HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1991 (2) Minutes of a Regular Meeting
September 18, 1991
Town of Los Altos Hills
City Council Meeting
Wednesday, September 18, 1991 7:15 P.M.
Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road
I. CALL TO ORDER,ROLL CALL, AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Hubbard called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 7:20
p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall.
Present: Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers Casey, Johnson,
Siegel and Tryon.
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager Les M. Jones, II; City Attorney Sandy Sloan;
Director of Public Works Bill Ekern; Planning Consultant
Margaret Netto and City Clerk Pat Dowd
Press: None
It was agreed to move Item 5.13 on the Consent Calendar to Appointments and
Presentations and to continue Item 5.11 to the next meeting at the request of the
applicant.
2. CLOSED SESSION: PENDING LITIGATION: PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(a)
3. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Proclamation: Honoring Recipients of the Gold Card Awards
Mr. Mark Gardner, Principal - Pinewood High School, received a proclamation from
the Council commending the 1991 "Gold Card" students at Pinewood High School.
It was noted that the Gold Card Program had been established to provide a practical
benefit to students for their achievements both in school and in their communities
and thirty four students at Pinewood had recieved this honor. Mr. Gardner thanked
Council for this proclamation and also noted that Dana Dolan had participated in
this program. (Council noted that a Certificate of Appreciation was on the Consent
4 Calendar for Dana Dolan for her contributions as the Town's Youth Commissioner.)
i/ September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
1
He further commented that the students enjoyed the program and appreciated the
recognition of this proclamation.
4. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
Commissioner Ellinger reported that in addition to the Planning Commission items
on the Consent Calendar, two projects were denied by the Commission at their
meeting on 9/11/91. An application for a site development permit for a new
residence, tennis court and swimming pool for Lands of Ben-Artzi on Via Feliz was
denied. This was a large project on a ridgeline. Siegel asked if the applicant had
gone through site analysis and was advised that the Planning Consultant and
Director of Public Works had met with the applicant several times. As a result of
these meetings modified plans had gone to the Commission but the applicant had
not been surprised by the 6-0 vote against his project. Casey stated that if staff had
met with an applicant three times and the Commission had voted 6-0 against the
project, something was wrong with the site analysis process and she would like to
see a discussion of site analysis agendized for the next meeting. Tryon disagreed that
it needed to be discussed again. She believed it was working but that some
applicants did not listen to the suggestions made by staff. Hubbard also agreed that
the issue of site analysis had already been discussed.
An application for a site development for a driveway and bridge for Lands of
Paboojian at 27591 Purissima Road was denied without prejudice as no plans had
`r been submitted for the entire property and it was unclear how many properties the
new bridge would service.
Commissioner Ellinger also reported on the ongoing discussions with Sun Country
Cable regarding the headend issue. Council asked that the Chair of the Planning
Commission advise the Council in writing of their concerns regarding the headend
issue and also what requests the Commission was making of Sun Country and staff
regarding this matter. A discussion was also held on the conditions of approval for
applications and Commissioner Ellinger commented that they were working on
revising the process to make the conditions more consistent while still maintaining
some flexibility.
Siegel commented on the new house at Prospect and Emerald Hill as an excellent
example of how oak trees should be screened.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items Removed: 5.1 - Minutes of Regular Meeting and 5.8 and 5.9 (Siegel)
thy
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
2
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Johnson and
passed unanimously (with Casey voting no on Item 5.6 due to a philosophical
difference of opinion regarding the fee structure) to approve the balance of the
Consent Calendar, specifically:
5.1 Approved Minutes: September 4, 1991 (Adjourned Regular)
5.2 Approved Warrants: $96,365.93 (8/30/91)
$48,126.66 (9/3/91)
5.3 Awarded Certificate of Appreciation: Dana Dolan - Youth Commissioner
5.4 Concurred with the following Planning Commission Actions at Its
Meeting on September 11, 1991:
5.4a Lands of Chan, 23531 El Caminito Road, approved request for a
site development permit for an addition/remodel
5.4b Lands of Codispoti/Schroeder, 14545 Manuella Road, approved
request for a site development permit for a new residence and
swimming pool
5.4c Lands of Shakir, 12476 Briones Way, approved request for a
site development permit for an addition/remodel
5.5d Lands of Meyer, 25541 Chapin Road, approved request for a
development permit for a major addition
5.5 Approved Amendment Number Three to Agreement with Brian
Kangas Foulk -- Reso #44-91
5.6 Adopted Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 1991-92 -- Reso #45-91
5.7 Accepted Dedication Burke Road Right-of-Way, Lands of F&H Limited,
13470 Burke Road - Reso #46-91
5.10 Notice of Completion, 1991 Striping Project, Safety Striping Services,
Inc. -- Reso #47-91
5.12 Proclamation: Womens' Day - September 22, 1991
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
3
41/
Items Removed:
5.1 Approval of Minutes: September 4, 1991 Regular Meeting
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Johnson
and passed unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 4, 1991
Regular City Council Meeting with the following corrections: page 8, Item
6.4, second paragraph, insert the following after ". . . .and not to the sides of
the house." "Current ordinances tended to encourage building houses
with no overhangs." and page 13, Item 11.4, add the following before
"Council took no action on this issue." "This proposed ordinance would
require a non-conforming detached secondary dwelling at the time of a
major remodel to conform to current zoning."
5.8 Acceptance of Improvements - Lands of Nelson, 13970 La Paloma Road
Siegel commented on the storm drainage improvements and asked for
clarification of the detention basin.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Casey
and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #48-91 accepting
improvements for Lands of Nelson, 13970 La Paloma Road.
5.9 Acceptance of Improvements - Lands of Clausen, Voorhees Drive -
Siegel commented on the following issues which he felt should be addressed
regarding Lands of Clausen: 1) Was there a condition to hire an arborist?
There was an oak tree that was in poor condition.; 2) What assurance was
there that the house Mr. Clausen lived in would be demolished? (If any
lot is sold, the house will be removed.); 3) There was a large metal pipe
and a pile of junk near the freeway exit which should be removed.; 4) The
emergency access road needed to be signed.; and 5) Was there a 'no right
turn on red' sign out of the school - there was such a sign off Voorhees?
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Casey
and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt Resolution #49-91
accepting improvements for Lands of Clausen, Voorhees Drive.
AYES: Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers Casey, Siegel and Tryon
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmember Johnson
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
4
6. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Kent Mitchell, attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Laub, asked Council to extend the time
period for the Laubs' application for a tentative map. Mr. Mitchell explained
when their application had gone before the Planning Commission and their
attempts to get FEMA approval. The City Attorney questioned the need for
such an extension in that they already had more than enough time under the
Permit Streamlining Act and the Town's Resolution #29-91 setting the time
limits and allowing extensions for environmental impact reports and negative
declarations. It was agreed that Mr. Mitchell and the City Attorney would
discuss this matter and, if necessary, it would be agendized for the next Council
meeting.
Ruth Buneman, 12655 LaCresta Drive, expressed her concerns about the road
repair work which was being done in the Town. She noted that she got her
notice of the road closure the night before it was to be done and she did not
think this was adequate notice. She also believed leaving notices on doors was
an invitation to burglaries and that the streets did not have to be completely
closed. The procedure now in place caused a lot of inconvenience. The
Director of Public Works said that he would look into Council's suggestion of
providing notice by mail and would change the specifications for future
contracts.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence, Lands of
Mooring, 13791 LaPaloma Road
Johnson stated that before the hearing on the Mooring's secondary dwelling he
had met with the applicant who showed him what his plans were for the
property. At that time Johnson cautioned the applicant about the
sensitivity of the La Paloma area and concerns about height and setbacks.
John Glathe, 13801 La Paloma, noted that this was the first construction on La
Paloma of a two-story house and he preferred a one-story house.
Whatever elevation he recommended that the house not be elevated
because of fill. Mr. Glathe also noted that Mr. Mooring had shared his
landscape plan with him and it appeared there was an additional parking
area which he would rather see removed.
Its September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
5
Ida Mae Hoover, La Paloma, stated that she thought the plans for the primary
11100 house could not be approved until the secondary dwelling plans were
approved and she also expressed her concerns about the height. The
Director of Public Works noted that the secondary dwelling plans had been
approved.
Carol Seeds, 18801 La Paloma, expressed her concerns about height and the
setback of the driveway. Regarding height she urged Council to keep the
height down to 24 1/2' and commented on the impact of a two story house
on their house and also recommended that the traffic be avoided on either
side of the house.
David Mooring, applicant, explained the parking area raised by Mr. Glathe and
stated that he was required to have two more parking spaces but he too
would rather not have them there either. Regarding the height issue, Mr.
Mooring gave several examples of two story houses in the area and also
stated that with a two story house they used less of the lot and there was
more open space. He also explained the siting of the house and the
mitigating measures he planned to take in response to the neighbors'
concerns.
Tryon noted that the plans before them were one year old and it appeared the
applicant had not taken into consideration the comments made by the
§11W Council when the secondary dwelling was before them. She also noted
that there was not enough setback for a large house and the maximum
floor area and maximum development area were very close to being
totally used. In response to Mr. Mooring's comments about open space,
Tryon stated that it was appropriate if more of the lot was used and the
house was spread out. Tryon also believed that if Council wanted to make
La Paloma Basin one story then they should state that decision.
Johnson believed the key issue was the low lying aspect of the La Paloma Basin.
He did not believe that a two story house fit in this area. Hubbard
concurred with Johnson's concerns and Siegel reminded Council of the
Fong height limitation of 23' which would still allow a two story house.
He believed if Council wanted to limit this to a one story house they
should make it quite clear. Casey did not believe that the direction to the
Moorings had been clear especially since staff had recommended approval.
She did not believe the issue was whether or not it was a one or two story
house. The issue to the neighbors was that a house of any size was being
built. The Moorings had planned to take mitigating measures and had a
right to build on their property. She also believed this two story was less
of an impact than a one story house and that the applicants should not
have to spend additional money on this project.
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
6
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by
Johnson and passed by the following roll call vote to continue the request
for a site development permit for a new residence for Lands of Mooring at
13791 La Paloma Road and to encourage the applicant to redesign the
project for a 24' single story house sited 100' from center line.
AYES: Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers Johnson, Siegel and Tryon
NOES: Councilmember Casey
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8.1 Formulation of a Statement of Town Policy in Respect of a Regional
Form of Government for the San Francisco Bay Area
Council discussed the proposal for the formation of a San Francisco Bay Area
Regional Commission and it was noted that this was a particularly
controversial issue. This commission would succeed the duties of the
Association of Bay Area Governments, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission and the Bay Area Air Quality Management Districts as well
as other agencies. Of particular importance was the composition of the
commission, elected vs. appointed. The Santa Clara County Cities
Association would be discussing a position on this proposal at their
meeting scheduled for September 19th. Council had before them a draft
policy statement on the formation of such a commission. Siegel and Casey
however disagreed with sections of this policy statement in that they
believed in the concept that the San Francisco Bay Area was in a position
to have these three agencies consolidated. Council also discussed
proportional representation, the direct election concept and the policy
whereby only elected officials on the commission would have binding
votes (assuming the commission also included appointed officials).
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Johnson
and passed by the following roll call vote to state that the primary position
of the Town of Los Altos Hills concerning the formation of a regional
form of government was that if such a regional agency was formed it shall
have proportional representation and shall be comprised of all elected
officials.
AYES: Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers Johnson, Seigel and Tryon
NOES: Councilmember Casey
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Casey
and passed unanimously to state that the Cities Association should
encourage a convention of all Santa Clara County City and County officials
to discuss this proposal.
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
7
411/ PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To encourage regional cooperation and to note that
further discussion on the issue of regional government is warranted.
8.2 Design Approval for Fencing of Byrne Preserve
Council discussed the issue of fencing for Byrne Preserve and what types of
fencing would be preferred. The Director of Public Works had noted that
he had been unable to get price quotes because he did not know what kind
of fence Council wanted. Council commented on the importance of an
aesthetically pleasing fence as well as one that was cost effective and also
kept the horses in the preserve.
Dot Schreiner, Chairman - Pathways, Recreation and Parks Commitee and
Sharyn Adkisson, Member - Environmental Design and Protection
Committee, both commented on various types of fences and how effective
certain fences were in keeping horses in a particular area.
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To ask the Environmental Design and Protection
Committee to make a recommendation at their next meeting on the
following two kinds of fences for Byrne Preserve: a three-rail wood fence
or a a one top rail fence with wire and to further request the
4� Environmental Design and Protection Committee to notify the neighbors
`. of Byrne Preserve (along Altamont) of this meeting.
Tryon also noted that certain types of eucalyptus trees in Town had suffered
damage due to the frost while others had not suffered any damage. Tryon
asked the Environmental Design and Protection Committee if they would
look into which eucalyptus trees held up better. It was also noted that the
Town Arborist was going to be at the next meeting of the Environmental
Design and Protection Committee.
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES, AND
COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES
11. STAFF REPORTS
11.1 City Manager
11.1.a Sun Country Cable
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
8
Council asked the City Manager to provide a status report on Sun Country
Cable to include the following: is the franchise completed, how could the
Town get Access 30, why is C-Span frequently out of sound, is the question
of damages resolved, can the Town get more channels; and what is the
status of emerency backup on cable.
11.1.b Components of Waste Stream Report
Siegel asked staff for a report highlighting the significant points in this report.
11.1.c Letter from Mr. Micko
Casey asked about the status of the request from Mr. Micko to meet with the
Council on his proposed project. It was agreed that at this stage Mr. Micko
will review this proposal with the Director of Public Works and Council
will be advised of any developments.
11.2 City Attorney
11.3 City Clerk
11.3a Report on Council Correspondence dated September 13, 1991
Tryon referred to the letter from ABAG requesting endorsement of
declaration of fiscal interdependency and statement of guiding
principles and noted that this issue would be discussed at the
League of California Cities Conference and further advised the
Mayor that it was rather controversial.
12. COUNCIL-INITIATED ITEMS
12.1 Council Policy on Appeal Costs (Councilmember Casey)
Council discussed the issue of appeals and who should pay for the costs
involved. Johnson had prepared a report on this subject (dated 8/3/91 and
on file at Town Hall). In this report Johnson examined several examples
of appeals and who should pay for what costs. These examples cover
when an applicant pays the costs involved (application approved by
Planning Commission and concurred with by the Council); when a
resident appeals an application and pays the $250 nonrefundable fee and
$500 deposit; when an application is appealed by either an individual or
the entire Council the Town should pay the costs of the appeal. The report
also stated that applicants defending their applications against appeals
bar
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
9
should pay all of their own costs. Casey supported Johnson and
kir commented that when a neighbor appealed an application they had to pay
the appeal costs; therefore, when the Council appealed they were
representing all of the neighbors and should also pay the appeal costs.
Siegel stated that the appeal step was part of all of the development costs
and also part of the entire process of an application. Tryon also
commented that Council had the ability to review an application which
was not quite the same as appealing an application. She also commented
on the cost involved in appealing a project ($750) as being at a level to
discourage people from making frivolous appeals.
Council discussed the amount of money paid by a resident who appealed an
application, specifically the $250 nonrefundable fee and the $500 deposit.
They were advised by staff that depending on the application the amount
of deposit required may be less than $500. However, if costs of the appeal
went over $500, the person appealing was responsible. Council referred to
the recent appeal made by a neighbor of the Shockley application and
asked about the costs involved in reviewing the additional drainage work
which had been done. Council was advised that these costs, under the
Town's current policy, would be paid by the person appealing. Council did
not agree with this and stated that they had not understood the policy to
mean that someone could be responsible for more than $500.
kir MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Johnson
and passed unanimously to state that the maximim amount to be paid for
an appeal made by other than the applicant shall be $750 ($250
nonrefundable fee and $500 deposit).
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To state that the appeal costs for the Lands of
Shockley shall not exceed $750.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by Siegel
and passed by the following roll call vote to state that if the entire Council
reviews an application, the applicant shall pay the additional costs.
AYES: Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers Johnson, Siegel and Tryon
NOES: Councilmember Casey
Council then discussed the specific case of appeal costs incurred by Dr. Hau.
Casey stated that she did not think it was fair that Dr. Hau had to pay for
the City Attorney's costs related to his appeal. The attorney's fees had
never been charged before and due to the appeal process in this specific
application and possible confusion regarding this appeal, Casey did not
believe they were appropriate charges.
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
10
The City Attorney explained two categories of her work: preparation of
tir documents and advice. She stated that she did not decide if her charges
were passed on to the applicant, staff did. In the case of Dr. Hau, however,
she had spent many hours on the validity of the appeal, including
preparing responses to lengthy letters prepared by Dr. Hau's attorney and
meeting with the applicants and their representatives.
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND: Moved by Siegel to state that
an applicant will not be charged for attorney fees in an appeal unless the
Council determines that unusual work by the attorney was done.
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct staff to prepare a policy statement on
appeal costs for approval by the Council and to defer consideration of Dr.
Hau's specific case regarding appeal costs until this policy is submitted and
voted upon by the Council.
12.2 Appointment of Councilmember to Joint Volunteer Awards Committee
(Mayor Hubbard)
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Tryon
and passed unanimously to appoint Councilmember Johnson to the Joint
Volunteer Awards Committee for a term of one year.
12.3 Lands of Oshima - Clarification of Height Limitation (Councilmember
Casey)
Casey noted that in 1988 a condition for a 23' height limit had been imposed on
Lands of Oshima and she requested that Council also include a condition
for Lot B on Lands of Oshima stating it shall be a one-story house. She
believed, after the recent situation with Lands of Fong (the other lot on
Lands of Oshima) and the neighbors' concerns over the height of the
house that by changing the condition at this time it would be perfectly
clear for the future owner of Lot B what could be done on the lot.
The City Attorney stated that Council could send this request for a change in
the conditions of the subdivision back to the Planning Commission for a
public hearing.
Mrs. Meyer, 26077 Torello Lane, referred to the letter signed by several of the
neighbors which she had submitted requesting a one story limitation on
Lot B of Lands of Oshima.
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
11
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Casey
and passed unanimously to refer the request for an amendment to the
subdivision conditions for Lot B of Lands of Oshima to include a one story
limitation on the house to the Planning Commission for public hearing.
12.4 Request for Proclamation: Asian Americans for Community Involve-
, ment (AACI), 5th Annual Freedom Awards/ 18th Anniversary Banquet
(Councilmember Tryon)
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tryon, seconded by Hubbard
and passed unanimously to issue a proclamation commending the Asian
Americans for Community Involvement on their 18th anniversary.
12.5 Altamont Road Guard Rail
Tryon asked the issue of the guard rail on Altamont Road (Julie Peacock's
letter) be agendized.
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further new or old business to discuss, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:50 p.m. to an Adjourned Regular Meeting at 6:00 p.m. on
`. Wednesday, October 2, 1991.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia Dowd
City Clerk
The minutes of the September 18, 1991 Regular City Council Meeting were
approved at the October 2, 1991 Regular City Council Meeting.
Saw
September 18, 1991
Regular Meeting
12