Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/2008Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 1/15/2009 1,. Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, December 4, 2008, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Harpootlian, Commissioners Cottrell, Collins, Clow and Abraham Staff: Debbie Pedro, Planning Director; David Keyon, Associate Planner; Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner and Victoria Ortland, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR - none 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS Planning Commission Ex Parte Contacts Policy Disclosure Commissioner Cottrell had spoken with neighbors (Barchas) and had visited the site. Commissioner Collins had spoken to a neighbor and had visited the site. Commissioner Clow met with neighbors (Barchas and Belani), the applicant's tenant and had visited the site. Commissioner Abraham had spoken with neighbors (Barchas and Belani) and had visited the site. Chairman Harpoothan had spoken with neighbors (Barchas, Belani and Jawadi) and had visited the site. 3.1 LANDS OF ASKARINAM, 27198 Elena Road, #203-08-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a new 6,003 square foot two story residence (Maximum height 27') and 756 square foot swimming pool. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) and (e) (staff -Nicole Horvitz). (CONTINUED FROM THE NOVEMBER 6, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING). Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report stating that the existing one story residence, swimming pool and driveway were proposed to be replaced by a new two story house, swimming pool and driveway. Two heritage oak trees at the front of the property would be preserved. Vinita and Ashok Belani, abutting neighbors on Dawn Lane, had expressed concerns over privacy and loss of sunlight because of the height of `, the new residence. Kay and Mark Barchas, abutting neighbors on Elena Road, were concerned with the impact that the construction, the trenching and the proposed new fence will have on the large trees located along the shared property line. A letter had Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2008 Page 2 Approved 1/15/2009 4r been received from the Yazdy family, neighbors on Elena Road, stating concern about the view of the house from their property. A preliminary landscape screening plan had been submitted by the applicant to address the Belani's privacy concerns. Six 24" box Swan Hill olive trees that grow to a height of 35 feet tall and have a growth rate of 12" per year, were proposed to be planted to provide screening. Mark Godby, Architect, explained that the house had been positioned on the narrow lot to save the significant trees and heritage oaks. The proposed Swan Hill olive trees, planned to be installed before construction, were chosen for their height and foliage to provide screening yet preserve sunlight for the neighbors to the northeast. Both the applicant and neighbors would benefit by preserving the trees located on the southeast property line. Commissioner Clow asked Mark Godby to consider relocating the proposed utility trench away from the property line. The existing trees should be protected to the drip line and their health would be endangered by trenching so close to the roots. Mark Godby replied that he was in support of moving the required trenching to a location further away from the property line and the trees would be protected by hand digging when necessary. Commissioner Collins confirmed with Mark Corby that all of the trees along the shared property line of Askarinam and Barchas would be saved. Mark Godby said that all the trees on the Barchas property should be preserved Commissioner Abraham asked if it would be possible to place the trenching within two feet of the foundation of the house. Mark Godby said that the trench would be moved to a location on the other side of the driveway. Chairman Harpootlian said that the balcony for bedroom number five on the north side (front) of the house was a problem for the neighbor. Mark Godby said the balconies and the lower level roofs on either side of the main center balcony balance the design of the front of the house. Steven Askarinam, applicant, suggested in regard to the property line fencing, a hedge could be planted for privacy or the fence could alternate in and out between the trees with some of the fencing on each property. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Kay Barchas, Elena Road, stated that she shared a common boundary of 350 feet with the subject property. She felt the property qualified as a ridgeline or hilltop lot as described in the Los Altos Hills Site Development Ordinance. The view of the new residence from the street would present Planning Commission Minutes Approved 1/15/2009 December 4, 2008 Page 3 `r an imposing structure taller than all the other homes in the neighborhood. The lot is longer than it is wide and the placement of the house will put it close to both side neighbors. Mark Barchas, Elena Road, felt that his trees near the property line that have canopies overhanging the applicant's property must have their roots protected at the drip line with tree fencing. He was in favor of moving the trenches to prevent damage to the tree's root systems. To preserve the mature trees near the property line, he proposed a fence line that was at the current fence location (one and a half feet inside the Askarinam property) and a new 75 foot fence constructed at that same location from the redwood trees down to the cherry tree. In exchange, Mr. Barchas would start a new fence east of the existing property line fence that would be a foot and a half onto his property to equal the same square footage and length as the fence on Mr. Askarinam's property. Mark Godby said that he and Mr. Askarinam were in support of a fair jogging of the fencing to save the trees with an equal run of fencing in both directions. He proposed minimal jogging and keeping as much fencing on the property line as possible. He said the existing fence and driveway could be left in place during construction to protect the trees and provide passage for construction traffic. Commissioner Abraham asked if any grading would take place in the setback along the southeast fence line. 4 Mark Godby said no grading would be done closer than ten feet from the property line. No retaining walls are required as the new driveway is at grade. Mr. Barchas requested mitigation of the noise generated from the air conditioning unit. He wanted the pool equipment enclosed on all four sides and with a roof. He had concerns that water from the dissipation trench would affect his septic system. Vinita Belani, Dawn Lane, said her fundamental objection to the project was that the new residence would constitute a gross invasion of privacy and significantly reduce the amount of sunlight on her property. She felt the balcony and the windows would allow a full view into her master bedroom, bathroom and study as well as the pool and spa. She stated there would be no place on her property that she would be able to stand and not be visible to people at the new house. The existing residence is screened from view by trees growing in her yard that are 25 feet high. Taller trees needed to screen the new residence would completely obscure the sunlight on her property. She felt that there was no other example in the neighborhood where privacy was compromised to the extent of what the new residence would do to her property. Ashok Belani, Dawn Lane, stated that the new residence would be a very visible, imposing structure. He suggested that lowering the house by five feet would help mitigate the light reduction issue and some of the privacy issues. Eliminating the side balcony would reduce the chance of a person directly looking into his kitchen, backyard, pool, spa and study. Changing location of the window in bedroom number four from the side that looks directly towards his property to the back would help with his privacy. He felt a single story design for the new residence was the best solution. He thought the landscape screening could be addressed at a later date and the olive trees may not be the best choice for the location. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 1/15/2009 December 4, 2008 Page 4 Sandy Humphries, Environmental Design Committee, commented that the trees, especially the redwoods, need to be protected out to the drip line. Commissioner Clow asked Steven Askarinam which option to resolve neighbor issues that he preferred, relocating the windows and removing the balcony or lowering the house Steven Askarinam commented that the roofiine under the second story prevented relocating the window in bedroom number four to the back of the house. He was in favor of keeping the balcony and he felt that lowering the house by five feet was not an option and would kill the project because of the amount of grading required, increased excavation costs and loss of light. Mark Godby had concerns with the amount of grading and cut that would be necessary to lower the house five feet and the impact on the root systems of the trees. Proper drainage for the new residence could become an issue. It was possible that five foot tall retaining walls would be needed along the edge of the driveway and installation of the walls and drainage system could require a cut at 10 feet from the property line. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Clow considered the site a ridgeline property and felt there were greater obligations when building on the top of a hill than on flat land. The screening trees should be saved and the fence can remain in the current location on the applicant's property and then jog onto the neighbor's property for the same amount. The trench should be moved to the side of the drive closer to the house. The drip lines of the Barchas' trees should be fenced at the driveway and use the existing driveway for construction equipment traffic. The home should be lowered five feet in height to make it less imposing, low decibel air conditioner units should be installed and the pool equipment should be enclosed with a roof. He thought that olive trees can be used effectively for screening. Commissioner Collins felt the lot was a hilltop property and the obtrusiveness and visibility of homes built on ridges and hilltops should be reduced. The home needs modification to help it fit in and because the Planning Commission cannot ask for architectural changes, the home should be lowered five feet. The olive trees proposed to be planted before construction and the landscape screening must be worked out with the neighbors. She supported the idea of both neighbors building the fences. Mr. Barchas can build the fence from the front of the property to the redwoods on his side and Mr. Askarinam can build the fence on his side beyond the redwoods. All of the trees should be preserved. The drip line of the trees located on the Barchas' property line should be shown on the plan. Commissioner Cottrell congratulated the applicant on his willingness to work with the neighbors, particularly with the Barchas' and the fence agreement and to protect all the trees. He agreed that the house is on a ridgeline, has a lot of bulk and has to be lowered five feet. How the house is to be lowered needs to be worked out by the architect and the owner keeping in mind the trees �, must be protected and the site properly drained. The best mitigation for screening is to have the landscaping installed close to the house. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 1/15/2009 December 4, 2008 Page 5 Commissioner Abraham was troubled by the privacy issues and stated that because the Planning Commission is not an architectural review committee; the only way to deal with the issue is to lower the house by five feet. The proposed olive trees will not be dense enough to provide screening and any tree planted for screening must be of a bigger size. All the trees along the property line need to be fenced at the drip line. He felt the existing fence could be left and repaired if needed. The offset jog on the front is a good solution to the balance of property. His trenching recommendation is: No trenching within the 30 foot setback of the southeast property line for any reason except PGE joint trench not to exceed 38 inches in depth, 24 inches in width and be located not less than 27 feet from the southeast property line. Water and/or sanitary sewer trench not to exceed 24 inches in depth and be located 21 feet or more from the southeast property line if the piping is installed within the 30 foot setback area. Minimum depth trench of 12 inches or less for surface drain located in the southeast setback area. No restrictions on trenching within the front setback area. No grading within 15 feet of the southeast property line and grading not to exceed 12 inches within 15 to 30 feet from the southeast property line. Commissioner Abraham and Chairman Harpoothan were apprehensive about the ability of the proposed drainage system to support storm drain flow amounts and the water from the roof downspouts. Mark Godby expressed his concerns about lowering the house by five feet. He felt it would create poor drainage around the home, would require five feet of cut for retaining walls along the driveway and would necessitate a grading variance. Aw Steven Askarinam stated that lowering the house five feet would have a significant impact on the layout of the house. He offered to move the balcony to the front of the residence and reduce the glass in two bedrooms windows by 33 percent each instead of lowering the house. The Planning Commission allowed additional public comment from Ashok Belani, who felt the obtrusiveness and imposing nature of the residence would not be mitigated by the solution suggested by Mr. Askarinam. Lowering the house would be more important because of the ridge top location. Chairman Harpootlian felt that the species of the screening trees should be reviewed by staff before planting. There should be no trenching within 15 feet of the property line with the details worked out by the engineers. He supported hand digging for the protection of the trees. The low decibel air conditioner units should be required. The roofline of the house should be lowered by five feet. The applicant should be allowed to work with staff on any grading exceptions for the property that will be necessary in order to lower the house. Commissioners Abraham and Clow had concerns about the stability of the redwood trees if the roots are severed by trenching closely to the trees. The trenches should be kept as far from the property line as possible. MOTION SECONDED, AMENDED AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Cottrell, amended and seconded by Commissioner Clow to approve the site development permit subject to the following additional conditions of approval: Planning Commission Minutes Approved 1/15/2009 December 4, 2008 Page 6 1). That the roofline of the house be lowered by five feet by whatever means the architect and staff can work out; the Planning Commission is willing to grant leeway on grading. 2). No trenching within the 30 foot setback of the southeast property line for any reason except PGE joint trench not to exceed 38 inches in depth, 24 inches in width and be located not less than 27 feet from the southeast property line. Water and/or sanitary sewer trench not to exceed 24 inches in depth and be located 21 feet or more from the southeast property line if within the 30 foot setback area. Minimum depth trench of 12 inches or less for surface drain located in the southeast setback area. No restrictions for trenching within the front setback area. These numbers are to be consistent with standard engineering practices. 3). Low decibel air conditioner equipment is to be required and the pool equipment must be enclosed with a roof. 4). All trees along the southeast property line will be protected, as a heritage oak would be, with metal chain link tree fencing installed at the drip line. Where the driveway runs under a drip line, the driveway will be fenced along the edges and at the end. Past the end of the driveway, the fencing will continue along at the drip line of the trees. Construction equipment may use the existing driveway under the drip line. 5). The fences between the properties will be in accordance to the agreement between the �, neighbor and the applicant with equal offsets on the property line. The part of the fence that goes into the applicant's property is to match where the existing fence is; uphill between the two existing homes and the part that goes onto the neighboring property is downhill close to Elena from the redwoods on, with the square footage and length to match. 6). Landscape screening plan will be heard at Planning Commission level 7). The screening trees will be of acceptable height and type to provide the desired screening (36" box minimum), agreeable to the applicant and approved by staff and must be planted before construction begins. AYES: Commissioners Collins, Cottrell, Clow, Abraham and Chairman Harpootlian NOES: none This item is subject to a 22 day appeal period and will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for November 13ih — Commissioner Cottrell 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for December 1 Vh— Commissioner Harpootlian 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for January 8'h— Commissioner Clow V Planning Commission Minutes Approved 1/15/2009 December 4, 2008 Page 7 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of November 6, 2008 minutes MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Motion by Commissioner Cottrell and seconded by Commissioner Abraham to approve the November 6, 2008 minutes as presented. AYES: Commissioners Collins, Cottrell, Clow, Abraham and Chairman Harpootlian NOES: none 8. REPORTS FROM FAST TRACK MEETING - none 9. REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETING —NOVEMBER 12 AND DECEMBER 2, 2008 9.1 LANDS OF TRIMBLE, 27920 Roble Alto; File #29-08-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 673 square foot first and second story addition and interior remodel (Maximum height 21'6"). CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(a) (Staff - Nicole Horvitz) (Approved with conditions). 9.2 LANDS OF ELSON, 14370 Miranda Road; File #224-08-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a 6,110 square foot residence and a 550 square foot second unit approved on May 3, 2007. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (b) (Staff -Cynthia Richardson) (Approved with conditions). 9.3 LANDS OF WRIGHT, 11930 Rhus Ridge; File #154-08-ZP-SD-GD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 533 square foot swimming pool. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(e) (Staff - Nicole Horvitz) (Approved with conditions). 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, �ctoria Ortlarid� Planning Secretary jW