Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/12/1992Minutes of a Regular Meeting APPROVED Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, November 12,1992, 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: -.asseues si7-YL ti f 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Pahl, Commissioners Cheng, Comiso, Ellinger, Schreiner & Sinunu Absent: Commissioner Stutz Staff: Jeff Peterson, City Engineer; Joe Sordi, Planning Consultant; Land Lonberger, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR None. Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be adopted in one motion, except for any item removed for separate consideration elsewhere on the agenda. The Chairman will ask the Commission and the audience for requests to remove these items. 3.1 LANDS OF MC PADDEN, 2581 Estacada Drive; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Minor Addition, CDP and Variance. Chairman Pahl asked if there were any requests to pull item from the consent calendar. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Ellinger to approve the consent calendar. l i Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 Page 2 AYES: Chairman Pahl, Commissioners Cheng, Comiso, Ellinger, Schreiner & Sinunu NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Stutz 4.1 LANDS OF KORNFIELD, 26209 Dori Lane; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Spa and Variance. Chairman Pahl asked if there were any questions for Staff. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Dr. Harrison Kornfield, 26209 Dori Lane, the applicant, asked if they had received the map of the land and the surrounding properties . The Commission had not and Dr. Kornfield passed the map around for their review. The subject property was outlined in red. He stated that the development of all the lots shown were larger than his lot and none of them would be subject to a net reduction of acreage because of easements except his lot. Without the easement across his lot, there could not have been two lots to his east. He was surrounded by lots that were larger both in gross and net. He discussed the map pointing out that it looked like there was a public road on his property, however, it was an access easement on his west side to the lot of Lands of Richter. He stated that this lot was of a such a size that there never could be a building on that lot across from the area were he plans to put the spa Chairman Pahl asked if Dr. Kornfield was familiar with the Town's ordinances and discussed the findings that the Planning Commission must make in order to grant a variance. The Planning Commission must find his property to be unique, so unlike almost any other property in Town. Having lots which are adjacent to larger lots, having lots that are unbuildable next to it, or having I-280 next to you, for example, are not unique or special. Chairman Pahl asked Dr. Kornfield what made his property so unique that it was so unlike any other property in Town. Dr. Kornfiled answered that the presence of the easement across the front of his property plus the 40' setback gives him.9 net acres and less than 3/4 of an acre to do his development. The whole property was pushed to the rear by that easement. Chairman Pahl discussed the previous applicantion, Lands of Mc Padden application and the size of his lot which was .46 of an acre. There are substantially smaller lots in Town because of slope or because they were substandard lots when the Town was incorporated. There are also lots in Town with easements on all three sides on them. He stated he was trying to work with the applicant, however, they have to find something really unique to his property. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 t Page 3 Dr. Kornfield discussed were the house and the development was on the property and what was around it. He presented an aerial photograph for the Commissioners review. He stated that it does show in the center of the property a building called a barn by the Staff. The roof was sagging and would have fallen down except that they rebuilt it on the inside with cables. This was on a mud sill and not a foundation which greatly limited were he could move dirt. He stated that at the time the report was written the Staff did not know that the barn was not at grade for the backyard and preserving the barn was one of the critical issues expressed by Mr. Fox. Dr. Kornfield felt that this was unique and did not feel most lots in the area have this type of barn. He also pointed out from the photograph that there was no sign of habitation on the lot directly behind him except for the corner of a garage which was 80' from the property line. He felt that the placement of a spa in this area would not infringe on the privacy of the neighbors and he felt that the purpose of the setbacks were to guarantee privacy from one property to the other. Dr. Kornfield stated that the report did not indicate that this was a portable spa and according to Linda Niles there were no regulations regarding portable spas. His contractor told him it would take 4 hours to install and 2 hours to remove. He stated that in the initial plan they showed a concrete pad, however, they were not firm on that plan and would be willing to put in gravel or another type of surface. Commissioner Sinunu asked Dr. Kornfield if he knew about the setback line before planning this project. Dr. Kornfield stated yes, and stated that when they purchased the house with the existing structure, in that setback was a trellis and brick patio around the pool and both approved by previous Planning Commissions and Councils. Where they plan to place the spa balances this area off and they do not plan to go further into the setback. Commissioner Sinunu discussed with Dr. Kornfield other areas for the spa which included by the pool, by the trellis, on the other side of the barn. David Fox, 100 North Third Street, Campbell, the applicant's landscape architect, discussed the number on conditions they had to contend with on the site when trying to place the development and discussed alternate placements of the spa as shown on their map. Commissioner Ellinger assumed that they had picked the best area and asked for the spot to be identified on the photo. He asked if the portable spa could be put on a portable foundation, if it could be put above the ground rather than below the ground and would he be willing to remove it in 30 days if there were complaints. He also discussed the property above the Kornfields and not being visible by that property. Mr. Fox stated that he understood the problem with creating precedent. He thought f that they could make findings in this situation because of the configuration of the lot \r with the existing structures, the desire to save the older structures and the Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 Page 4 topographical constraints on it, coupled with the fact that they would be willing to remove the spa in the event of complaints, it was a very narrow set of criteria that would be hard to match by another applicant. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Ellinger stated that he felt that the applicant was not seeking a permanent structure so this would not require a variance. He would find that it did not create a public nuisance and he would like to take the position of this being a portable spa. He stated that what made this unique was the steep embankment behind him. Chairman Pahl and Commissioner Ellinger took the position that this was not a permanent structure. Chairman Pahl suggested letting the applicant dig his hole, put in his potable spa and attach the electrical and plumbing to it. There were no standards in Town for a portable spa and as long as it was not connected permanently to the ground there was not a problem. Commissioner Schreiner asked for Mr. Peterson's comments regarding portable spas as she has a neighbor who now has to remove his portable spa because of complaints from a neighbor. Mr. Peterson stated that the only concern he had was mixing the word portable with temporary. Because something was portable did not mean it would be moved. Trailer houses are also portable, however, often times set up for life in one place. It may be a permanent structure that has portable capability. In discussing the thought of tying it to a particular owner, the Town would not necessarily know when that property was sold and he thought that would be difficult. Commissioner Ellinger asked Mr. Peterson if they had anything in the Town that would require a Use Permit for anything like this and asked if there was anything that required a Use Permit for using your setback for anything on a regular basis. Mr. Peterson responded, no, not to his knowledge as far as the use of the setback; it was mainly structures. Chairman Pahl felt that unless it was a public nuisance, there was nothing wrong with putting the spa in the setback. He further stated that a structure could be temporary and not portable, however, it could not be portable without being temporary. Commissioner Comiso discussed the ordinance and the reason for such ordinances which protect the property. She stated that she could not find anything unusual about this property. Motion made to deny the variance; seconded by Commissioner Schreiner. J Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 4W Page 5 Commissioner Cheng stated that the Commission must follow the rules and she had walked through the property and could not approve the variance. Commissioner Ellinger felt that something like this should require a Use Permit and in a situation where everyone in a neighborhood agreed that this did not cause a problem, it should be acceptable, however, when the first person objects, the Use Permit would give the City the option to ask for removal. If you approve a project with a variance, there would be a problem. He would like to see if further action, as a recommendation to Council, to look into this as an Administrative process. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Schreiner to deny the variance. AYES: Chairman Pahl, Commissioners Ellinger, Schreiner, Sinunu, Cheng & Comiso NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Stutz The application for a variance has been denied. Dr. Kornfield has the opportunity to appeal before the City Council within 10 days at a cost of $750.00. Chairman Pahl stated to Dr. Kornfield that Staff would be willing to work with the applicant, however, Dr. Kornfield stated that he thought that the Planning Commission had not listened to what he said and thought that there were preconceived ideas. He was disappointed with some of the comments. 4.2 LANDS OF BELLA,11921 Hilltop Drive; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence and Pool. The applicant requested a continuance to November 24, 1992. 4.3 LANDS OF VISO, 28620 Matadero Creek Court; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence, Pool and Spa. Staff requested that this item be continued to the November 24, 1992 meeting to allow the applicant to provide additional information. 4.4 EAVES IN SETBACK; Review the Negative Declaration (Neg. Dec.) and Ordinance adopting amendments to the zoning code allowing eaves to encroach into required setbacks. Chairman Pahl stated that the Commissioners previously had an opportunity to review f the Ordinance adopting amendments to the zoning code allowing eaves to encroach into setbacks and asked if there were any questions, additions, or modifications to this Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 Page 6 proposed ordinance. He asked that the minutes reflect that what was before them was half of the recommendations from the sub committee. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger and seconded by Commissioner Comiso that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Eaves Encroachment Ordinance. AYES: Chairman Pahl, Commissioners Schreiner, Simmu, Cheng, Comiso & Ellinger NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Stutz 4.5 Household Hazardous Waste Element & Source Reduction Element; Review of the recommended Negative Declaration and preliminary draft of the Household Hazardous Waste Element of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element and General Plan to add the above two elements to the Town's General Plan. J Chairman Pahl stated that the Negative Declaration was not in the packet and would be provided at the next meeting. This item will be continued to the November 24, 1992 meeting. 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.1 LANDS OF SWANSON, 27575 Purissima Road; Conceptual review of proposed height variance. Chairman Pahl stated that this was Site Analysis and usually occured before the Planning Commission meeting in an informal setting. For those Commissioners who had not been through Site Analysis he stated that this was not a public hearing and a vote would not be taken; this was solely for the purpose of providing assistance and guidance to the applicant. Chairman Pahl asked for the applicant to come forward. The Commission had an opportunity to look at the plan, read his concept of plan and visit the property. He asked Mr. Swanson if he had any questions. Mr. Swanson stated that he would rather be asked questions as he had already made a statement. Commissioner Comiso discussed the Town's ordinances regarding height limitations and other properties in Town that exceeded the height limitation mentioned in Mr. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 Page 7 Swanson's letter dated September 14, 1992, She stated that those houses where built before the Town had the height ordinances in place and long before the Town was incorporated. The ordinances say no to the requested height. The property will support a two story, 27 house and Commissioner Comiso asked Mr. Swanson why he wanted a 38' house. Mr. Swanson stated that this was their dream home and he felt that unless you flew over the property in an airplane, you would never see the house. Chairman Pahl explained that it was an unknown as to what would happen to the property next door to the Swanson's and it could someday be subdivided. As previously stated, in order to grant a variance by law, the Commission had to find that this property was like almost no other in Town and the applicant could not create the problem. The fact that Mr. Swanson wanted to build a 38' house could not be used by the Commission. To grant Mr. Swanson a variance would be throwing away the rule book. Commissioner Comiso stated that if Mr. Swanson really wanted this variance he would have to approach the City Council to change the ordinance. 4W Commissioner Sinunu asked if Mr. Swanson had plans drawn for this project and wanted to echo the comments that this was the appropriate time to bring up a situation for input. He felt that the property was beautiful and he felt it was very difficult to do anything about the ordinance. 5.2 Request to change December 23, 1992 Planning Commission meeting to Tuesday, December 22, 1992. This will be discussed at the December 9, 1992 meeting to discuss a possible change in starting time. 6. OLD BUSINESS 6.1 Fences, Basements and Recommended Plant List Study Session scheduled for December 15,1992 at 5:30 p.m. 6.2 MDA/MFA-This item will be discussed at a special workshop meeting to be scheduled in the near future. 6.3 Review of the General Plan a. Confirm due dates for Element assignments. b. Recreation and Scenic Highways Elements will be presented by Commissioners Schreiner and Stutz on November 24,1992. ( 7. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23,1992 Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 Page 8 Minutes were held for completeness. 8. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3,1992 Commissioner Comiso discussed Lands of Owen and the suggestion was to take 10' and the architect was to return if it moved the house too much. Council wanted the Planning Commission to know that they do want the dedication and right-of-way taken on Alta Lane North and Alta Lane South. Council would also like to start taking the full dedication of street right-of-way and easements. Commissioner Schreiner asked Commissioner Comiso what the Council stated regarding hook up to the sewers on Alta Lane. It was stated that at this time the application was still conditioned to hook up to the public sewer system. There was some talk regarding going back to septic, however, it was still conditioned for sanitary sewer. Mr. Owen had indicated that he could accomplish this by moving the house down the hill. There was also a discussion by Council regarding 6" hook ups initially rather than 4". 9. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 27,1992 9.1 LANDS OF NGUYEN/PHAM, 11632 Rebecca Lane; A request for a Site J Development Permit for a Tennis Court. Approved with conditions. 9.2 LANDS OF SANDMAN, 26545 Purissima Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Pool and Pool Hut. Approved with no additional conditions. 9.3 LANDS OF CODISPOTI/SCHROEDER,14545 Manuella Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for Landscape/Hardscape. Mr. Peterson stated that the applicant proposed the planting of several oak trees on the site as well as replacing other trees that had been removed. Terry McDaniel from Environmental Design and Protection Committee reviewed the Plan and she was satisfied with the Plan as far as the type of trees and their placement. Terry also felt that the large oak tree that was preserved provided a large amount of screening. At the back of the property, there was a fairly large grove of Eucalyptus and one request by the Pathway Committee was that there was an existing pathway easement that ran along that property line. Right now parts of it are unusable because its obstructed by vegetation, being these large Eucalyptus trees. It was requested that it be cleared which was acceptable by the applicant and Pathway Committee. One of the conditions would be to have the applicant's engineers stake the easement so they could see exactly were the easement was in relation to the Eucalyptus. If the trees were in the easement the applicant would Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED November 12, 1992 4 Page 9 move the easement away from the trunks of the trees so it could be usable. This way they would not have to clear it and yet obtain a usable easement. The Planning Commissioners stated that they all appreciated the Pathway Committee Recommendations hand out provided for this meeting. Commissioner Ellinger suggested that the Commission draft a recommended ordinance for the Town to go to Council which basically described examples of recreational and personal use that would involve temporary and portable equipment and in that ordinance he would like it to require a Conditional Use Permit so that an activity could be shut down solely on the complaint of a neighbor. He felt that the Commission was in the middle of a gray area and in the middle of a setback area. He discussed examples of portable and temporary situations and not having a means of enforcement. The Commission further discussed the meaning and examples of what was portable. Commissioner Ellinger was more concerned with the activities versus what was or was not portable. Joe Sordi read the Code regarding "portable" for the Commission and the definition of "structure" which were things such as buildings, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts and patios requiring construction or erection on the ground. Chairman Pahl stated that the legal definition of structure was that it was intended to be permanently attached to the property; a fixture. Chairman Pahl suggested that the study session on December 15th include portable features and all of the Commissioners agreed with the suggestion. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso, seconded by Commissioner Ellinger and passed by consensus to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lard Lonberger Planning Secretary mo u