HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/10/1998Minutes of an Adjourned Regular Meeting
February 10, 1998
Town of Los Altos Hills
City Council and Planning Commission
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 10, 1998, 6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road
A. Call To Order and Roll Call
Mayor Casey called the Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and Planning
Commission to order at 6:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall.
Present:
Mayor Casey and Councilmembers Dauber, Hubbard, Johnson
2.
and Siegel
Staff:
City Manager/City Engineer Jeff Peterson, Planning Director
4.
Curtis Williams, Assistant Planner Suzanne Davis and City
5.
Clerk Pat Dowd
Press:
Carol Tiegs, Los Altos Town Crier
Planning
Chairman Carol Gottlieb and Commissioners Aurelio, Cheng,
Commission
and Jinkerson
B. Scone of Planning Commission Review (Level of Detail):
1. Height of Residence
2. Height of Entry
3. Architectural Features (chimneys, towers)
4. Skylights and Windows
C. Sensitivity to and Interaction with Applicants at Meetings
D. Policy Issues
1.
Backup/tumaround areas
2.
Secondary dwellings - basements, height, driveway access, garages, patios
3.
Basement definition - backfilling, daylighting, lightwells and stairways, patios
4.
Definitions of "three story facade" and "single story"
5.
Development on and definition of "ridgelines"
6.
"Challenged" lots - how to address them early in process
7.
Requiring two car garages
8.
Counting carports as floor area
9.
Height measurement re: basements, pad/crawl space
10.
Enforcement of conditions of approval
11.
More strict application of Design Guidelines to protect "rural' character
12.
Town removal of trees in right-of-way
13.
Planting in road right-of-way
February 10, 1998
Adjourned Regular Meeting
The Planning Director reported that at the 10/29/97 Joint Meeting the Council and Planning
Commission had discussed up to Item DA on the agenda. This meeting was a continuation of
that discussion.
Casey referred to the Lands of Godino and believed it was wrong of the Planning Commission
to change the ordinance regarding chimneys as it related to this project. Gottlieb stated that the
chimney was larger on the second set of plans that the Planning Commission reviewed and it
blocked the view of the neighbors. Siegel stated that chimneys should be the height required by
the building code and not excessive obtrusive heights. Hubbard stated that the reasons for
design changes should be reflected in the minutes of the meeting.
Council and Planning Commission addressed the issues of three story facades and single stories.
Gottlieb commented that three story was permitted as long as the house was stepped down and
did not look like three stories. The goal was to reduce the bulk and mass of the project. Casey
recommended that applicants go through site analysis before they begin their project to avoid
disappointment. Siegel suggested that the Commission and staff arrive at specific numbers for
height limitations for highly visible lots, i.e. a single story house shall not exceed in
height. Casey thought it would be difficult to define `a highly visible lot' and Dauber believed a
definition was needed for how the attic area was counted.
On the subject of `challenged lots' it was noted that currently the allowed development was
limited to the point where variances were often requested. The Planning Director commented
that more often than not these projects were the best designed because the owners and designers
had to work within a more difficult framework. Jinkerson believed that the requirement for a
fourteen foot wide driveway negatively impacted the available outdoor living areas. Dauber
commented that grass crete could be used for the required fourteen foot turnarounds for fire
safety and grass crete did not count toward development area. Council agreed that the Planning
Director should bring a recommendation back to the Commission and Council on allowed
development for challenged lots.
The issue of carports and garages was discussed. Dauber noted that currently carports were not
counted as floor area but garages were. Siegel however did not think the Town should be
encouraging carports. Jinkerson believed that garages were better but did not think that carports
should be prohibited. It was agreed that staff should bring a recommendation back to the
Commission and Council on carports and garages and how they could be more equitably
counted as development/floor area in a project.
Tim Chown, 13822 Page Mill Road, referred to the issue of `challenged lots' and did not believe
the development area for these lots should be increased. Anyone purchasing such a lot would be
advised of the limitations of these lots.
Bill Masten, William Masten Architect and Associates, commented that in Portola Valley a
subdivision was requiring carports but this decision was recently changed because it was felt
they were unsightly and reduced the property value.
Robert Molinari, 12133 Foothill Lane, believed applicants should be given a choice between
carports and garages. He also wondered if the Council and the Commission represented the
opinion of the majority of residents. It seemed they were expressing their own opinions.
Lalla Carsten, 13761 La Paloma, did not concur with requiring two car garages.
February 10, 1998
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Valerie Chown, 13822 Page Mill Road, did not concur with the direction of encouraging those
using all of their development area to come back for variances. She further believed the Council
and the Commission were responsible for upholding the Site Development Policy and Design
Guidelines to the best of their ability.
Kamin Lee, 26799 Elena Road, believed there would be less confusion if the rules were clearly
stated and discretionary decisions by the Council and Commission were not permitted.
Ralph Vetterleiq 26035 Todd Lane, believed that the Town should be working on harmony and
understanding rather than divided fronts. He commented on the 1996 election which had a very
high voter turnout. Mr. Vetterlein noted that everyone in Town had property values and rights.
Sandy Humphries, 26238 Fremont Road, noted that Council was overturning the decisions of
the Planning Commission and there was a lack of communication between the two groups. It
appeared that if an applicant did not like what the Planning Commission said, they simply went
to Council and got the decision appealed. She believed more trust was needed.
Jinkerson believed the Town had good ordinances and guidelines and everyone was treated
equally. Hubbard referred to the effort by both the Commission and the Council to implement
the General Plan, ordinances and policies. Dauber noted that Councilmembers were elected by
a vote of the residents and during the election process the issues affecting the Town were
discussed at length. She believed it was their responsibility to review and evaluate applications
and make decisions as they deemed appropriate. Siegel commented that major issues go to a
vote of the people for a decision such as upholding the one acre minimum zoning. He noted
however that deciding on how the details of development should be handled was difficult.
Casey strongly supported the need for public input on all ordinance changes. She felt that if a
resident was not directly involved in Town Government, they had no idea what the Town's
regulations were. Therefore, she supported notification to all residents of ordinance changes.
Gottlieb believed it was important for Commissioners to be able to speak to an application at a
Council Meeting. She noted that often statements were made that did not correctly reflect what
happened at the Planning Commission Meeting and they should have an opportunity to address
these statements. Johnson reminded Gottlieb of the City Attorney's opinion on the process of
these public hearings and the inappropriateness of the Commissioners speaking to the Council at
public hearings in the role of Planning Commissioners.
E. Presentations from the Floor
F. Adjournment
There being no further new or old business to discuss, the City Council Meeting was
adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia Dowd
City Clerk
The minutes of the February 10, 1998 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council
and Planning Commission were approved at the March 4, 1998 City Council Meeting.
February 10, 1998
Adjourned Regular Meeting