Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/25/2010 Minutes of a Special Meeting Approved 5/6/2010 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, March 25, 2010, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road 1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A special meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Clow and Commissioners: Collins, Harpootlian, Abraham, and Partridge. Staff: Debbie Pedro, Planning Director; Steven Mattas, City Attorney; Cynthia Richardson, Consultant Planner; and Victoria Ortland, Planning Secretary. 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR—None 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS Planning Commission Ex Parte Contacts Policy Disclosure: Commissioner Harpootlian had met with neighbor, George Clifford; Commissioner Partridge had spoken with Mayor Breene Keer; and Chairman Clow had met with Chris Overington and other Hidden Villa personnel; all Planning Commissioners had received an email from Sharon Emling. 3.1 LANDS OF HIDDEN VILLA; 26870 Moody Road, APN: 351-36-024 and 351- 36-020; File#12-10-MISC; Amendment to the Los Altos Hills General Plan Land Use Element and Urban Service Area Boundary; Amendment to the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code (Titlel0, Chapter 1, Zoning) to create a Hidden Villa Overlay District (HV); and Prezoning of Lands of Hidden Villa; CEQA Review: Negative Declaration(Staff: Cynthia Richardson). Debbie Pedro, Planning Director, presented the staff report. Hidden Villa is a non-profit organization offering a variety of programs including a hostel, summer camps, community agriculture, and other educational programs. The approximately 1,550-acre property, comprised of eight parcels, is within the Town's sphere of influence but outside of the Town's urban services area boundary. The Los Altos Hills County Fire District serves the developed area of Hidden Villa and Cal Fire serves the remaining 1,400 acres. It is proposed that the Town's new urban services area boundary will match the Los Altos Hills County Fire District service boundary. The area to be annexed would be approximately 213 acres. Santa Clara County must approve a lot line adjustment before final annexation. The Land Use Diagram of the General Plan would be amended to include Hidden Villa. An overlay zoning district would be established to allow the continuation of operations and accommodation for the special needs and activities of Hidden Villa. Three different types of primary uses are permitted in the overlay zone: non-profit, residential, or open space. For the residential parcels, a minimum lot size of Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 2 five acres and development restrictions equal to a one acre flat lot (6,000 MFA and 15,000 MDA maximum) would be required under the overlay ordinance. Up to a maximum of five lots could be created within the entire overly zoning district. Conditional uses for the overlay district include concerts, commercial stables, and certain events that have duration of more than one day. Mid Peninsula Open Space District and Santa Clara County hold easements over the entire area except for the 24 acres known as the "lower fields" area. The "lower fields" are the most likely _ area for future subdivision and development. Hidden Villa has leased approximately eight and a half acres to Heifer International. They have indicated that in the future they may consider selling a parcel to Heifer and proposes the option to allow up to two non-profit lots and three residential parcels in the overlay district. Discussion ensued regarding the overlay district and the two proposals. Steve Mattas, City Attorney, explained that the original proposal would allow one non-profit lot and four residential lots. The alternative proposal would allow two non-profit lots and three residential lots. The Planning Commission is being asked to consider one of the proposals. Commissioner Partridge asked about the development potential of Hidden Villa and the limits put on the property by the easement agreements. He wondered if Hidden Villa could develop the 200-acre parcel with the same standards as any parcel in Los Altos Hills. Staff explained that any development would have to be in compliance with the Mid Peninsula Open Space District agreement to use the property for educational and recreational purposes. Commissioner Abraham confirmed with staff that up to five total parcels would be allowed in the overlay zone. He asked for clarification about commercial stables and a possible location. Staff explained there is no proposal for a commercial stable. If Hidden Villa desired a commercial stable in the future it would require a Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Harpootlian asked about the current County restrictions that exist for the property. Staff replied that under the hillside-zoning district for Santa Clara County, the setbacks for front, side, and rear yards are 30 feet, creek bank restrictions are more stringent at 150 feet, and the County has no maximum development and floor area limitations. Subdivision of the property would be allowed and a slope density ordinance would regulate the number of resulting lots. Without a specific technical analysis, the number cannot be specified. However, the four-unit estimate was based on the County's slope density formula without the easements. Commissioner Harpootlian asked what the non-profit lots development potential would include. Staff replied that the second non-profit parcel could include five acres or more and would be subject to the Town's lot unit formula which is based on the size of the parcel and average slope. Commissioner Collins asked if Mid Peninsula Open Space District would retain the easement rights to any development on the areas covered by the overlay district. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 3 Steve Mottos said that easements are a private right between parties involved and generally will remain in effect. Commissioner Abraham stated that funds for police services, road maintenance, sewer maintenance, and infrastructure items would be paid by Los Altos Hills. He was concerned about the incurred costs. Staff replied that fire services are paid by property taxes, police services have been estimated at approximately $1,500 per year, and road maintenance (to bring Moody Road up to Town standards), as estimated by a preliminary study, would be approximately $55,000. Commissioner Abraham asked how many lots could be subdivided from Hidden Villa under the County's control. Staff answered that in a conversation with Santa Clara County Planning staff and estimated without a detailed analysis; two to three lots were stated as possible. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Martin Neiman, Member of the Board of Hidden Villa, said the possibility of annexation into the Town of Los Altos Hills had been a unanimous vote of the board members. The Board does not intend to gain any development rights and is currently negotiating with Mid Peninsula Open Space District to place the remaining 24 acres under a permanent open space easement. The annexation must remain a "development neutral" agreement to neither gain nor lose rights. The number of subdivided lots potentially allowed, if Hidden Villa remained under the County, (their attorney believes that the entire acreage could be considered) may be up to nine. The Board felt that four lots was a good compromise. The arrangement with Heifer International had begun years ago with the County and is well under way. Chairman Clow asked about the proposal for two non-profit lots and three residential lots. Martin Neiman said the Hidden Villa attorney envisioned a time when the arrangement with Heifer International might work better if the land was sold rather than maintained as a lease. The original document, as written by Town staff, may prohibit the sale. Hidden Villa wanted to retain the flexibility to sell Heifer the land in the future. Commissioner Collins asked if the Global Village was part of the Heifer International project. Chris Overington, Executive Director of Hidden Villa, clarified that Heifer International ran a world hunger program to bring youth together. The Global Village program would include small structures to represent areas of the world where Heifer does its work. The structures would be used by children to experience a particular culture including the architecture, food origins, and agriculture of the region. 1 Commissioner Partridge said that the potential residential lots would be allowed approximately 20 percent of the floor area and development area permitted in other areas of the Town. He asked Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 4 if Hidden Villa would object to the same 20 percent development allowance applied to the second non-profit parcel. Martin Neiman said he could not speak for the Hidden Villa Board; but expressed his opinion stating that by accepting the 20 percent development restrictions on the residential lots, Hidden Villa was going above and beyond what was required. It was a compromise from what would be required under the County's jurisdiction. He would have a hard time understanding why Hidden Villa should compromise the ability to develop the majority of the land, which is the heart of their program. Commissioner Harpootlian asked if the primary reason that Hidden Villa would benefit from a second non-profit parcel was the option to sell the parcel rather than lease it. Chris Overington replied that whether one or two non-profit parcels existed, with the overlay zoning in place, the program density would be the same. Commissioner Harpootlian stated that of the two proposals, in the option that allowed two non- profit lots, one of the non-profit lots would be allowed many times the development numbers of the other three residential lots. The same restriction on floor area and development area would not be applied and the potential for expansion would be very great for the larger parcel. Chris Overington said that Hidden Villa rights already exist to develop the lots under the Santa Clara County. Commissioner Harpootlian said that the right to develop the property existed, but not yet the right to sell it. Chris Overington stated that under the County, Hidden Villa does have the right to subdivide and sell the land. They do not wish to lose that right by being annexed to the Town. Steve Mottos explained that the issue of the two options relate to the fact that if the property was leased as part of Hidden Villa, they believe that they can operate under an exception to the Subdivision Map Act that would not require them to subdivide. But if at some point they wanted to sell a parcel, they would have to subdivide both under the proposed Town approach and the current County requirements. The concern that was expressed with regard to the original proposal was that it provided for one non-profit organization and four residential lots. If a second non-profit were to be desired under this option, a Zoning Amendment would be required. The alternative proposal allows for potentially two non-profit organizations operating on the site with a lease, not needing to subdivide; or if subdivided, a parcel could be sold to the other non- profit and one parcel would be retained for Hidden Villa. The issue of concern being addressed by the alternative option relates to the zoning on the site rather than the subdivision. Commissioner Harpootlian said that one of the additional non-profit parcels would be allowed a very large floor area and development area. The original proposal did not have that large growth ; ) potential, and he wanted clarification on what was being proposed. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 5 ,i Steve Mattas said that if the Planning Commission had concerns about the size of the facility that might go on a second non-profit property, an upper limit could be recommended for the-property on how it might be used. When zoning is applied, generally an equal level of regulation over parcels is desired, if possible. Maximum limitations could be recommended for the second non- profit parcel; but then the only two parcels in Town with non-profit designation and use, would be given different standards for approval. Given the size of the lots, it probably would not be considered"spot zoning",but there may be some concern over that issue. George Schriener, Moody Road, asked that with the overly zoning, would the boundary line to the north on the knoll be eliminated and residential development restricted to the "lower fields" area. Debbie Pedro explained that a lot line adjustment was necessary because the annexation required the combination of the individual lots into one parcel. Of the newly created parcel, approximately 24 acres referred to as the "lower fields" would be unencumbered by easement restrictions. The knoll area of the Hidden Villa land, is covered by an Open Space Contract (a converted Williamson Act Contract), held by Santa Clara County, which is renewed automatically every year for a 15-year term. Katie Marron, Murietta Lane, stated that her property was adjacent to Hidden Villa. The vegetation around Adobe Creek provides a natural buffer area between the homes on Moody Road and the "lower fields" area. She requested that the Planning Commission create a } designated open space preserve or wildlife corridor along Murietta Lane. She expressed neighborhood concerns with Heifer International's use of the Hidden Villa land including: excessive outdoor flood lighting, outdoor amplification of sound, use of the parking lot only during hours of operation or supervision, non-commercial use of the Global Village, and no hiking trail access from the parking lot. Faith Bell, Moody Road, stated she was a longtime neighbor of Hidden Villa. She was confident that Hidden Villa was working for the best use of the land, as they have done in the past. Helping them establish an endowment (by retaining the value of the property), in negotiations with Mid Peninsula for solid value, should be encouraged. She had concerns that the knoll area would be developed in the future. She supported the effort by Hidden Villa to place the entire property under Mid Peninsula Open Space District protection. George Clifford, Tanglewood Lane, said that Hidden Villa had been a wonderful neighbor; he supported their work, and Heifer International's mission. He was deeply concerned over the changes that would be made to the property with Heifer International's arrival, as the view from his home overlooks the 24-acre "lower fields" area. Issues such as parking, new entrances, noise, and lighting associated with the Heifer project should be examined during the annexation process. Consideration of these issues would make the neighbors feel better about Hidden Villa. Sandy Sommer, Senior Real Property Planner for Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District, emphasized that the District valued the partnership with the Trust for Hidden Villa. They consider the Hidden Villa programs to be a great benefit to the public and would like them to continue their work in recreation and education. The District is in discussion with Hidden Villa working on ways to benefit both the public and the Trust for Hidden Villa by allowing them to Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 6 be sustainable into the future. Of the two easements on the property, one covers the ranch area with the current structures and activities and one is the wilderness area intended to keep the land in its natural condition. These perpetual easements held by Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District would not be affected by the proposed prezoning. As both easements are publicly dedicated under the Public Resources Code, the District could not convey them away. The possibility of any alteration of the agreement would need to be examined by the District's legal counsel. Santa Clara County holds a third easement with a renewing 15-year term over part of the property. Martin Neiman appreciated the concerns expressed by the residents. He felt Hidden Villa had been a good steward of the land and the only proposed change would be the regulatory mechanism transfer from the County to the Town. He would hate to see many restrictions put in the annexation proposal as they are requesting no exemptions. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Partridge felt that Hidden Villa was a tremendous asset to Los Altos Hills and the annexation would be helpful for both entities. The possibility for large development area and floor area numbers for the non-profit areas was the only concern. Limiting the MDA and MFA maximums of the entire parcel to 20 percent of the Town's allowable and leaving the land division decision to Hidden Villa seemed like a simple solution. He supported five lots with one or two non-profits. Commissioner Harpootlian considered Hidden Villa a Town asset whether annexed or not. He had no concerns about the property's usage while under Hidden Villa's ownership. The Planning Commission would review issues from a planning perspective when the lots are developed. Development on the non-profit parcels is problematic if the parcels would not have the same overlay restrictions as the residential lots. He suggested creating a wildlife corridor 50 feet wide along Moody Road, locating residential parcels in the 24-acre area, and the parcel for a second non-profit split from farther inland. Commissioner Collins felt a partnership with Hidden Villa would be a great benefit for all involved. She supported four or five residential lots with one non-profit lot, because the scope of the Heifer project was uncertain. However, she may be able support a three residential lot and two non-profit lot plan, if guidelines limiting the scale of development for the second non-profit lot, could be established. Commissioner Abraham was concerned that changes in the future would allow the sale of some of the Hidden Villa land. He was troubled that if four residential lots were created in the "lower fields", a fifth lot could contain up to 200 acres for development under the Town's regular standards. He preferred a plan with either four residential lots and one non-profit lot, or three residential lots and two non-profit lots. The residential lots would be five acres each and allowed 6,000 MFA and 15,000 MDA. The non-profit lots would be a minimum of five acres each and limited to 30,000 MFA and 75,000 MDA in the Hidden Villa overlay. The ongoing costs for r police protection, road maintenance, and other infrastructure expenses were also of concern. He saw no advantage in annexation of the Hidden Villa land, to the average Town resident, with the Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 7 exception of possibly additional control over the property. Under the County's restrictions, it appears that two or three lots maximum would be allowed for subdivision. Chairman Clow thought it made sense in principle when annexing Hidden Villa into the Town of Los Altos Hills not to change the type of uses that are permitted on the land. In the request for Hidden Villa to come into the Town, it shouldn't be asked of them to comply with completely different rights from the set that they have under the County. The major benefit to Los Altos Hills would be the potential for input, and under the County, there would not be an opportunity for residents to come and speak up. Opportunities in the future for designating wildlife corridors, trails, etc. would be increased with annexation. The annexation would have a positive benefit for the neighbors, as they will have input into any development process. If a second non-profit group purchased a parcel from Hidden Villa, a subdivision process with description of the proposed purpose and building development would be followed. The Town should be careful how the land would be encumbered with restrictions at this point as Hidden Villa is working with Mid Peninsula on the value of an easement. The Town should not harm Hidden Villa with new restrictions. He supported staff's annexation recommendation and either the plan for three residential lots and two non-profit lots or the plan for four residential lots and one non-profit lot. Commissioner Harpootlian requested explanation on Chairman Clow thoughts regarding Hidden Villa's current restrictions. He thought Santa Clara County's regulations were more restrictive than Los Altos Hills'. He wondered if it was known if the County would allow a second non- profit parcel. Staff replied that under County restrictions, Hidden Villa could request to subdivide the lot and request a use permit to operate a second non-profit on the subdivided lot. Commissioner Harpootlian stated that Town restrictions for a non-profit lot were more generous than for a residential lot; a future owner of a non-profit lot may put in commercial stables or other types of land use. Commissioner Collins asked about restrictions on the individual parcels and the problem of"spot zoning". Steve Mattas explained that the most defensible approach would be to put similar restrictions on the residential and non-profit parcels. Enough acreage is available for both types of land use to avoid an argument of "spot zoning", if the second non-profit were given a different level of restriction. However, if there were a set of restrictions that would apply to both the non-profit acceptable to Hidden Villa and the Town for both non-profit parcels, that would be a better option. Commissioner Abraham suggested putting a limit per parcel on the MFA and MDA for the non- profit parcels. He had concern over the potential of making four parcels in the "lower fields" and a fifth parcel consisting of the remaining acreage. Chairman Clow suggested that if a second non-profit parcel were created, it could be assigned the residential lot restrictions. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 8 Steve Mattas said that it seemed that staff, the Commission, and Hidden Villa were satisfied with the residential restrictions. If a development percentage existed for the non-profit parcels, acceptable to both the Planning Commission and Hidden Villa, language could be included that was similar to that used for the residential parcels. Martin Neiman stated that Hidden Villa's position was to maintain the "status quo" as much as possible. They were willing to transfer the controlling authority from the County to the Town; but if the Town imposed significant new restrictions, Hidden Villa's Board would consider remaining under the County's control. Chairman Clow did not want to impose new standards on the existing Hidden Villa operation. He proposed the new development consist of three residential lots and one non-profit with residential restrictions. Commissioner Partridge suggested a recommendation to the City Council expressing general concern about the amount of development and floor areas,particularly on the non-profit parcels. MOTION MADE: Motion made by Commissioner Abraham to forward to the City Council the staff recommendations in Items one, two, and three; with the additional recommendation that the non-profit parcel be limited to 30,000 square feet of MFA and 75,000 square feet of MDA, and dedication made for a 50 foot wide conservation easement on the east property line. j MOTION AMENDED, AND FAILED DUE TO LACK OF SECOND: Motion amended by Commissioner Partridge to forward to the City Council the staff recommendations in Items one, two, and three; with the additional recommendation that the Planning Commission had expressed concern about the potential level of development on the non-profit parcels and was deferring final decision to the City Council. MOTION MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Harpootlian and seconded by Commissioner Collins to forward to the City Council the staff recommendations in Items one, two, and three. AYES: Commissioners: Abraham, Collins, Harpootlian, Partridge, and Chairman Clow NOES: None This item will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. 4. OLD BUSINESS—None 5. NEW BUSINESS—None 6. REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for February 18—Commissioner Partridge 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for March 18 —Commissioner Abraham 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for April 15—Commissioner Harpootlian Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 9 i 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of February 4, 2010 minutes. MOTION MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY VOICE VOTE: Motion by Commissioner Harpootlian and seconded by Commissioner Collins to approve the February 4, 2010 minutes. AYES: Commissioners: Abraham, Collins, Harpootlian,Partridge, and Chairman Clow NOES: None 8. REPORTS FROM FAST TRACK MEETINGS —FEBRUARY 9, FEBRUARY 23, AND MARCH 16, 2010 8.1 LANDS OF SCOTT, 13833 Campo Vista Lane; File #230-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 6,524 square foot two story new residence (maximum height 30'6") with a 2,737 square foot basement, a 514 square foot pool house, and a 1,000 square foot swimming pool and spa. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) and (e) (staff-Nicole Horvitz) (approved with conditions). 8.2 LANDS OF BERMAN, 26074 Mulberry Lane; File #247-09-ZP-SD-GD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 5,991 square foot two-story new residence (maximum height 27') with a 3,125 square foot basement and 1,075 square foot swimming pool. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) and(e) (staff-Nicole Horvitz) (approved with conditions). 8.3 LANDS OF CIESINSKI, 26435 Ascension Drive; File #217-09-ZP-SD-GD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 2,509 square foot single-story addition and remodel (maximum height 19'). CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15301 (e) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 9. REPORTS FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETINGS — FEBRUARY 9, MARCH 2, MARCH 6, AND MARCH 16, 2010 9.1 LANDS OF BROUGHER, 26974 Fremont Road; File #225-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a 10,496 square foot new residence approved on August 7, 2007. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (b) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 9.2 LANDS OF CHAN & HUA, 13198 La Cresta Drive; File #174-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a 4,982 square foot two story new residence approved on June 27, 2006. The applicant is } also requesting approval for 663 square feet of pole mounted solar panels of up to 9 feet in height. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (a) and 15301(a) (staff-Nicole Horvitz) (approved with conditions). Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/6/2010 March 25,2010 Page 10 9.3 LANDS OF KWONG, 26615 Anacapa Drive; File #21-10-PM; A request for a Site Development Permit for a permit modification to increase plate height and overall building height by two (2) feet (maximum height 22') CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (e) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 9.4 LANDS OF CRUM, 25420 Crescent Lane; File #138-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for an attached 1,000 square foot secondary dwelling unit and a 932 square foot basement (maximum height 15'). CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15301 (e) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 9.5 LANDS OF KENEHAN, 14555 De Bell Road; File #193-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a 2,070 square foot first and second story addition including an interior remodel approved on September 4, 2008. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (b) (staff-Nicole Horvitz) (approved with conditions). 9.6 LANDS OF HIEBERT, 12080 Green Hills Court; File#248-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 1,184 square foot swimming pool with 300 square feet of pool decking. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(e) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 9.7 LANDS OF GUPTA, 26303 Alexander Place; File #2-10-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a 6,785 square foot new residence approved on March 3, 2009. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (b) (staff-Brian Froelich) (approved with conditions). 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:44 p.m. Resp-ctfully submitted, Victoria Ortland Planning Secretary