Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/20014 Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 5/10101 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, April 26, 2001, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes (1) #6-01 ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE J 6:00 p.m. joint meeting with the City Council) Present: Chairman Cottrell, Commissioners Vitu, Gottlieb & Clow Absent: Commissioner Wong 1.1 Continued joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission a. Discussion of report from LUF (Lot Unit Factor) Committee b. Discussion of Council direction to Planning Commission for review of ordinance changes 4 The Planning Commission regular meeting was called to order at 7:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Staff: Carl Cahill, Planning Director; Sandy Sloan, City Attorney; Jim Rasp, Public Works Manager; Matt Weintraub, Associate Planner; Angelica Herrera, Assistant Planner; Lam Smith, Planning Secretary PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR -None PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF LYONS & WIESLER, 28012 Laura Court (63-01-MISC); A request for a right of way vacation for a portion of Stonebrook Drive near Laura Court. The Planning Director introduced this item noting the applicants were requesting the abandonment of a 10 -foot wide portion of the Stonebrook Drive right of way adjacent to their property as shown on exhibit provided. The remaining right of way exists on paper only and there is no actual paved roadway at this time. Correspondence from Mindie Romanowsky ( City Attorney's office), David R. Sylva, Bruce McLeod and Nat Gorham/Jan Shuler were reviewed along with a sketch clarifying the location of the 10 foot strip from Jim Rasp, Public Works Manager. 4hir OPENED PUBLIC HEARING `7 Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5110101 April 26, 2001 Page 2 Bruce McLeod, Living Design, 1110 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, applicants' representative, stated the original Stonebrook Drive (and previously San Antonio Avenue) right of way was a total of 40 feet wide. The referenced 30 feet dedication (made to the County of Santa Clara in 1990) was from the centerline of the original right of way, making that portion of the right of way in front of the Lyons/Wiesler property a total of 50 feet. Abandonment of 10 feet as requested will return this portion of the right of way to its original 40 foot width matching the adjacent properties. Mr. Rasp, Public Works Manager, provided clarification of the request and was available for further questions. It was noted that the road would not be reduced below 40 feet. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Vitu and seconded by Commissioner Clow to forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation for approval, subject to finding the right of way abandonment request to be in conformance with the General Plan. AYES: Chairman Cottrell, Commissioners Gottlieb, Clow & Vito NOES: None E ABSENT: Commissioner Wong �I This item will be scheduled for a City Council agenda. 3.2 LANDS OF SANDLIN, 25720 Carado Court (271-00-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence and secondary dwelling unit (continued from the April 10, 2001 Fast Track meeting). Continued to a future date at the applicant's request. 3.3 Ordinance Amendments to the Town's Zoning Code with regard to the Amount of Allowable Development Area and Floor Area; Review of Mitigated Negative Declaration; and Addendum to the Negative Declaration. The Planning Director introduced this item noting the receipt of correspondence from Elayne Dauber, Libby Lucas and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. The Commission began their review of the Negative Declaration. Commissioner Gottlieb discussed ordinances versus policies noting policies that were being reviewed for change at the moment. She felt the Negative Declaration needed to be strengthened as the grading policy is only a policy not an ordinance. The Planning Director responded and reviewed the Negative Declaration, requesting recommendations that can be forwarded to the City Council. He also noted the letter from the Santa Clara Valley Water District and their commentS regarding hydrologic study which could be performed by a property by property situation. Commissioner Gottlieb was concerned with the Negative Declaration and the proposed ordinance being discussed by the City Council. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5110101 April 26, 2001 Page 3 Commissioner Clow felt what was being proposed with the Fenwick formula (MDA/MFA) is what they are developing the Negative Declaration for. If they come up with something that has a greater impact (more MDA/MFA), they will start all over again. He was comfortable discussing the Negative Declaration based on the Fenwick formula. Chairman Cottrell felt if the grading policy becomes on ordinance, they would have a tool to enforce drainage and erosion control. Mr. Cahill explained even if the grading policy was an ordinance, the review would be the same. He noted that in the "LUF" report, the grading policy is very restrictive and will cap development. Commissioner Gottlieb continued discussion regarding the grading policy versus a grading ordinance. She asked if they could defer the Negative Declaration until the Council decides on other issues (MDAfMFA)? Mr. Cottrell felt they could make their recommendations on the ordinance and forward it on TO the Council. He did not know how deferring it or denying it would help. Chairman Cottrell would rather make a recommendation. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Bill Springer, Associate Civil Engineer, Santa Clara Valley Water District, referred to his letter from the District and was available for questions. He clarified that the District does not specifically suggest or believe that this ordinance amendment will cause flooding. He just had some concerns regarding the mitigation measures as he thought some of them were not quite as clear as they might be and suggested hydrologic studies be performed in and away from Los Altos Hills. When the District looks at a site for potential ways to mitigate for increase mnoff, they have to look at the specific site and all the characteristics of that site. He continued by discussing their process. Chairman Cottrell has always felt a master drainage plan was needed. Commissioner Clow suggested discussing preventing flooding at a future meeting. Sandy Humphries, Environmental Design Committee, provided photographs showing runoffs, and erosion problems in the Saddle Mountain and Matadero Creek area. She has been trying for four years to get the Town to do something about runoff (retaining ponds, using blocks for paving) so some water will sink in. The LUF committee was very helpful with their information but it was a committee made up of all people who wanted more square footage on their sloped parcel; not a fair way to come up with a solution for an entire Town. The photos provided were taken from the top of a hill as she did not have enough time to follow the situation down the hill. She felt there were two issues the LUF committee did not touch on; velocity (a two story home having more impact than a one story home), and vegetation. More vegetation should be required on parcels. She further discussed a creek in her area and flooding until the creek was expanded. Also, the type of plants are very important. Taylor Vanderlip 13851 Fremont Pines Lane, came to discuss the Initial Study and Negative Declaration. She has been an environmental consultant for over 20 years. She provided the Commission with a letter noting one of the primary purposes of the CEQA process is to inform the decision making body and the public of the scope of the proposed project and the potential environmental impacts resulting from it. She found that this Initial Study does neither. All phases of project planning, implementation, and operation must be considered in the Initial Study Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5110101 April 26, 2001 Page 4 of the project. This study includes no information regarding the location or status of lots affected by the proposed change in the zoning ordinance, or what the expected result of implementing this ordinance is except to say under the discussion of cumulative impacts that the ordinance will apply to at least 60 to 75 percent of the lots in town. It does not describe the net possible increase in graded area, impervious surface, and runoff. She further discussed other aspects of the report that do not comply with CEQA requirements. In conclusion, she stated to truly comply with CEQA, the Town must complete an Initial Study which describes the project more fully, which explains in some way all of the responses on the checklist, and which determines, using factual data, whether the change will result in significant cumulative impacts. Such factual data would include the expected increase in runoff and where it will go, and some indication of the amount of additional grading that could occur. Libby Lucas, 174 Yerba Santa Avenue, Los Altos, felt that the Negative Declaration was deficient in its analysis of the environmental impacts of this ordinance amendment, and an Environmental Impact Report was needed to assess the regional implications of this project. She quoted CEQA law and guidelines. She discussed the following issues: a Negative Declaration is inappropriate in this project because of the need to coordinate with neighboring cities to evaluate impacts of increased storm volume and speed of runoff to stream systems; the 25, 50 and 100 year storms should be studied; the Matadero Creek and the Adobe Creek drainage basin; the watershed affecting Hale, Permanente, and Stevens Creek flow; the possible impacts on flooding of Palo Alto; inconclusive evaluation of the impacts of changes to the density and slope evaluation formula and the alteration of the affected ordinances; and suggested mitigation measures are too open ended and incomplete to comply with CEQA law and guidelines. She felt what was needed was a map, reviewing all parcels that are in each drainage basin, their size and what the increased impervious surface might be. She would encourage the Council to be as conservative as possible. The Commission does not have to say they want to process the Negative Declaration this evening. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Cottrell felt there was more work to be done. He felt there were other solutions regarding the MDAIWA formula. More time should be spent on the Negative Declaration. Commissioner Clow felt it was time to do a study of the town regarding flooding, how to handle water, etc. There are many opportunities to reduce the impact on Palo Alto whether it be holding ponds or more landscaping, etc. Commissioner Gottlieb also felt there was not enough information before them to recommend the Negative Declaration. She discussed many areas which experience flooding. It is very important not to harm their down stream neighbors. Commissioner Vitu agreed that they need an overall study. It is possible to mitigate with engineering review on a site by site basis. She was concerned with putting off the Negative Declaration indefinitely. Commissioner Clow discussed the LUF Committee view regarding the development on slope lots not having any more impact on development than flat lots so there is an equity issue. Although, if you allow people with slope lots who are not allowed development today, to have development, this resulting in more development. What is the impact? Commissioner Vitu discussed the LUF Committee report. Chairman Cottrell felt they should recommend that the proposed ordinance amending the Zoning Code with regard to allowable Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/10/01 April 26, 2001 Page 5 floor area and development area and Negative Declaration not be approved at this time. The Council has the option to go back to the formula for constrained lots before reviewing the LUR He would argue that a great deal more work needs to be done, as all heard tonight. One could look at the ratio of permeable to impermeable coverage on a lot and do just as good of a job as they do with MDAIMFA, if not a better job, and control the drainage at the same time. We are already getting enough negative response from our neighbors (Palo Alto, Los Altos). Commissioner Gottlieb agreed, mentioning the ordinance the Commission had recommended previously which could be expanded, if necessary. Commissioner Clow felt they could not do a proper Negative Declaration without reviewing a Town wide drainage study. Mr. Cahill felt they could approve the Negative Declaration with a recommendation stating they approve additional development provided there is no additional storm water mnoff release. Commissioner Vita felt the Negative Declaration was a tool to allow mitigation. What is in the Negative Declaration allows them to mitigate, if they chose to. Commissioner Clow was not clear with the motion and would not want to stop Council actions due to the cost or time needed for a study. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Cottrell and seconded by Commissioner Gottlieb, due to their concern and expressed concerns from others, recommend to the City Council not to approve the Ordinance Amendments to the Town's Zoning Code with regard to the amount of allowable development area and floor area, and Negative Declaration until further hydrological studies regarding drainage have been completed (enough study in the opinion of staff to withstand possible challenges). The Negative Declaration should be improved 4W and expanded. The City Council could proceed with the constrained lot ordinances. AYES: Chairman Cottrell & Commissioner Gottlieb NOES: Commissioners Vim & Clow ABSENT: Commissioner Wong The Planning Commission clearly had two opinions regarding the proposed Negative Declaration. The proposal will be directed to the City Council noting a split decision. 4. OLD BUSINESS 4.1 Report from subcommittees -none 5. NEW BUSINESS -none 6. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for April W, Commissioner Clow, reviewed the meeting and the "basement" discussion. 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for May 3rd — cancelled 4W 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Planning Commission Minutes April 26, 2001 Page 6 Approved 5/10/01 ow 7.1 Approval of April 12, 2001 minutes - continued to the May 10, 2001 meeting. 8. REPORT FROM FAST TRACK MEETING- APRIL 17 & 24. 2001 8.1 LANDS OF BRYANT & RENO, 25615 Fernhill Drive (36-01-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence. Approved with conditions April 17, 001. 8.2 LANDS OF BOONMARK, 27233 Deer Springs Way (21-01-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence. Approved with conditions April 24, 2001. 9. REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETING APRIL 17 & 24. 2001 9.1 LANDS OF RASMUSSEN, 27589 Samuel Lane (56-01-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a second story addition to an existing residence. Continued to future date. 9.2 LANDS OF TRIFELOS, 13581 Wildcrest Drive (68-01-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan. Approved with conditions April 17, 2001. rI 9.3 LANDS OF KAMANGAR, 24300 Summerhill Avenue (72-01-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan. Approved with conditions April 24, 2001. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,/ LanSouth Planning Secretary kir