission further agreed that the selection of chair and vice -chair should occur after the new members are appointed. 8. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business. 9. ADIOURNMENT: MOTION, SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Emling, seconded by Pahl, and passed by consensus to adjourn at 11:45 p.m.. Respectfully Submitted, Ann W. Jamison Planning Director L