Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/21/1996 (2)`w Minutes of a Regular Meeting February 21, 1996 Town of Los Altos Hills City Council Meeting Wednesday, February 21,1996,6:00 P.M. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Siegel called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 6:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Casey, Dauber, Hubbard and Johnson Absent: None Staff: City Manager/City Engineer Jeff Peterson, City Attorney Sandy Sloan, Planning Director Curtis Williams, Public Works Manager Ed Taylor and City Clerk Pat Dowd Press: Clyde Noel, Los Altos Town Crier 2. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Presentation to Philip Hau on his achievement as Eagle Scout Mayor Siegel presented Philip Hau with a proclamation congratulating him on his achievement as Eagle Scout and commending him for this accomplishment. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Planning Commissioner Doran reported that the following items were discussed at the February 14, 1996 Planning Commission Meeting: Lands of Chang, 26228 Scarff Way, request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool, spa, secondary unit and greenhouse - approved; Lands of Vallner, 10723 Magdalena Avenue, request for a site development permit for a major addition/remodel - approved; Lands of Pang, 28138 Story Hill Lane, request for a new residence, pool and spa - approved; Lands of Lam, 13597 Robleda Road, request for a site development permit for a major addition/remodel and pool - approved; and Lands of GTE Mobilnet/Foothill College, 12345 EI Monte - recommended approval of a %W February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting conditional use permit and site development permit for an existing cellular telephone facility, including a 60 foot high monopole, 372 square foot equipment building, fencing and utilities and approval of a negative declaration. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar, specifically: 4.1 Approved Minutes: February 7, 1996 (Adjourned Regular) February 7, 1996 (Regular Meeting) 4.2 Approved Warrants: $62,872.83(1/31/96) 4.3 Accepted grant of pathway easement and vacation of existing trail easements, Lands of Goldberg, 12012 Emerald Hill Lane-- Resolutions #6-96 and #7-% 4.4 Adopted Ordinance #379 amending Title 8 of the Municipal Code, to adopt 1994 Editions of the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code and Uniform Fire Code, and 1993 Edition of the National Electrical Code with Amendments 4.5 Rejected Claim -- Caroline Bowker 4.6 Adopted Mid -Year Budget - FY 1995-96 -- Reso #8-% 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 Establishment of guidelines concerning public/private roads The City Manager referred to the Public Works Manager's staff report dated 2/21/96 on public/private streets. He commented that there had been an article on this subject in the recent newsletter and to date there were about fourteen streets under discussion. These specific streets would be discussed at a later time but at this meeting the focus of the discussion was on general guidelines regarding public/private streets. The City Manager referenced the 1989 right of way policy which stated that all new streets would be accepted as public. %W February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Casey believed that all roads should be accepted as public. The Town had an 6 obligation to provide appropriate transportation in the Town. She also believed �r most residents probably had no idea if their road was public or private. The City Manager did comment that this information was available on title reports. Hubbard commented on the financial impact of accepting roads as public and stated there was not enough money in the budget to accept them all now. He also noted that there should be a time limit for acceptance of roads. Hubbard also believed that a policy decision should be made as soon as possible. Presently there were residents who thought their streets were public when apparently they were private and the streets were not being maintained. Siegel commented on the liability aspect of public roads. Dauber suggested that the goal should be to get the Town's roads up to a certain level of maintenance. Casey recommended that this matter be discussed at budget hearings. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct staff to prepare a map of the Town showing the collector streets and which ones are private/public and to bring this map back to Council at a future Council Meeting for review. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB -COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES law 8. STAFF REPORTS 8.1 City Manager 8.1.1 Budget Hearings The City Manager noted that the budget schedule had been prepared and he asked Councilmembers to let him know if they were not going to be available during May and June for budget hearings. 8.1.2 Chairs for Council Chambers The City Manager advised Council that materials and prices were being looked into for the chairs Councilmembers had selected. 8.1.3 Vacation The City Manager reminded Council that he would be out of Town from 2/22/96 through 2/27/96 and during that period of time the Public Works Manager would be acting City Manager. ftr February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting 8.2 City Attorney 8.3 City Clerk 8.3.1 Report on Council Correspondence dated 2/14/96 It was agreed that the Mayor would send a letter to Mr. Tombs advising him that the code enforcement issue on which he had written the Town was closed. 9. COUNCIL -INITIATED ITEMS 9.1 Assistant to the Town Historian Johnson commented that he was aware of a resident who was willing to assist the Town Historian. Council authorized Johnson to contact this resident about her offer of assistance. 9.2 North County Flood Control Advisory Committee Dauber noted that at their meeting today it was reported that flood control projects would not be put to the voters until the November 1998 election to allow for detailed information on such projects and early involvement by environmental agencies. 9.3 All 2125 Casey asked for support of AB 2125 prohibiting female genital mutilation. It was agreed this issue would be agendized for a future Council Meeting. 9.4 Measure A Siegel commented on the impact of Measure A funds on the cities. 10. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.1 Request for certification of Final Environmental Impact Report, amendments to the Town's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and approval of a Tentative Map for 23 lots on 78 acres, Lands of Quarry Hills, 11920 Stonebrook Drive February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting John Vidovich, applicant, commented that he concurred with the Planning k Director's 2/21/96 staff report including minor modifications to the proposed conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures. Mr. Vidovich thanked Council and noted that he was looking forward to completing his project. A. Adopt Resolution certifying the Final Environmenal Impact Report for the Quarry Hills Subdivision, subject to findings of fact MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Casey and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #9-96 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Lands of Vidovich at 19920 Stonebrook Drive B. Adopt Resolution amending the General Plan MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #10-96 adopting amendments to the General Plan for Lands of Vidovich at 11920 Stonebrook Drive C. Introduce Ordinance pre -zoning the Lands of Vidovich to "R -A" (Residential -Agricultural) (FIRST READING) MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Casey and passed unanimously to waive further reading and to introduce ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to prezone the property at 11920 Stonebrook Drive D. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map, subject to conditions of approval and findings MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to approve the Tentative Subdivision Map, Lands of Vidovich, 11920 Stonebrook Drive, subject to conditions of approval and findings as recommended by Planning Commission, amended by Council and amended by Planning Director's 2/21/96 staff report. E. Approve the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program as amended by Planning Director's 2/21/96 staff report. 11.2 Review of Planning Commission's denial of request for a site development permit for a secondary dwelling unit, Lands of Rouse, 27979 Baker Lane %br February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Dr. Rouse, applicant, explained his application to the Council. He had believed it was a win/win situation. They had moved an old home from Palo Alto onto their land with staff approval. They had not seen it as an eyesore to the neighbors. However, they had had problems with the agreement they had signed with the Town to move this house. They had not realized it would take so long to get required surveys done, etc. and had not been able to accomplish the requirements within the approved timeframe. They had not intended to antagonize the neighbors and thought a possible solution might be for them to move the old house off their land and go through the regular site development permit process for a secondary dwelling. He would not like to see the old house demolished, however. Richard Andrews, 28080 Horseshoe Court, recommended Council establish a firm deadline for action regarding this project. Although an agreement for a defined amount of time had been signed earlier with staff, it had gone on for months longer than approved. Dauber commented for the applicant's information concerning the possibility of a future secondary dwelling that in her opinion this location was unacceptable for a secondary dwelling as it was too close to the neighbors. She also thought there were other violations on the property which needed to be addressed, such as numbers of vehicles, before additional structures such as secondary dwellings should be discussed. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a site development permit for a secondary dwelling unit, Lands of Rouse, 27979 Baker Lane. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Siegel and passed by the following roll call vote to state that the old house on the Rouse property (moved there from Palo Alto) shall be removed from the property within 90 days of this date (February 21, 1996) or it shall be demolished and the grading shall be restored to the satisfaction of the City Engineer by June 1, 1996. AYES: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Casey, Dauber and Johnson NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Hubbard Hubbard noted that this situation had been going on for a long time and he believed 90 days was to long to require removal of the house. 11.3 Review of Planning Commission's approval of request for a site development permit for a new residence, secondary dwelling unit and pool, Lands of Parikh, 26875 Elena Road %W February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Allen Nikitin, applicant's architect, commented that several designs had been studied for this house including a one story house. It was their opinion that this two story house in the farthest corner of the lot was the least obtrusive placement of the proposed home. Mr. Nikitin also noted that this lot was severely constricted by the oaks on the property. Mr. Nikitin referred to condition sixteen regarding lowering the roof line and raising the turnaround bulb and expressed concerns about drainage if this condition was met. Robert Stinson, applicant's landscape architect, addressed the impact of this project on the neighbors and noted that the Halls would be partially impacted but only for a very small percentage of their view. He did note however that the Parikh's lot had had an old decrepit house on it with junk around and their purchase of the lot and subsequent new home would improve the lot and view immensely. Mr. Stinson also noted that the view the Halls were complaining was negatively impacted was due in part to trees on their own property. John Dumont, applicant's contractor, concurred with Mr. Stinson's comments about the placement of this house and the impact on the Halls. He stated that they had reduced the visibility of the house as much as possible but there was no way to mitigate the height of the roof line to eliminate all visual impact. Mr. Dumont noted that there were limitations regarding the siting of this home and care and concern had been given toward this issue. In response to the suggestion of rotating this house, Mr. Dumont did not believe this would affect the views and expressed concerns about drainage. Mr. and Mrs. Hall, 12140 Foothill Lane, addressed the Council with their concerns about the visual impact of the Parikh's home on their property. Their primary concerns were privacy, view and property values. They stated that their view of the valley would not increase if they removed their trees because of oaks in the view line and referred Council to letters from real estate appraisers confirming the reduction of their property value if the view were reduced. The Halls also noted that they had not been approached about this project until just before the Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Parikh, applicant, commented that they had lived in the area for thirty years and had spent over six months designing this home. Of all the possible designs, he believed that this placement was the best with the least impact on the neighbors. Mr. Parikh noted that this lot was definitely an eyesore before they bought it and was much more of a negative visual impact on the neighbors in that state. He asked for Council approval of his project, noting that the Planning Commission had approved it and they had worked within the letter and intent of the Town's regulations. `' February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Council discussed options before them for a mutually agreeable solution to this situation. Dauber believed the house could be moved and should be stepped down. Johnson agreed with Dauber and thought it unfortunate that a compromise had not been reached. He realized that the house could not be moved to the top of the lot because of the leach fields but he did feel the layout of the project could be reorganized. He suggested the possibility of giving the applicant the opportunity to lower the story poles. Hubbard thought other alternatives were worse such as a very long one story house. He supported the Planning Commission's approval and the removal of condition #16 on lowering the roof line and raising the turnaround elevation. Siegel commented on the importance of getting input from neighbors when undertaking a project. He could not support the project as submitted. Casey did not know if there was any resolution to the situation that would not involve some visual impact on the Halls by this project. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To continue the public hearing on the request for a site development permit for a new residence, secondary dwelling unit and pool for Lands of Parikh at 26875 Elena Road to the March 6, 1996 City Council Meeting to allow the applicant the opportunity to place lower story poles on the property to see if this would make a difference in the visual impact on the neighbors. 11.4 Review of Planning Commission's approval of request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool, tennis court and negative declaration, Lands of Owen, 13930 LaPaloma Road Staff noted that the application before Council was for a site development permit for a new residence, pool and tennis court. The applicant had additional information regarding the drainage from this particular project and the conditions of approval addressed the drainage of this lot. The overall issue of drainage for the LaPaloma area was being addressed in ongoing discussions and meetings with the neighbors. Another meeting with the neighbors would be held in a couple of months. Several issues were under review including the necessity of storm drain easements. Bob Owen, applicant, noted that he had made a modification to this project by redirecting the drainage from La Paloma to Fremont Pines. He believed this would address the neighbors' concerns about the drainage issue. He knew the importance of working with the neighbors on a project and also realized the drainage in the LaPaloma area in general was under current discussion by the Town and the neighbors. Mr. Owen referred to the view corridor, the use of larger setbacks, the basement design and the siting the house. He commented on the lighting issue and the use of tinted glass and also noted that the tennis court was less than regulation size although the fence around it was full size. February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Scott Galati, representing the Burkharts on LaPaloma, referred to Mr. Owen's offer to redirect the drainage to Fremont Pines and commented that while this was good for his clients he questioned if the owners along Fremont Pines had been notified of this condition. Perhaps the project should be continued if proper notification had not been done. He believed this area was undergoing piecemeal development which was resulting in an unclear drainage picture. Jean Koon, 26025 Newbridge, commented that she had lived in Town for 28 years and stated her concerns about the drainage issue, the results of piecemeal development and the basement issue. Juanita Reed, 13940 LaPaloma, expressed her concerns about the drainage issue; she did not believe the existing system was going to be able to carry the drainage. Mrs. Reed did not support the option of redirecting the drainage to Fremont Pines. She also commented that runoff and irrigation from landscaping were issues that needed to be resolved. She urged Council to look at the whole picuture. Mrs. Reed referred to the tennis court and was concerned about the runoff due to too much fill and expressed her concerns about the lighting issue and the reflectivity off the glass. Mr. Cantwell, son-in-law of Elsie Burkhart, stated that Mrs. Burkhart had owned property in Town for 30 years and for years there had never been a drainage problem. He offered the solution of a 15" pipe into the creek. Colleen Maurer, 26170 Maurer Lane, expressed her great concerns about the drainage VAW issue and cited examples of the impact of development on their property. She commented on the endangerment to farm land and did not believe it was right to enhance property values at the detriment to other properties. Mrs. Maurer stated that she was not against development in the area but she was against development until the drainage issue was resolved. On another subject she suggested that a reassessment of the Town's ideals regarding size of homes be made at some future time. Jean Struthers, 13690 Robleda, asked where the drainage went off Fremont Pines and suggested that this area be looked at along with the LaPaloma area. Bill Whitney, 13890 LaPaloma, referred to the easement problem concerning the resolution to the drainage issue. He did not believe it was right to dump the water onto the Burkhart property and urged Council to fix this situation. Dave Pefley, 26169 Maurer Lane, encouraged the Planning Commission and City Council to work toward a permanent solution of the drainage problem. I I%W February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting Council discussed the application before them. Hubbard stated that the intent of the y ordinance regarding tennis courts and development area was that the entire tennis �► court area within the fence should be counted as development area. He also was concerned about the skylight issue and the reflectivity factor. Dauber referred to the setback issue. She believed with 1.4 acres it should be possible to not go into the setbacks. Council further commented that this project was not in conformance with the definition of basement. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Dauber and passed by the following roll call vote to not approve the request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool, tennis court and negative declaration for Lands of Owen at 13930 LaPaloma Road based on the project going over the allowed development area including the basement area. AYES: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Dauber and Hubbard NOES: Councilmembers Casey and Johnson Bob Owen, applicant, addressed the Council in the hopes that some of these issues could be resolved at this time and the project could go forward. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by Siegel and passed by the following roll call vote to approve the request for a site development permit for a new residence, pool, tennis court and negative declaration for Lands of Owen at 13930 LaPaloma Road subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission and with the following conditions added by Council: 1) to amend Condition #13 to require that the incremental increase in drainage runoff due to the increase in development area be conveyed toward Fremont Pines instead of La Paloma Road; 2) to include a basement with openings only as required to meet the minimum standards of the UBC; 3) to include all area of the tennis court within the fence in the development area; 4) to remove the skylight at the porte cochere; and 5) to stipulate that the total development area may not exceed the amount allowed by ordinance. AYES: Mayor Siegel and Councilmembers Casey, Hubbard and Johnson NOES: Councilmember Dauber 11.5 Proposed revised pathway element of the General Plan; amendments to the Site Development and Subdivision Ordinances regarding pathway requirements and proposed negative declaration Motion to waive futher reading Motion to introduce ordinance This item was continued to the March 6, 1996 City Council Meeting. February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting 10 %W 12. CLOSED SESSION: PERSONNEL: PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 — Public Employee Performance Evaluation -- City Attorney The City Council adjourned to a Closed Session on Personnel at 10:45 p.m. and reconvened at 11:20 p.m. Council returned to open session to report, if necessary, any action taken. 13. ADTOURNMENT There being no further new or old business to discuss, the City Council Meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Dowd City Clerk The minutes of the February 21,19% Regular City Council Meeting were approved at the March 6,19% Regular City Council Meeting. 11 February 21, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting