Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/02/1996Minutes of a Special Meeting Approved 7/24/96 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, July 2,1996,7:00 p.m. ON PROJECT SITE Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes #13-96 (2 ) ROLL CALL The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on the project site. Present: Commissioners Gottlieb, Doran, Cheng, Stutz, Jinkerson & Schreiner Absent: Commissioner Finn Staff. Curtis Williams, Planning Director; Jeff Peterson, City Manager; Sheryl Proft, Assistant Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Planner 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 LANDS OF ROGEZ (FORMERLY Lands of Han), 13901 W. Edith (also known as 25561 W. Fremont Road) #135 -95 -TM; a proposed three lot subdivision of 4.5 acres, cancellation of the Williamson Act Contract, and proposed Negative Declaration. The Commission reviewed and had informal discussions on various aspects of the proposed subdivision, including building sites, access to the three lots, drainage and flood control, tree preservation and removal of existing improvements. In addition to the Commissioners and Town staff, the following people were present at the on-site meeting: Scott Wilson, SCVWD; Didier & Isabelle Rogez (property owners and applicants); Abby Ahrens, applicants' representative; Bill Kull, project engineer; and Von Haws, building designer. Neighbors included: Jean & Dave Struthers; Richard Moll; Bernice Moos; Mr. & Mrs. John Lopez; Mr. & Mrs. Duming; Jean Gurney; and Vince Vargas. ADJOURNMENT (oroiect site) The Planning Commission meeting reconvened at 8:19 p.m. in Council Chamber. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 2, 1996 Page 2 4/ 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Commissioners Gottlieb, Doran, Cheng, Stutz, Jinkerson & Schreiner Absent: Commissioner Finn Staff: Curtis Williams, Planning Director; Jeff Peterson, City Manager; Sheryl Proft, Assistant Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Planner; Roberta Wolfe, Acting Planning Secretary 2. REORGANIZATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Gottlieb and seconded by Commissioner Cheng to nominate Commissioner Doran as Chairman. AYES: Commissioners Gottlieb, Cheng, Stutz, Jinkerson & Schreiner. NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Finn MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson to nominate Commissioner Gottlieb as Vice - Chairman. AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners, Cheng, Stutz, Jinkerson & Schreiner. NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Finn 3. PUBLIC HEARING LANDS OF ROGEZ (formerly Lands of Hau), 13901 W. Edith (also known as 25561 W. Fremont Road) #135 -95 -TM; a proposed three lot subdivision of 4.5 acres, cancellation of the Williamson Act Contract, and proposed Negative Declaration (continued). Chairman Doran said she wanted to get some of the issues brought up at the site into the record. Mr. Williams said there had been some confusion regarding the building sites as shown on the map. The 160 foot building circle is a code requirement. The actual building may or may not fit into the circle. The second page of the plans show buildings on each lot. He clarified that those are conceptual only and only indicate how a configuration might be feasible. Approval of the subdivision does not approve this plan. Bill Kull, Giuliani and Kull, Inc., 20431 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, civil engineer 1 representing the applicant, referred to the conditions of approval for the tentative map. He Planting Commission Minutes Approved 724/96 July 2, 1996 Page 3 asked that Condition 12 be modified as the property is only on the west side of the creek and wanted to clarify that the applicants were only granting an easement over their property. In addition, he asked that reference to the 100 year flood be deleted. Mr. Peterson said that the intent of Condition 19 is that the applicant constructs storm drainage improvements for the localized site which may not be necessary for the subdivision. Mr. Kull asked that the words "if necessary" be added to the first line of Condition 19 after the words "drainage improvements." In regard to Condition 23, Mr. Kull said the applicant would like a reimbursement agreement for other properties that may be connecting to the line within the next ten years. Referring to Condition 27, he said the applicant would like the option of bonding for improvements. He also stated that Conditions 34 and 35 are the same. Mr. Peterson said that normally the applicant has the choice of (1) completing improvements prior to the final map being recorded, or (2) bonding for improvements so they can record the final map, then sell lots to fund improvements. This request is for a bond to allow site development. He said the difficulty is that the Town needs leverage to push subdivision improvements through. Recently the Town has had to call in bonds. Mr. Williams said the most recent modified language requires that improvements would have to be completed prior to issuance of building permits. Mr. Peterson said that way, the construction and subdivision improvements are done before the house is built. Mr. Kull said he would still like the words in the condition In regard to a reimbursement agreement for the sewer line, Mr. Peterson said the intent of the Municipal Code is clear that a reimbursement agreement is for expansion of service, and we are putting in an 8 inches line instead of 6 inches. This would serve up to 200 homes. The agreement is only for the material difference so he thought it might be a nominal amount. He said they would look at it and see if it would be worth it; the applicant pays attorney fees to draw up the agreement. Mr. Kull answered questions regarding the scale of the houses shown on page 2 of the plan. He said the houses shown are about 6,000 square feet, and are not representative of the full floor area allowed. Discussion followed regarding access. Mr. Kull said there were not traffic studies, but calculations were done based on site distances and speeds. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 2, 1996 Page 4 Abigail Ahrens, 200 University Avenue, Los Altos, presented a brief history of the property and said it has taken this long for a property owner to come up with a plan to deal with flood control and erosion. She said this proposal has an enormous tax advantage. Taxes are now $400 a year as a result of the Williamson Act contract, and it is obvious that the land is not being used for agricultural purposes. She expressed gratitude to staff and said the proposal brings a win to property owners and brings Los Altos a solution for drainage. In addition, it will provide sewers to this end of town. She said one thing the Town can do is to let the applicant go ahead with house designs. She asked that the Town allow the Rogez's to submit plans for review and issue building permits, but not issue any occupancy permits until all conditions are met. Jean Gurnee, 5 Cypress Court, said she was concerned about the eucalyptus trees. The retaining wall is down and some of the trees are 150 feet tall. If they come down her house would be destroyed. Her attorney has written to Dr. Hau (previous property owner) and the Water District requesting they remove five trees. Scott Wilson, Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCV WD), said that when the easement is granted, what is within the easement becomes their liability. An arborist would look at the trees and determine if they are dangerous and take them down if necessary. As part of that process, Mrs. Gurnee's concern would be addressed. �w Vince Vargas, 7 Cypress Court, Los Altos, said his back boundary is Adobe Creek. He expressed concerns about the creek and what is proposed by SCV WD. One concern is that it be as natural as possible. He said he understood that Reach 5 is scheduled for the year 2000, but a lot can happen in four years. He said they have gone through a couple of floods in that area and he requested that Los Altos Hills and Los Altos join with neighbors on both sides of the creek to propose to the board of the Water District that the priority be moved up on Reach 5. He asked how heritage trees will be protected and said he would like the redwoods and oaks to be protected during construction. Chairman Doran informed him that the Town requires a fence over the drip lines of trees of a certain size, especially oaks. Mr. Vargas described what had happened to his property in 1983 and the temporary measures taken by the Water District at that time which he felt have preserved what remains of the creek. Rudolf Moos, 25661 W. Fremont, said he lives just downstream of the creek. He wanted his concerns regarding what happens downstream to be in the record so they are considered as the plan goes forward. He said his concern is what happens to the height and velocity of water flow as the changes in the creek water flow occur. These concems have been raised with the Water District but he thought it was important and that a study should be done by the Water District Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 2, 1996 Page 5 Mr. Wilson said a permit would be required to put in the new storm drain, and they would make sure it was not making conditions worse. Mr. Peterson explained what SCV WD is proposing as far as channel improvements and talked about timing. He said capital improvements can occur with or without Water District improvements. Commissioners asked if there were ways to move up the timetable for Water District improvements. Mr. Peterson said the EIR will be open to public review this fall. In addition, the Northwest Zone of the Flood Control Advisory Committee provides input and they could talk to individuals on that committee as well as members of the Water District Board. In response to a concern about drainage, he said that every time a house and driveway are built it incrementally adds a little more water to the creek. Discussion followed concerning possible flooding. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the proposed 100 year flood channel will be able to carry the 100 year storm. He said the finished floor of the houses must be built above the flood plain. Mr. Wilson said there is a benefit assessment on everyone's tax bill and the money goes ( into a pool to construct flood control improvements. When asked about a guarantee that funds will be available in 1999 or 2000, he said that part of the planning is looking at the flow of funds to make sure the funding fits with what they are planning. He described the process of approval for a project. Regarding commitment of funds, he said that in the past, when projects had been approved, they had been constructed. He described the scope of the proposed project and said the District had obtained an easement on the Los Altos side of the creek when that subdivision was constructed. He explained that this alternative is the culmination of a long process that began when the District presented 15 alternatives to the neighborhood group. The core of this alternative is the easement across this property. They would replace the existing flume and it does not bring additional drainage to the creek. He said the District's concern is that they get water to the creek in a way that does not damage the creek. Mr. Peterson said the applicants can demolish the existing structures. Before the final map can be recorded any zoning problems must be eliminated. He said the improvements to the channel would need to stand alone. Houses would need to be designed to the elevation required by the Water District. Mr. Williams said that it would be a condition that existing improvements that cross property lines be removed before new homes are built. kaw Planning Commission Minutes Approved 724/96 July 2, 1996 Page 6 In regard to keeping the tennis court, Mr. Williams said that depends on how the condition is crafted, but the most generous would be that they could keep it until occupancy is granted. Rich Moll, 1 Cypress Court, Los Altos, said he is an officer for the neighborhood association. He said they have a pool and had a 25 foot section of the wall collapse. The Water District came in to make the repair. He said he was here to say thanks for permitting the Water District to take the property and to encourage the Water District to move the project ahead. He said letters had been sent to the Town. John Lopez, 25541 Fremont Road, expressed concern about past flooding on his property. He is mainly interested in the capital improvement project and improving drainage in the area. Mr. Peterson said since the Town has planned mediation in August, he could not answer that question at this time. Jean Struthers, 13690 Robleda Road, said there have been two bad floods in the area and she felt the worst decision she ever made as a Planning Commissioner was to allow a house to be built on top of the creek. Debris, etc. causes water to build up. She was glad this project was happening. Chairman Doran closed the public hearing and said the Commission has three considerations: (1) review of the negative declaration. (2) the Williamson Act contract cancellation; and (3) the tentative map. In answer to a question from Commissioner Gottlieb, Mr. Williams said the conservation easement is a condition of approval so it is appropriate to add it to mitigation measures. Further, referring to the Environmental Checklist, he said item f on page 7 was addressed on page 13 under Discussion of Environmental Evaluation. In regard to questions about the section in the new housing element on vacant land in the town that is still available, Mr. Williams said this property is included under the B category, which means it is suitable for development. He said that table is very rough and the sole purpose was aggregating maximum potential buildout. It was not intended to be site specific. Williamson Act Commissioner Gottlieb asked whether the town would receive any of the money from the cancellation fee. Ms. Davis said she would contact the assessor to find out who gets the money from the cancellation fee. M Planning Commission Minutes Approved 724/96 July 2, 1996 Page 7 Mr. Williams informed the Commission that Finding 5 was directed toward large pieces of farm land and was not relevant in this case. Tentative man A lengthy discussion concerning the conservation easement ensued, including the following: • The extent of the easement • Improvements proposed by the Water District • Whether a pool or other improvements could encroach into the easement • Activities the Commission would like to see within the 100 year flood control bench • The three -stage channel • The reason for the bench • Type of plants allowed • Whether fences would be allowed within the SCV WD easement • Type of development to be allowed in the easement • Application to lots 2 and 3 • Width of improvements ( Mr. Peterson said that one of the reasons these designs get this wide is that the wider the design the slower the water moves. He clarified that this property is benefiting downstream property owners by spreading the water out. Mr. Wilson said if the Water District does not get the easement, there is no project. Discussion followed regarding the following: • Working with the Water District on where building is allowed and what type of development can occur within their easement • Whether to deduct the conservation easement from slope density calculations to limit Lot Unit Factor • Design of entrance • Whether floor and development area figures are too high for the lots • Whether greater setbacks should be required • Whether height limitations should be imposed • Informing buyers of restrictions • Adjusting lot lines to equalize lots 2 and 3 • Looking at development restrictions for lot 3 as it is entrance to the Town • Pathway along Adobe Creek • Protection of trees (redwood and oaks) and retention of as much vegetation as possible • Need for traffic study Planning Commission Minutes July 2, 1996 Page 8 Approved 7/24/96 • Time line for when improvements are scheduled to start and finish outside this property Mr. Peterson stated that final improvements are supposed to be substantially in conformance with the tentative map. The Commission should set accesses, especially for Lot 3. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Jinkerson and seconded by Commissioner Cheng to continue this matter until July 10. Staff will provide information on the following as requested by the Commission: • Revised wording for condition #12 • Wording for a disclosure statement for MDA and MFA • Exhibit showing line 25 feet from top of bank of bench versus SCV WD easement line • Slope density calculations removing the area within the conservation easement to the line 25 feet from top of bank of middle bench • Projected time line for capital improvement project, SCVWD and subdivision improvements • Whether paths can be constructed along the property frontages within the rights-of- way and 10 foot pathway easement AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Stutz, Schreiner, Cheng, Jinkerson & Gottlieb NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Finn 4. OLD BUSINESS 4.1 Review policy for secondary dwelling units and accessory structures (continued). Mr. Williams provided background and outlined the policy developed by staff. Commission members discussed Item 3 which referred to puking spaces, rental, and location on a lot less than an acre in size. It was agreed that Item 4 should be modified to delete reference to an attached structure. Planning Commission Minutes July 2, 1996 Page 9 Approved 7/24/96 4 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve the recommended policy amended to delete Item 3, renumber Item 4 as Item 3, and the new Item 3 to read, "The size of a "secondary dwelling" shall include all portions of any structure, but does not apply to a main residence." AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Stutz, Schreiner, Cheng, Jinkerson & Gottlieb NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Finn ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Roberta Wolfe Acting Planning Secretary 4 CJ