Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/10/1999`r Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 3/10/99 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, February 10, 1999, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes (2) #2-99 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Cheng, Commissioners Gottlieb, Jinkerson & Schreiner Staff: Curtis Williams, Planning Director; Sheryl Proft, Associate Engineer; Ola Balogun, Associate Engineer; Lani Smith, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR -none 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF YAM & TO; 10475 Albertsworth Lane (241-98-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new one-story residence and swimming pool. The Planning Director introduced this item. Ms. Proft noted the need for a certificate of compliance since the two lots will be merged into one lot. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the dates of development as the existing development area figures exceed the maximums. She also questioned the development area breakdown on Worksheet #2 (existing and proposed pool and decking figures). Commissioner Gottlieb questioned the need for an additional 110 square feet of material to be imported to the site for the driveway as it relates to retaining walls. Ms. Proft clarified that there were no new substantial walls proposed. They will only change one area where the driveway encroaches onto the neighboring property. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Frank Ho, 560 Cambridge Avenue, Palo Alto, project architect, discussed the existing and proposed pool and decking numbers which have been included in Worksheet #2 under the "driveway & parking" figures. There will be no increase in height of retaining walls except for the area where it encroaches onto the neighbor's property. He further discussed the design, roof kw ridge average height (18'/2 feet), fill, correction of encroachment, and unobtrusive site design. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 3/10/99 February 10, 1999 Page 2 Commissioner Jinkerson questioned the emergency turnaround figures. Mr. Ho clarified that the original calculations were based on a 16 foot wide driveway. The driveway will actually be 14 feet wide as required by the fire department. The development area final figures will be at least 200 square feet less than noted on Worksheet #2. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Schreiner liked the low profile of the house. She asked that the certificate of compliance regarding the lot merger and a corrected Worksheet #2 which reflects a breakdown of the development area be added to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Jinkerson suggested a change to condition #25 deleting "a minimum" of 14 feet..., and #27, adding that the total development area not exceed 16,317, after the turnaround area is added. Chairman Cheng felt the design was low profile and fit on the ridge well. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson to approve the Site Development Permit for a new residence and pool, Lands of Yam & To, with the following additions/changes to the conditions of approval: require a certificate of compliance for the lot merger; #25 deleting "a minimum" of 14 feet..., and #27, adding that the total development area not exceed 16,317, after the turnaround area is added. AYES: Chairman Cheng, Commissioners Gottlieb, Jinkerson & Schreiner 4 NOES: None This approval is subject to a 21 day appeal period. 3.2 LANDS OF WU & CHEN; 26998 Beaver Lane (205-96-ZP-SD-GD); A request to delete a condition of approval of a Site development Permit for a major addition and remodel that requires the addition to be stepped with the topography on the site. The Planning Director introduced this item by reiterating the information provided in the staff report regarding the history of the project. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Tsu-Phong Wu, 26998 Beaver Lane, applicant, asked again not to be required to step the bedroom wing portion of the addition for three reasons: it will be more convenient for his aging parents; stepping is not needed as the house is not visible from off-site; and safety is not a concern with the 1,200 square foot addition due to the number of piers which will be drilled. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes Approved 3/10/99 February 10, 1999 Page 3 Commissioner Schreiner noted one of the main standards in Town is stepping houses down the hillside. She referenced page 14 of the "Guidelines for Residential Design & Land Use" which illustrates fitting the design on the site, citing six (6) ordinances. In addition, the Town has a grading policy which sets limits which is applied to all applications. She had researched previous applications where the Commission had required the same stepping: Peters on Oak Knoll Circle; Wong on De Bell Road; Wythe & Vitu on Moon Lane; Shideler on Via Ventana; Gerena & Roach on Oak Knoll Circle; Godinho on Menalto Drive; Shukov on De Bell Road; Loughmiller on La Loma Drive; and Gorman & Cheng which was denied for a variety of reasons, one being the lack of stepping. She would not want to set a precedent nor could she make a finding that preferential treatment was not being given to this applicant. The main standard in the Town is to insure blending houses to the land. She has difficulty changing her original determination. She noted this application has gone through the process twice (Planning Commission and City Council). Commissioner Gottlieb agreed, citing the grading policy. Chairman Cheng stated she had originally voted for the project as originally designed as she felt the addition was small. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Jinkerson and seconded by Commissioner Gottlieb to deny the request for modification to a condition of approval for an approved Site Development Permit for a major addition and remodel of an existing residence, Lands of Wu & Cheng, with the following findings: Municipal Code Sections 10-2.401-2.410, 10-2.702,b,(2)(5), 10-2.702c, 10-2.502, and 20-2.703. The Commission had previously asked ` the applicant to step the bedroom wing of the addition. They have consistently encouraged and `r required applicants to step down a hillside. To not require this applicant to not step with the land would provide them a benefit others in the community do not receive. The request also is not in compliance with the grading policy of the Town, and is substantially above the recommended level, particularly at one corner. AYES: Commissioners Schreiner, Gottlieb & Jinkerson NOES: Chairman Cheng The 21 day appeal period to the City Council was explained for the benefit of the applicant and audience. 3.3 LANDS OF JAIN; 28510 Matadero Creek Lane (Lot 5) (11 -99 -17M -AMEND); Modification of tentative map conditions for Matadero Creek Subdivision (Tract #7187) to permit development area of 2,272 square feet in excess of the allowable maximum. The Planning Director introduced this item noting the receipt of letters from Richard Love and Charlie Ettinger. Commissioner Jinkerson questioned the need for a proposal from the applicants before they can act. In fairness to the applicant, they should have a plan as to what they are proposing to do with the additional 2,272 square feet of development area. Also, he felt the applicants needed to have their plans reviewed by the Matadero Creek Architectural Board as taw stated in the CC&R's before coming to the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 3/10/99 February 10, 1999 Page 4 The Planning Director clarified that they are not amending the CC&R's. The 8,380 square feet development area is a subdivision condition of approval for lot 5 which is more restrictive than applying today's code provision to the entire lot. The numbers set for each lot are more restrictive than using the current methodology applied to the entire lot, not just the encumbered portion, excluding conservation easements, and other kinds of open space areas. Further discussion ensued regarding the current subdivision conditions of approval which have become cumbersome to monitor and implement for a number of reasons, as listed in the staff report. During the Ruiner application review, staff evaluated alternative approaches to simplify the subdivision conditions, as noted in the staff report on page 4. Commissioner Gottlieb pointed out that lot 5 was given an additional 420 square feet of development area in December, 1982. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Lall Jain, 28510 Matadero Creek Lane, clarified their request which is to apply the same rules throughout Matadero Creek subdivision. It is not a variance issue but a property rights issue. For the Matadero Creek development, the second floor was not counted as a part of the development area. Then came Ordinance 305 (1986), when the second floor was counted as part of the development area. There are 20 lots in the subdivision; 11 lots developed prior to the 305 rule; nine lots developed after the 305 rule. Five of these when developed did not follow the 305 rule, but the Matadero Creek development criteria. The other two lots were given additional L MDA to get around the 305 rule (lots 7 and 12) by the City Council. He asked why they were ky applying different rules on his lot. He provided examples of development within the subdivision. In summary, he noted that 16 lots were built according to the Matadero Creek criteria, and two lots were given additional development area. Commissioner Jinkerson asked Mr. Jain why he did not ask for additional development area last year at his public hearing. At that time they were asked to perhaps reduce the size of the house to preserve some development area, but the applicants indicated they did not need any additional development area. Fred Osterland, 26238 Fremont Road, was in attendance at the time of the Jain's public hearing. He noted that the Commission told the applicants that they were maxing out their living buildable space and they were not leaving much room for living space. The Jams responded they chose not to have any outdoor living space as indoor space was more important to them. He felt the general fundamental rules of the Town were being disregarded. The ordinances should be upheld as he felt that the majority of the residents agree with the ordinances. Marilyn Fogel, 27950 Roble Blanco, voiced drainage concerns relating to an over -built lot and its effects on neighboring properties. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 3/10/99 February 10, 1999 Page 5 obw Shako Nagpal, 28555 Matadero Creek Lane, purchased lot 17 at the Town auction. She was very familiar with the history of the Matadero Creek subdivision, restrictions, and regulations, as she has been a member of the Architectural Board from the beginning. She felt the development should now be treated like any other lot in the Town. The Town originally modified the restrictions to sell the lots. Maureen Collins, 27955 Roble Blanco, bought their home in 1977 aware of the restrictive codes. She felt they should not allow the additional development area as this would create chaos. She was also concerned with the additional drainage. Bob Lefkowits, 28515 Matadero Creek Lane, does not want the Matadero Creek subdivision to comply with current MDA/MFA calculations. The Jams were aware of the restrictions. He referred to page 3 of the staff report. Rick Ettinger, 28520 Matadero Creek Lane, compliments the Planning Commission for all their hard work. He does not advocate using the current Town standard for calculation of MDAIMFA. For the record, he noted that his second floor was counted and approved in 1985. At that time, second floors were counted at less than full development to encourage small and compact houses, and to keep open space between the structures. He felt that the Jain's approved house design was attractive, however impacts the Lefkowits property by blocking the view of the ridge above them from their breakfast nook and family room. He further discussed erosion and ` drainage on the Jain property and the problems which would occur with the approval of �r additional outdoor paved area which would increase the sheet flow off of the property. He recommended staying with the already approved numbers which do exceed the Matadero Creek recommendations. Charlie Ettinger, 28520 Matadero Creek Lane, stated regardless of what has taken place on the other lots, there are drainage and erosion concerns. Lot 5 is one of the smallest lots in the subdivision with one of the largest homes. There will be serious drainage issues with any additional coverage. Where this lot backs onto Page Mill Road, there are several trees with their root systems exposed. As the ground above is covered with impervious material, the rainwater is naturally going to flow to lower ground, thereby soaking these trees more than in past years, creating a greater hazard along the road. Shabnam Jain, 28510 Matadero Creek Lane, stated they were not asking for more development area nor any variance request. They were asking for the Town to calculate their MDA in the same manner as other homes in Matadero Creek subdivision. Give them the additional numbers first and then they will submit their landscape plan for approval. The issue is how to calculate MDA. It should be calculated in the same manner as other lots in the subdivision. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes Approved 3/10/99 February 10, 1999 Page 6 lkw Commissioner Jinkerson noted they were in a situation not of their creation. In part, it is due to the fact that the property rights that were established by the CC&R's have been ignored in the past by the government. The government has no business interfering in the private property rights that were established by people who in contractual relationships made decisions to purchase property. The Commission is being asked to apply the CC&R's to allow the applicants to have more development area. They would be better off with a clean slate where the government did not interfere with contractual rights under the CC&R's. However, they are in a position that the Commission does not know what the development area will be. He has never seen a proposal without plans indicating what they were requesting. He suggested either deny the application or continue so the applicants can show what they want on the property. He cannot vote on a blank piece of paper. There is a need to review plans. Commissioner Gottlieb stated that the numbers were known when the property was purchased. The Town will be reviewing modifying the development numbers for this subdivision. There should be some basis for the requested increase in the development area numbers. The CC&R's should be upheld. The applicants should either apply for a variance for the increased development area with plans or the application should be continued until the Town establishes the numbers for the subdivision, returning with plans after that time. Commissioner Schreiner agreed. They should pay close attention to the criteria staff has provided on page 4 of the report, and ask them to come back with numbers on each one of the lots based on the unencumbered area of the lot. She requested upholding the maximum development area figure of 8,380 square feet which the applicants agreed with at the time of approval. Regarding the second floor not being counted, that was a condition that applied to the entire Town during 1981 to 1984. There was a feeling that all anyone was concerned with was the footprint so you could go up as high as you wanted, with the second story free. Rules, regulations and codes have changed. Subsequent buyers have to abide by new rulings. She agreed with staff findings. It is very difficult to make a decision without reviewing a plan. She also felt they need to know the numbers. Chairman Cheng understood why the applicants were making the request. However, the Commission makes decisions according to Town rules and they work with the numbers allowed. Drainage is also an issue for this lot as well as Town wide. She felt the entire Matadero Creek subdivision should be studied to provide MDA/MFA calculations consistent throughout the subdivision. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson to recommend that the City Council deny the modification of Tentative Map Conditions to permit development area in excess of allowable maximum, Lands of Jain, citing the findings outlined in Attachment 1 of the staff report (adding to #3, last sentence, "if applied to the entire property"), and the criteria on page 4 of the staff report to further look into this matter. AYES: Chairman Cheng, Commissioners Jinkerson, Gottlieb & Schreiner NOES: None Planning Commission Minutes February 10, 1999 Page 7 This item will be on the City Council agenda March 4, 1999. 4. OLD BUSINESS Approved 3/10/99 4.1 Report from subcommittees included discussion of the Town picnic, the volunteers award dinner, pathways committee, and the environmental design committee preparation of a native planting handout (brochure). 5. NEW BUSINESS None 6. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6.1 Planning Commission Representatives for February Yd - Commissioner Schreiner reported on the following items: discussion regarding creating a new "information" committee; interview of Planning Commission applicants at the next meeting; status of ownership of Colina Drive; Lands of Denny subdivision (continued); and Lands of Srinivasan (continued). E 6.2 Planning Commission representative for February 18" — Commissioner Schreiner ` 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of the January 13, 1999 minutes -continued to the next scheduled meeting. 8. REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT HEARINGS - JANUARY 26, 1999 8.1 LANDS OF MORSEY, 13081 S. Alta Lane (253-98-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for hardscape and a landscape screening plan. Approved with conditions. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lani Smith Planning Secretary