Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/1991APPROVED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 FREMONT ROAD LOS ALTOS HILLS, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23RD, 1991 cc: Cassette #17-91(1) 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Noel called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Noel and Commissioners Cheng, Jones, Pahl Absent: Commissioners Comiso, Ellinger, Stutz Staff: Bill Ekern, Director of Public Works; Margaret Netto, Planning Consultant; Laura Johnson, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR There were no presentations from the floor. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF TAAFFE, 26854 Purissima Road: A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence The Public Hearing was opened. Ben Taaffe, applicant, in response to a question from Commissioner Jones, noted there was an existing house on the neighboring lot which has a driveway. He noted they would like their own driveway. He clarified that the break in the fencing was just that, and not the location of the driveway. Dot Schreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain Drive, Chair - Pathways Committee, requested restoration of the pathways. Mr. Taaffe noted he had read and had no problems with the Staff Recommended Conditions of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page 2 The Public Hearing was closed MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Jones, seconded by Pahl and passed to approve the Site Development permit for a new residence with Staff Recommended Conditions 1 - 8 and the following Condition 9: 9. Repair any pathway damage prior to release of any building finals. AYES: Chairman Noel and Commissioners Cheng, Jones, Pahl NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso, Ellinger, Stutz 3.2 LANDS OF FORWARD, 10575 Blandor Way: A request for a Variance to the fence height/setback requirements of the Zoning Code Bill Ekern introduced this item noting Staff recommended approval of a variance with conditions for this request for a chainlink fence along Olive Tree Lane. Olive Tree Lane is a 32 foot wide driveway easement accessing a potential of five lots. As this constitutes a road, the fence is required to be 30 feet from the centerline of the easement. The proposed location is approximately on the easement line. Conformance with the Code places the fence down a hill, so it provides no protection to or delineation of the property. Commissioner Pahl referred to a similar variance request for a fence approximately 18 months ago, noting there were many properties in the Town with the same burden. He noted that Staff's recommendation for the subject property made common sense, and the Commission had asked Staff to draft a proposed ordinance which makes sense. Mr. Ekern clarified that the constraints of the topography as it is associated with the right-of-way of the road constitute the basis for the findings for the variance. The property falls steeply from the road; if a fence is located down the hill on the reference line, it provides no practical source of property protection. Because of the narrowness of the road and the proximity to the Open Space area, the type of fence and mitigation of the fence are important as views could be impacted. In response to a question from Commissioner Pahl regarding treatment of public and private roads, Mr. Ekern noted that it is important to address different corridors differently based on impacts. Lots on private roads may have more constraints on them. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 L Page 3 In response to a question from Commissioner Jones, Mr. Ekern clarified that if the lots were created today, a 60 foot right-of-way would be required for the easement. He noted that the Municipal Code's incorporation of a 'reference line' allows preservation of the general sense of the right-of-ways' width and drives development away from the roadways. It also precludes construction of fences in public and private right-of-ways. If Olive Tree Lane was accepted as a public road, the Town would probably require the structural section of the road to be built up. While the shoulder along the Forward property is close to Town standards, the paved section is currently substandard. The Public Hearing was opened. Terry Forward, applicant, noted Staff set forth her rationale very well and a fence height of 4.5 feet was adequate for her purposes. She explained that she had obtained a permit to construct a fence but was subsequently involved in an accident. She was not able to supervise when the fence posts were placed, and a number were located closer to the street than intended. Dr. Forward noted she agreed with the Staff Recommended Conditions of Approval. �, In response to a question from Commissioner Jones, Dr. Forward noted she wished to construct a fence for security, for property delineation, and to have animals, and planned to enclose the entire property. Peter Schubart, 24624 Olive Tree Lane, noted he submitted letters to the Director of Public Works and to the Planning Commission. He noted general support for Staff's recommendations but requested a compromise for visual impact, asking that the fence be located a few feet down the hill. He felt the current placement of the fence posts would be intrusive. There are no fences in the area currently, which contributes to the feeling of openness. He noted the Forward residence didn't look onto the subject area, but residences on Olive Tree Lane look at the area each day. He noted supported of a black painted, as opposed to a galvanized metal fence. Dr. Forward noted that moving the fence four feet down the hill would negate the purpose of having a fence as the area is extremely steep. She did note there were many properties in the area with fences only a few feet off the paved road. She noted that as a single woman on a large property, and a victim of a violent crime last year, she wished to enclose the property to allow her to enjoy the use of her property. The Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Jones noted he could make findings for a variance for a fence based `, on topography, but not for the proposed location. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 L Page 4 Commissioner Pahl noted that utilization of the property was not sufficient for a finding for a variance. He noted the Commission has asked Staff for a new fence ordinance that would provide some flexibility. There are many properties with the same characteristics as this property, but the Commission is bound to uphold the fence ordinance. If approved, he would like to see requirement of black vinyl fencing. Commissioner Pahl noted he had no problem with moving the request to the City Council without a recommendation. Commissioner Jones noted he felt the Commission was in the middle of a neighborhood dispute and was concerned that a neighborhood problem was a factor in the requested location of the fence. He felt the fence should be moved a couple of feet downhill as it will impact views. Chairman Noel noted he would also like to see the City Council get involved in the review of this application. He noted that if the Commission had more clarity in direction from the Council, he had no objections to allowing a fence. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Pahl, seconded by Cheng and passed to deny the variance to the fence height/setback requirements of the Zoning JaW Code without prejudice, and to direct Staff to agendize this item for City Council review. AYES: Chairman Noel and Commissioners Cheng, Jones, Pahl NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso, Ellinger, Stutz 3.3 LANDS OF BECKER, 14290 Saddle Mountain Road: A request for a Site Development permit for a New Residence and Swimming Pool Bill Ekern introduced this item, noting the Planning Commission reviewed an application for the subject property on June 12, 1991. Since that time, the applicant had reduced the size of the residence and demonstrated 1500 square feet of outside living area. Staff recommended vehicular access to the property from Moon Lane and construction traffic from Saddle Mountain Road. In response to a question from Commissioner Pahl, Mr. Ekern noted the property underwent Site Analysis review. Commissioner Pahl noted issues discussed at the last meeting included access, living area, and the size of the house. He noted it appeared the applicant only reduced the size of the house around 100 feet. Mr. Ekern suggested the applicant was �, looking at the size of the house based on quantitative analysis: that is the size of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page 5 residence allowed under current ordinances. He felt it was likely that there were also economic considerations driving the size of the house. In response to a question from Chairman Noel, Mr. Ekern noted the applicant had reduced the driveway area and used the recovered area for outdoor living area. He clarified that the property currently has access from both sides of the property. Saddle Mountain Road is a public road and to public road standards, and is better suited to surviving construction traffic. The property couldn't be developed in this manner under current Town standards. It was created prior to the incorporation of the Town and has no access to a road but comes in off of narrow easements on neighboring properties. Consequently, Staff believes it is a reasonable exchange to design permanent access off Moon Lane. In response to a question from Commissioner Pahl, Mr. Ekern clarified that the Saddle Mountain Road access is technically a fire access which was required to be installed when the neighboring Mourad property was developed. Staff recommended it return to that status after construction is completed. Chairman Noel asked about the amount of cut and fill. Bill Ekern noted that preparation of the building pad constituted the majority of the cut for the project. He noted there were 'pros' and 'cons' to repairing the landslide area. If water accumulated due to poor drainage design, the area could potentially slide. The Public Hearing was opened Lewis Becker, applicant, noted the application was significantly revised from the application the Commission considered previously. The floor area of the residence was reduced from 6500 square feet to 5800 square feet. The difference in the development area doesn't appear substantial as this application includes the swimming pool. The outdoor living area was increased in response to the Planning Commission's direction. He clarified that it was impossible from an elevational standpoint, as there is an eight foot difference in height, to have access from Moon Lane. He referred to Staff Recommended Condition 10, noting they did not wish to be held responsible for any existing damage to the road, nor for damage from outside sources during the construction process. Henry Mourad, 14300 Saddle Mountain Road, noted there appeared to have been only a 112 foot decrease in the size of the residence. With a home sized more in line with those in the neighborhood, the amount of cut and fill would decrease substantially. He felt outdoor living space was sacrificed because of the size of the house itself. He noted he understood there was difficulty with vehicular access from Moon Lane, and stated his willingness to grant an easement to make access PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page 6 possible. Mr. Mourad also noted the plans did not reflect a 40 foot turnaround for fire access. In response to questions from Chairman Noel, Mr. Mourad noted he had not spoken with the applicant since the last Planning Commission meeting, and that the size of his own home was 3800 square feet including the garage. Mr. Mourad presented an overhead projection of the subject property and surrounding area. He explained there is already a problem with car headlights shining into his home, which will be compounded if Moon Lane is opened for traffic Doris Mourad, 14300 Saddle Mountain Road, noted concern with Saddle Mountain Road access, as adding a steep upcoming driveway where a driver is not able to see until she is up on the road itself is very dangerous. She also noted concern with the amount of cut and fill proposed; her own home has numerous stairs as the area is steep, and the obstruction caused by the number of trucks necessary to remove the cut will be a problem. Dot Schreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain Road, noted that under current Town standards, most of the lot would be in a conservation easement, referring to the memo dated June 12, 1991 from Bill Ekern to the Town Planner. Ms. Schreiner noted she thought the Commission at their meeting of June 12, 1991 had asked the applicant to downsize the house. She noted she couldn't remember when the Town had allowed the reconstruction of a landslide to allow maximum development of a property, asking if the area will continue to slide as it is classified as an active landslide. She expressed concern that the two way intersection at Saddle Mountain could be a three way intersection. At the Saddle Mountain subdivision, the conditions of approval on access included reservation of a strip for emergency access only, with a barricade/gate to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer to discourage use by non-residents. The conditions were breached twice, with development of the Mourad and Schwarz's properties, causing safety problems, and the impact on the Mourad's is steadily worsening. She urged the Commission to require access from Moon Lane. Mrs. Bredo, 13820 Page Mill Road, noted her husband had addressed a letter to the Commission. She requested preservation of as many trees on the subject property as possible. Lewis Becker noted he was at a loss regarding Staff's quantitative analysis, as there was a 700 square foot decrease in floor area of the residence between this application and the application of June 12, 1991. He requested the item be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting to allow them to review the quantitative analysis with Staff. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 (160 Page 7 Mr. Becker noted his willingness to erect a gate so unauthorized vehicular access is not allowed on Moon Lane. He felt that coming out of a driveway onto Saddle Mountain Road there was clear visibility to the right and to the left, and the area is flat. He understood there were concerns with traffic, but suggested there were ways to address them. In response to a question from Commissioner Pahl, Mr. Becker noted he was opposed to access via Moon Lane as the road is in terrible condition and is not set up for vehicular access. It would be necessary to pave Moon Lane if it were used for access. Mr. Mourad noted concern with the magnitude of the cut and fill and the existence of the active slide. Mr. Becker clarified that he did not believe it was necessary to repair the slide provided the drainage is designed so it doesn't impact the slide area. The Public Hearing was closed. Chairman Noel noted he did not see a difference between this application and the last application. Whether the size of the house was decreased 100 square feet or 750 square feet, it was still too large for the subject property. Commissioner Pahl noted agreement with Staff regarding access, and felt the issues of the sewer and outdoor living area had been resolved, but the reduction of the size of the house was critical. Commissioner Jones noted his agreement with Commissioner Pahl, that the difference in the size of the residence was critical. Commissioner Pahl suggested an understanding that the Commission did not want to discuss access, landslide, sewage, outdoor living area, but only the size of the house and the appropriatness of the size of the house. Chairman Noel noted concern with the landslide. Mr. Becker clarified that as it stands, it is physically impossible to configure the access to Moon Lane, questioning whether the issue should be left open. Commissioner Pahl noted he would oppose a re -opening of the public hearing. Chairman Noel noted that unless there was new information to be presented, he would not re -open the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 4W Page 8 Commissioner Jones noted the Commission could discuss issues amongst themselves if the item was continued, and did not wish to give the impression all issues have been decided. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Jones, seconded by Pahl and passed to continue this item to the Planning Commission meeting of November 13, 1991 at the request of the applicant. AYES: Chairman Noel and Commissioners Cheng, Jones, Pahl NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso, Ettinger, Stutz The Planning Commission took a brief intermission at 9:00 p.m 3.4 LANDS OF OSHIMA, 25891 Fremont Road: Amendment to the subdivision conditions for Lot B to include a one story limitation on the residence e Bill Ekern introduced this item, referring to the Staff Report to clarify under Recommendation that it should state: Recommend to the City Council Amendment of condition #11, Conditions of Approval Lands of Oshima, to clarify that the structure should not be single -story. Mr. Ekern noted Staff recommended retention of the height restriction. The Public Hearing was opened. Mike Meyer, 26007 Torello Lane, noted the issue was not the quality of the looks of the house, but the quality of life in the area that is critical. When the property was created, conditional exceptions were approved. With a one story residence, there is some invasion of privacy, but a two story residence is a major intrusion and impacts the quality of life. Carol Meyer, 26007 Torello Lane, explained that when the property was originally subdivided, Mr. Oshima represented to the neighbors that he did not intend to build a two-story home. At the Planning Commission meeting where the subdivision was reviewed, the Commission agreed there were extenuating circumstances and conditions were in order. The 19 foot limitation on height was imposed to prevent creation of unauthorized floor area. The project engineer, Paul Nowack, said that a building height of 23 feet was needed for aesthetic reasons. She objected to having to go through the same discussion when this property came in for development as PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page 9 with the Lands of Fong. She felt that with the benefits of subdivision, there should be some considerations. Murray Horton, 26000 Alicante Lane, noted the existing home is within two feet of the property line. He felt the Planning Commission's intent at the time the property was subdivided was to limit a new residence to a single story. When he went to the City Council to have the height increased to 23 feet, Mr. Oshima indicated he was not interested in building a two story residence. Bob Rabin, 25980 Alicante Lane, noted he was also at the City Council meeting when the height restriction was discussed and the 19 foot limitation was originally imposed as the residence would impact four different neighboring properties. He was in favor of limiting a new residence to a single story, noting he was not concerned with the height of the structure but would not like to have views into the adjacent properties from the second floor. Mr. Oshima, 25891 Fremont Road, clarified his personal preference for a single story residence. He noted the main reason the property was allowed to subdivide with approval of conditional exceptions was that the property is essentially flat, with a maximum development area (MDA) of 16,000 square feet. The height of the structures was discussed from the beginning of the subdivision, and the intent of restricting the height was to assure development fit into the environment. If design was done tastefully, by a good architect, two stories should be allowed. The Fong's new residence is a good example. He agreed with Staff's recommendation. Carol Meyer noted the Mas, 26011 Torello Lane, asked her to express their concern as a two story residence would have a view of their property. They would like a single story residence to be required. The Public Hearing was closed. Chairman Noel noted he went along with the 23 foot height limitation and felt the residence should be a single story residence. Commissioner Jones noted it was possible to look down onto the properties in the area of the subject property from La Cresta Drive. He felt the neighbors were not interested in spying on each other. He thought, in reading the transcript of the City Council meeting regarding the subdivision, that the Council was made aware before they voted to increase the height limitation that it was possible to build a two story residence on the subject property, and voted to approve it anyway. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page 10 Commissioner Pahl noted that the Planning Commission recommendation in 1988 was overruled when the City Council approved the 23 foot height limitation and did not require the construction of a single story residence. One councilmember warned the Council that if they approved the 23 foot height limitation, they were approving a two story residence. He felt the Council knew what they were doing. Commissioner Cheng noted her main objection to a two story residence was that it would be possible to look into neighboring backyards. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Pahl, seconded by Jones and passed to recommend to the City Council amendment of condition #11, Conditions of Approval Lands of Oshima, to clarify that the structure should not be single story. AYES: Commissioners Jones, Pahl NOES: Chairman Noel and Commissioner Cheng ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso, Ellinger, Stutz 4. NEW BUSINESS 4.1 Discussion of Safety Barriers Around Swimming Pools MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Pahl, seconded by Jones and passed to recommend to the City Council fencing of swimming pools for safety purposes. AYES: Chairman Noel and Commissioners Cheng, Jones, Pahl NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso, Ellinger, Stutz Commissioner Pahl referred to a letter from Carolyn and Fred Carnes, noting he was surprised the Town suggested undergrounding the utilities. Bill Ekern responded that the Town had not made that suggestion, but that the City of Palo Altos had suggested undergrounding through their property or moving the lines to an alternate location on the property. Commissioner Cheng noted she had received a complaint from a resident that a neighbor's second unit was blue. Staff would follow up on the complaint. 5. OLD BUSINESS Commissioner Jones thanked Staff for the speed limit signage on Fremont Road. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED October 23rd, 1991 Page I l 6. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 9TH, 1991 Commissioner Pahl wished to make the following amendments on pages 6 and 7, under Lands of Battle: Commissioner Pahl noted the basis for the findings recommended by Staff was that the property is triangular, when in fact the property has four sides. Commissioner Pahl noted that if this request is approved, everyone with roads and driveways and a triangular shaped property with four sides will come in and ask for the Battle variance. He noted the Commission had to make findings that the property was so unusual, virtually unlike any other property in the Town. Mr. Ekern clarified that each Planning Commission action is de novo, and the Commission is not obligated to follow precedent. Commissioner Pahl indicated that while each decision is de novo, he felt obligated to follow precedent. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Jones, seconded by Pahl, and passed by consensus to approve the minutes of October 9th, 1991 as amended. 7. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 16TH, 1991 8. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 22ND, 1991 October 22nd, 1991: Bill Ekern reported one item was reviewed and approved: Bjorklund - Grading. Permit to restore backyard to original grade. The work will be done under the supervision of an engineer; the area will be planted for stabilization 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Pahl, seconded by Jones, and passed by consensus to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Johnson Planning Secretary