Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/1996Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 7/24/96 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, July 10, 1996, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes #14-96 (3) ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Gottlieb, Jinkerson, Finn, Cheng, Stutz & Schreiner Absent: None Staff: Jeff Peterson, City Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Planner; Lam Lonberger, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR -None. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF STEVENSON, 27650 Edgerton Road (109-96-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a major addition, remodel and pool. Ms. Davis introduced this item. A memo was provided to the Commission with comments from the Los Altos Fire Department. She requested that the Fire Department recommendation be added to the conditions of approval. Ms. Davis clarified that the closest sewer line is over 400 feet from this property. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Raymond Miller, 225 Frances Drive, Los Altos, project architect, commented on condition 99. The colors chosen will be in the brown tones. Condition #19 requires a conservation easement over the area at and below the 650 foot elevation. Mr. Miller requested a modification to the conservation easement to include only areas with a 30% slope or (� greater. Commissioner Gottlieb would like the creek included in the conservation V easement. It was noted that some clearing is allowed in conservation easements. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 2 Commissioner Schreiner questioned a small portion of space to the left of the living area on the lower level. She asked if the area was seven feet or greater in height and was it living area. Mr. Miller responded that it was a storage area. He was not sure of the actual height. He will measure it and add the area to the calculations if it qualifies as floor area. Commissioner Schreiner continued noting that the pool is at the 30 foot setback line. She asked if they were planning a deck within the 30 foot setback. Mr. Miller responded yes; five feet maximum. She questioned the purpose of the grading. Mr. Miller responded it was for a flat play area for the children. Ken Goldman, 12385 Melody Lane, neighbor, questioned the location of the pool as it relates to his property. Mr. Miller responded to the question. CLOSED PUBLIC TESTIMONY Commissioner Finn felt it was a straight forward application with the addition of the Fire Department comments. He agreed with the suggestion to place the conservation easement only over areas of 30% slope and greater and over the creek. Commissioner Cheng agreed. Commissioner Schreiner also agreed, however she voiced concern with the pool decking within the 30 foot setback. She asked staff for policy regarding grading and flattening out an area in the 30 foot setback. Ms. Davis answered the question noting grading is being kept to a minimum. Retaining walls in a setback could be as high as six feet. The applicants are showing a four foot high wall located at least 10 feet from the property line. Commissioner Gottlieb would like to see the lot line certified prior to excavation for the pool site. Commissioner Stutz agreed that the conservation easement be reduced to include only areas over 30% slope. She requested a statement from the Fire Department as to when they will be requiring a 14 foot driveway on major addition applications. She would like to know how the decision is being made. She objected to the pool decking in the 30 foot setback. She asked if the pool could be shifted five feet, understanding it might require some tree removal and additional grading. There was a consensus to move the pool three feet so only a maximum of two feet of decking would be in the 30 foot setback. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Finn and seconded by Commissioner Gottlieb to approved the Site Development Permit for a major addition and remodel of an existing residence and a swimming pool, Lands of Stevenson, with the following changes/amendments to the conditions of approval: the Fire Department recommendations which include a minimum 14 foot wide driveway; the pool shall be shifted away from the property line if more than two feet of decking is desired on the uphill side of the pool; and conservation easement shall be granted over the area at and below the 650foot elevation, to include slopes of 30% or greater, the seasonal creek and areas within 25 feet of the top of the bank. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 3 4 AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Jinkerson, Schreiner, Cheng, Gottlieb, Stutz & Finn NOES: None. This item is subject to a 21 day appeal period. 3.2 LANDS OF MEHTA, 26677 Snell Lane (112-96-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a major addition and remodel. Ms. Davis introduced this item requesting the Fire Department recommendations be added to the conditions of approval. There will be a correction to condition #19 correcting the time of the street. The improvements encroaching into the setbacks were already there when the current owner purchased the property. A portion of the wood deck at the back of the house will be pulled back from the property line. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the new second set of stairs that are encroaching into the setback. Ms. Davis noted that it was simply a walkway with steps on grade that can encroach. She will ask for clarification from the architect. Code allows pathways and walkways in the setback. Commissioner Gottlieb would prefer a natural walkway. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Walter Chapman, 620 South EI Monte Avenue, Los Altos, project architect, discussed the addition and remodel of an existing one story residence. He commented on jogging the walkways to prevent anyone from bumping into the cantilever section. No structures will be in the rear setback and the second leg of the driveway will be added to make it a circular drive. The backup area will be modified to be circular in shape, which will remove some of the pavement within the side setback. The driveway will go between the two Pine trees to prevent removal of trees. The storage areas on the setbacks will be removed. Discussion ensued regarding the private easement. CLOSED PUBLIC TESTIMONY Commissioner Jinkerson commented on the fact that no other structures will be in the setbacks and pavement currently in the setbacks are being reduced. Commissioner Schreiner was concerned with the circular driveway impacting the trees. She would like the Site Development Committee to review the area in case the trees die, as the trees should be replaced. Ms. Davis clarified condition #3 relating to additional landscaping. Another item of discussion was the lower neighbor's concern with drainage. Ms. Davis noted that the plan had been reviewed by the Assistance Engineer. Commissioner Schreiner asked if the turnaround currently in the setback will remain. Ms. Davis responded that it will be pulled back from the property line, reducing the amount in the setback. Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb and Jinkerson felt there was still too much 400 encroachment into the setbacks. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 4 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Stutz, seconded by Commissioner Finn, and amended to approve the Site Development Permit for a major addition and remodel of an existing residence, Lands of Mehta, with the following addition to the conditions of approval: add the additional Fire Department recommendation noting that the driveway shall have an all weather surface that is designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (45,000 pounds). The gradient of the driveway shall not exceed 17%. AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Cheng, Stutz & Finn NOES: Commissioners Schreiner, Jinkerson & Gottlieb This item is subject to a 21 day appeal period. 3.3 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 from July 2, 1996). Brief break at 8:15 p.m. to provide the Commissioners an opportunity to read a memo from Ms. Davis as requested at the previous meeting, and several letters from surrounding neighbors (Dick Moll, Vince Vargas, Jean Gurnee, and Rudolf, and Bernice Moos). Commissioner Finn stepped down from the public hearing as he was not able to listen to the tapes of the previous meeting due to a malfunction of the equipment. Ms. Davis' memo provided the following information: map showing the lines of the proposed conservation easement and 25 feet from the top of the middle bench (per planned improvements by the Santa Clara Valley Water District); slope density calculations for the lots excluding the area within the conservation easement to the line 25 feet from the top of the middle bench (as opposed to the entire conservation easement as shown on the Tentative Map); information on whether the paths on W. Edith Avenue and Fremont Road will be able to be constructed within the proposed 10 foot wide pathway easement; revised wording for the granting of the conservation easement; wording for a disclosure statement for maximum floor and development area; and tentative time line for improvements (Town CIP, SCV WD channel and subdivision improvements). The City Engineer passed around a drawing provided by the Water District. In answer to a question, he noted that the Town had no control over the Santa Clara Valley Water District improvements. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 5 Scott Wilson, Santa Clara Valley Water District representative, discussed the fence on the Los Altos City side of the creek which Commissioner Gottlieb felt would catch all of the debris, forcing the water onto the Los Altos Hills side. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the language in the Negative Declaration regarding easements. She was concerned that the Negative Declaration stated that the flood plains on lots 1, 2 and 3 were to be conservation easements. No structures were to be allowed in the flood plain conservation easements. She asked if the wording could be changed without re -circulating the Negative Declaration. Ms. Davis responded yes. Commissioner Jinkerson discussed the water going up over the middle bank. Scott Wilson, Santa Clara Valley Water District, fielded questions from the Planning Commission which included the following: planting in the creek channel; the upper bench being left open; no fences or structures in the area of conservation easement; the design process and details; SCV WD time line; and the letter from the neighbors regarding the culvert. Chairman Doran commented on the construction schedule memo provided by Jeff Peterson, assuming approval of the subdivision and the Town's storm drainage capital improvement project, the schedule would be as follows: • Rogez subdivision, spring of 1997 • Storm drain capital improvement project, summer of 1997 • SC V WD Adobe Creek project, summer of 1999 Chairman Doran asked the City Engineer what would happen to the water between 1997 and 1999 if the site is built and the creek is not improved. Mr. Peterson responded that a preliminary design would be completed and submitted to the Water District. They would review all storm drainage outlets into the creek within their jurisdictions. Any concerns would be put into comments which would need to be addressed and sent back to the design engineer for changes. The Water District requires of all water outlets into creeks specific outlet requirements. Those requirements include either rock riprap around the outlet of the pipe to prevent erosion or concrete sack riprap or some type of erosion protection so that erosion at the end of a pipe does not occur. This concern is valid for every single pipe that enters a creek. Chairman Doran was concerned with the Eucalyptus trees and with the Rogez' property between 1997 and 1999 if the creek improvements are not in place in the event of a 100 year storm. Mr. Peterson responded that the creek in that section is deep enough to handle the water. Commissioner Stutz asked Scott Wilson if there was any way to move up the time line. Mr. Wilson responded that in August they plan to release the Environmental document Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 6 which addresses the entire study. He further discussed the hearing process noting it was not possible to move up the time line. Commissioner Stutz would not want the design to change once approved. When the Commission recommends approval of the tentative map granting the Water District an easement, is it then their responsibility to take care of the trees that currently need to be removed. Mr. Wilson responded that they would have an arborist review the current situation. He noted that when the easement is granted to the Town, the Town would grant the Water District an overlay easement. Then it would be the responsibility of the Water District to oversee the erosion control measures. Commissioner Stutz also asked if the storm drain capital improvement project could be started earlier. Mr. Peterson responded no. The reason is that the water in this water shed is the subject of litigation which has tied their hands relating to the design. Currently there are conceptual designs which have not been released. Commissioner Gottlieb asked if they could put a conservation easement over the entire creek as she was looking for some protection as to the materials used in the creek. Mr. Peterson responded no. He suggested noting the items that they do not want to see in the creek rather than opposing the design in concept. Commissioner Jinkerson commented that nothing should be placed in the easement until the improvements are made. He would also prefer the Water District record and take the easement immediately. The issue of a swimming pool, if permitted, should include some restrictions with regard to the use of a swimming pool (no large patios with tables around it; no enclosed pool equipment in the 4 bench area). Commissioner Schreiner noted that presently there is 25,000 to 30,000 square feet of development on this property. They are reviewing increasing the development to 60,000 square feet. She asked if nothing ever happens to the channel except directing a pipe to Adobe Creek, what effect will the extra 30,000 square feet have on the site. Mr. Peterson responded that clearly by subdividing the property it will allow more development area. The development area increase is incremental; it will add an incremental amount of perhaps one cubic foot per second or less, of runoff to the creek. The increment of runoff that would come off this property would be negligible compared to the flow in this creek. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Bill Kull, 20431 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, project engineer, discussed the creek improvements, storm drain improvements covered by Scott Wilson and Jeff Peterson, and working closely with the staff and the Santa Clara Water District to present a tentative map that combines the wishes of both the Town and the Water District. Many of the letters from neighbors were relating to creek improvements and the storm drainage improvements covered by Scott Wilson and Jeff Peterson. Mr. Kull is representing the subdivision lot line configurations. They were in favor of the new wording for conditions # 12 and #35. He commented on condition #27, noting a request to change the wording from "site development permits" to "building permits." He further discussed standard Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 7 construction design relating to flood plain areas. He reiterated that the applicant would like to bond for subdivision improvements so that the site development application for the new residence can move forward. Mr. Peterson requested an additional condition relating to the demolition of the buildings on site (land fill concern). He requested that the applicant research the possibility of recycling the materials. The condition (436) would state the following: The applicants shall submit a plan for recycling the building materials from the demolished structures. The plan shall be approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Materials from the demolished structures shall be recycled in accordance with the approved recycling plan. Abigail Ahrens, 200 University, Los Altos, applicant's representative, discussed the following: the possibility of recycling of materials; the benefits of the project; Los Altos creek improvements; erosion control; smaller scale homes being proposed; the Water District involvement; no one in Los Altos giving property; the Williamson Act cancellation; creating sewers; extensive pathways; one driveway on Fremont Road instead of two; stepping up the drainage problem solution; street dedication; the applicants being an asset to the community; design issues regarding the house on Fremont Road and Edith Avenue; the ability to design a house which would be appealing on the comer; condition 435, revised wording for the disclosure statement, looking at the new numbers; concern with trees and conceptual house design for lot 3; lot 3 being the most impacted lot and the lot which will require the highest elevation; request to leave the lot lines as is; and the possibility of increasing of the setback requesting they be flexible with the location of the driveway access. Ms. Ahrens concluded by requesting to know the least and most amounts of MDA/MFA for lot 3; and, if a 40 foot setback would be required on two sides, they would request driveway access to the garage (the proposed garage is at the 30 foot property line as shown on the conceptual development plans). Ms. Davis commented that the Commission could specify that the 40 foot setbacks could be for structures only. Commissioner Jinkerson noted that because this is the entrance to Town, he would prefer 40 foot setbacks on two sides (Edith Avenue and Fremont Road). Tom Griffith, Pathway Committee, requested the path on W. Edith Avenue be on the property side of the trees for safety reasons (#26). Commissioner Stutz noted that if the path between the trees and fence is acceptable, the fence would protect users of the pathway. Ben Vargas, 7 Cypress Court, Los Altos, wanted to make sure the letters from the neighbors are a part of the record. He requested the schedule of improvements. He commented on the 13 redwood trees on the creek bank. He requested that the Water District take the easement immediately. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 8 4 Jean Struthers, Environmental Design Committee, requested that the creek situation be handled as soon as possible. She discussed the previous Water District plan. A box channel would not be desirable. She requested that the Planning Commission firm up the Water District commitment. John Lopez, 25541 Fremont Road, requested some flexibility by the Planning Commission when working with the applicants as the project has many positive aspects. He discussed previous flooding of his property site. CLOSED PUBLIC TESTIMONY Discussion ensued regarding the Tentative Map; the conservation easement, the limit of the conservation easement, and what could be placed in the easement. Commissioner Gottlieb requested putting a conservation easement over the entire creek up to the Town 25 foot conservation easement top of the bank, no fencing, no structures, limiting the area of development until the Water District improvements are complete. It was preferred not to have concrete or box channel for SCV WD improvements (rock or gabion lining was preferred as shown on SCV WD plan) between the conservation easement and the SCV WD easement line. No improvements allowed until the SCV WD channel improvements are completed.. Mr. Peterson commented that in the storm drain easement, once the easement is granted, the SCV WD would need to approve any development within their easement, noting it would not be necessary to wait until the Water District improvements are completed. Chairman Doran asked Scott Wilson what would happen when the Rogem want to develop lot 3 and the plans are presented to the Water District who are still in an open FIR. Will the Water District not approve any type of development within the Water District conservation easement? Mr. Wilson responded development could be permitted. Chairman Doran asked what would happen if the easement is not accepted by the Water District up to that point, does the Town cover this by stating they cannot develop in that area. Mr. Peterson responded yes. Scott Wilson noted that when plans are submitted, the Town will send a set to the Water District for review. Suggested wording for #12 included the following: natural materials preferred for SCV WD channel improvements, including gabions; conservation easement from easterly property line to 25 feet from top of bank of middle bench; and no fencing or structures allowed within the easement. Mr. Peterson noted that they could not condition the Water District through conditioning the Rogers. Discussion ensued regarding the pathways and road right-of-ways. Commissioner Gottlieb would like to see the extra 10 foot pathway easement remain and the path meander rather than a straight path (with the possibility of some Vee removal and replacement with same or shrubs). Mr. Peterson noted that the Town reserves the right to Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 9 request the removal of fencing within the mad right-of-way. There was a consensus that the path should be on the property -owner side with the Town accepting the path. Also suggested, if the fence is replaced, it shall be replaced with open style fencing using natural materials. Discussion ensued regarding the MDA/MFA figures and the memo from Ms. Davis providing the MDA/MFA calculations for the three lots including the area beyond 25 feet from the top of the bank of the middle bench, but excluding the remainder of the conservation easement. Ms. Davis noted that if the Commission accepts the lower figures as presented in the table, they may want to exclude the disclosure statement. Chairman Doran did not want to adopt the new table as there are already so many restrictions on the lots. She felt the lower numbers would inhibit design creativity. Commissioner Schreiner disagreed, given the constraints on this lot, (i.e. conservation and Water District easements plus being in a flood plain), noting no one would like to see a 8,000 square foot house on lot 3 although the numbers indicate it would be possible. This property is the entrance to Los Altos Hills; a transition between two communities. Commissioner Jinkerson accepted the lower numbers as presented in the memo. Commissioner Stutz would not want to restrict the figures before they have chosen the setbacks for lot 3. Discussion ensued regarding setbacks on lot 3. Chairman Doran and Commissioner E Cheng would prefer not reducing the MDA/MFA figures, allowing the applicants to be creative with their design and retaining the disclosure statement noting that they may not be able to use the maximum figures (#35). Commissioner Schreiner noted that the statement does not give the applicant any direction. CONSENSUS VOTE: To accept the MDA/MFA figures as shown on the Tentative Map. AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Cheng & Stutz NOES: Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb & Jinkerson CONSENSUS VOTE: Forty foot setback for lot 3 on Edith Avenue. AYES: Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb & Jinkerson NOES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Cheng & Stutz CONSENSUS VOTE: To accept the reduced numbers for lot 3, requiring a 40 foot setback on Edith Avenue and Fremont Road; using the original numbers for lots 1 and 2 with the disclosure statement. Discussion ensued with additional suggested wording by Commissioner Jinkerson to accept the reduced numbers for lots 1 and 2, and accept the original MFA/MDA figures for lot 3 with a 40 foot setback on Edith Avenue and Fremont Road. The motion on the floor needed to be acted upon prior to another motion being accepted. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 10 Mr. Peterson noted that the code does not prohibit driveways in the setback. The applicants were concerned that they be allowed to have the driveway in the additional 10 foot setback. AYES: Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb, Stutz & Jinkerson NOES: Chairman Doran, Commissioner Cheng The Commission agreed that the 27 foot height was acceptable measured from existing grade. Discussion ensued regarding the Tentative Map. The first item discussed was the stands of trees. An extensive arborist report had been completed. The subdivision code addresses the removal of trees. It was agreed to add a condition stating the following: all trees with a trunk diameter greater than six inches that are proposed to be removed for subdivision improvements shall be first approved by staff. Trees to be removed due to the development of the lots will be reviewed at the time of site development permit. Commissioner Schreiner noted that the flood plain is indicated on the map for lots 1 and 2, but not for lot 3. Mr. Peterson responded that the limits of the 100 year flood shall be shown on the final map. The wording could be added as a condition of approval. He further noted that all the letters from the Los Altos neighbors will be placed in the capital improvement project file to refer to when designing the Town improvements. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Discussion ensued regarding the Negative Declaration, specifically page 13, " e" as Commissioner Schreiner felt the wording needed to be changed indicating the discussion regarding the limits of what could be built in the easement area. Ms. Davis did not feel this resulted in a substantial change to the Negative Declaration. There were no comments regarding the Williamson Act Contract cancellation. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Cheng and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to recommend approval of the Negative Declaration and Tentative Tract Map for a three lot subdivision, and cancellation of the Williamson Act contract with the following changes/amendments to the conditions of approval: condition #5, last sentence, changed to read "a type IIB path shall be installed as part of the subdivision improvements"; #7, add "the Town reserves the right to require the removal of any or all of the existing fencing within the right-of-way"; add to # 12, the first sentence to read "A conservation easement shall be granted to the public over Adobe Creek and for a 25 foot width from the top of bank of the SCV WD middle bench (as shown on the Tentative Map), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer'; #13, add "The grant document shall Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 11 include provisions that the Town prefers to have natural materials (including the proposed gabions), used for the creek channel improvements, and the concrete lines or box channel is not desirable to the Town. Limited development such as pools, patios, decking or landscape improvements may be allowed within the storm drain easement, outside the area covered by the conservation easement, subject to approval of the Town and SC V WD' ; #14, add "The limits of the 100 year flood shall be shown on the Tentative Map'; #27, change "site development" to "building permits"; #29, the Town and the applicants shall enter into a sanitary sewer reimbursement agreement if deemed desirable by the applicant; #36, all trees with a trunk diameter greater than six inches that are proposed to be removed for subdivision improvements shall be first approved by staff. Trees to be removed due to the development of the lots will be considered at the time of site development permit; #37, lot 3 shall have a 40 foot setback on both Fremont Road and West Edith Avenue. The total development area may not exceed 17,250 and the total floor area may not exceed 6,900 square feet. A disclosure statement shall be recorded stating that the property owners were informed that the development and floor areas for lots l and 2 may be restricted due to various factors. Future developers of the lots may not be able to utilize the maximum floor and/or development area for the lots as set out in the Town's Municipal Code; and #38, submittal of a plan for the recycling of building materials from the structures and other improvements to be demolished. AYES: Chairman Doran, Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb, Jinkerson, Stutz & Cheng NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Finn This item will be scheduled for City Council public hearing. 4. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 4.1 Planning Commission Representative for July 17 -meeting -Chairman Doran. 4.2 Planning Commission Representative for the August 7th meeting -canceled. OLD BUSINESS 5.1 Report from subcommittees. Commissioner Schreiner discussed the Housing Element. r-9 L Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/24/96 July 10, 1996 Page 12 4 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Rotating schedule for attendance of City Council meetings. 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 The June 26" and the July 2nd minutes will be on the July 24" agenda for approval. 8. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF JULY 2. 1996 8.1 LAND OF GLOSS, 24300 Dawnridge Drive (I 15-96-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a pool, spa and koi pond. Approved with conditions. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 11:08 p.m. 4 Respectfully submitted, / Lani Lonberger Planning Secretary