Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 ITEM 3.1 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS October 16, 2016 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN; LANDS OF EESPRD LLC; 13638 OLD ALTOS ROAD; FILE #136-16-ZP-SD. FROM: Suzanne Avila,AICP,Planning Director RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Approve the requested Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan, subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Old Altos Road and Fremont Road. The parcel was created as part of a two lot subdivision approved by the City Council on January 15, 2015. A new residence, detached garage, second unit,pool and tennis court were approved at the March 31, 2015 Fast Track hearing, and all improvements are under construction. As required by a condition of approval, a landscape screening and tree replacement plan has been submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. On August 23, 2016 the Planning Commission considered a landscape screening plan for the property. The Commission continued the matter and requested that the applicant add landscaping to screen a previously approved fence along Old Altos and Fremont Roads and to move proposed planting away from the oak tree near the south property line, closer to the tennis court. CODE REQUIREMENTS Sections 10-2.801 and 10-2.802 of the Site Development Ordinance are utilized to evaluate landscape plans and includes policies to address erosion,noise,visual effects,maintenance, tree preservation,views,size and placement,and amount of planting required to adequately screen new construction. DISCUSSION The planting plan has been revised as follows: 0 shrubs were added along the fence lines on Old Altos and Fremont Roads o shrubs near the large oak tree (located between the south property line and the tennis court) were relocated to the tenths court side of the tree Planning Commission Lands of EESPRD,LLC October 6,2016 Page 2 of 4 o shrubs to be planted near the tennis court were changed from coast silk tassel to coffeeberry o vines were added to screen the tennis court fence The proposed planting along the roadway side of the fence would be located within a public utility easement(PUE). The utility companies serving the property need to consent to any planting within the PUE. It is anticipated that this will not be an issue since the PUE was not specifically requested by a utility provider and there are not currently any utility lines within the easement. PUBLIC COMMENT Staff has not received any written comments on the proposed plans. Several residents spoke at the August 23 meeting and stated a desire for screening of the fencing along the roadways, screening for the tennis court, and preservation of a large oak tree located between the tennis court and the south property line. ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE (CEQA) The proposed landscape screening and fencing is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15304(b). ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval (two pages) 2. August 23, 2016 Draft Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1 Lands of EESPRD,LLC October 6,2016 Page 3 of 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN AND DRIVEWAY MODIFICATION LANDS OF EESPRD, LLC, 13761 BURKE ROAD File# 131-16-ZP-SD PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any further changes or modifications to the approved plan or the required landscaping shall be first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or Planning Commission, depending on the scope of changes, prior to planting or commencement of work. 2. All required plantings shown on the screening plan (sheet L4.2) shall be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. All exposed slopes must be replanted for erosion control to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. 3. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on sheets L 5.0 and L5.1 of the plans. Any additional lighting shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to installation. Lighting shall be the minimum needed for safety and shall be down directed or shielded, low wattage, shall not encroach or reflect on adjacent properties, and the source of the lighting shall not be visible from off the site. 4. A landscape maintenance and water use deposit of$5,000.00 shall be posted prior to final inspection of the new residence. An inspection of the screening plantings to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after installation.Prior to deposit release,the property owner shall also furnish to the Town the second year(months 13-24 following receipt of the Certificate of Completion) of water use and billing data from the subject property's water purveyor. If the site water usage exceeds the calculated PWB, the deposit will be held for an additional 12 months. At the end of the additional 12 month period, the property owner shall provide the Town with the previous 12 months (months 25-36) of water use and billing data from the subject property's water purveyor. If the water usage still exceeds the estimated PWB, the deposit shall be forfeited to the Town, in full. All Town staff time and materials expended to ensure compliance with this condition will be deducted from the deposit. 5. No new fencing is approved. Any new fencing on the property shall comply with the current Fence Ordinance and shall be approved by the Planning Department,prior to installation. Planning Commission Lands of EESPRD,LLC October 6,2016 Page 4 of 4 6. The property owner shall contact the Building Department and acquire any and all required building permits prior to commencement of work on landscape or lighting. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 7. Any revisions or additions to the previously approved grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for review by the Engineering Department. The plan shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department and approved prior to commencement of this project. The approved plan shall be stamped and signed by the project engineer and shall supersede the previously approved drainage plan. 8. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium(October 15 and April 15) except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line. 9. Any and all areas on the project site that have native material disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 10. All irrigation systems must be located at least five feet from the Town's pathways and outside of the public right of way and public utility easements. The Town staff shall inspect the site and any deficiencies shall be corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the date of the action. Building Permits cannot be accepted until the appeal period has lapsed. The applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department on or after October 31, 2016 provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. NOTE: The Site Development Permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until October 6, 2017). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. Please refer to the Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein. If you believe that these Conditions impose any fees, dedications, reservation or other exactions under the California Government Code Section 66000, you are hereby notified that these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and/or a description of the dedications,reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest such fees, dedications,reservations, and other exactions,pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. ATTACHMENT 2 MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Partridge moved to app.>ove the Site Development Permit subject to the recommended conditions of approvaL,in Attachment 1, with the added condition that the landscape screening plan come back to the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner andle. AYES: Coiissioner Basiji, Commissioner Mandle, Commissioner Partridge,FCor. missioner Tankha, Chair Couperus NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 62 LANDS OF EESPRD, LLC; 13638 Old Altos Road, File #136-16-ZP-SD: A request for a Site Development Pennit for a landscape screening and lighting plan for a previously approved new residence. second unit, pool and tennis court. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304(b) (Staff- S. Avila). Ex Parte Disclosures: Commissioner Mandle said that she had spoken with neighbors John and Cathy Lerch. Chair Couperus said that he had spoken with neighbor Chris Vargas. There were no other disclosures. Planning Director Suzanne Avila presented the staff report. Commission asked questions of staff. Commissioner Partridge expressed concern that the proposed trees would not be tall enough to screen the large home, and asked that the landscape screening plan be elaborated. Commission Mandle noted there are existing trees that will remain that are not as pronounced on the plan as the new plantings. Dustin Moore, landscape architect, spoke to Commissioner Partridge's concerns about plant size. Gregory Badros, applicant, spoke to the concerns the Commission had about the lack of screening of the fence from the street, as there is a public utility easement they were trying to avoid, and addressed the preservation of the remaining oaks on the property. Director Avila said they could request permission for the Town's Public Works Department to plant in the easement and screen the fence, but there was no guarantee this request would be approved. 4 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 23,2016 Chair Couperus expressed concern over the closeness of the tennis court to the oak, and Mr. Badros ensured the Commission that this oak was important to him and his neighbors, and they were doing everything in their power to preserve it. Michael Young, Urban Tree Management, spoke to the status of the oak near the tennis court, how they were caring for it, and its relation to the screening plan. Pat Ley, Co-Chair Environmental Design and Protection Committee, said that she had not seen this application prior to this meeting, but agreed that all the proposed plants are native and protecting the trees was important. Chris Vargas, Los Altos Hills, stated his support of the fence screening, and requested that any flood lights not be triggered by a passerby on the path. A resident expressed concern that the trees would lose their leaves in the winter and suggested toyons for near the oak. Cathy Lerch, Los Altos Hills, stated her support of the project, and shared her sentiments and concerns about the oak tree previously discussed, and requested that the tennis court be screened. Ken Li, Los Altos Hills, expressed concern with the bulk of the home, and that he hoped they could find a scenario that would make it more natural looking, and keeping with the feel of Los Altos Hills. Mr. Badros responded to comments made by the public and answered questions further posed by the Commission. Chair Couperus closed the PUBLIC HEARING. Commissioner Mandle complimented the applicant for their selection of plants, but requested they relocate the plantings to the tennis court side of the oak, and requested taller trees along the Old Altos side of the property. The fence should be screened but she will leave the specifics-to-the applicant and City Engineer. She requested the lighting be addressed in the conditions of approval. Commissioner Tankha expressed concern with the Old Altos side of the property, and while there is tall foliage, it is important visually for the screening to be continuous. She said the coffee berry may not be sufficient. Commissioner Partridge acknowledged that while it may not be the best solution for the applicant, the plants that need water should be moved to the same side as the tennis court, as it will have a better outcome in the long term. He expressed concern with the height of the plants, and that the Old Altos side should have tall, evergreen, and dense foliage. 5 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 23,2016 Chair Couperus said that he agreed with his fellow Commissioners, and shared his own experiences with an oak tree dying on his property. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Mandle moved to continue the landscape screening plan with the instructions that the applicant come back with the planting under the oak tree moved to the tennis court, with additional screening vegetation planted near the garage that is evergreen, tall enough to screen windows, and dense enough to screen the building, and that the proposed perimeter fence be screened. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Tankha. AYES: Commissioner Basiji, Commissioner Mandle, Commissioner Partridge, Commissioner Tankha, Chair Couperus NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 6.3 LANDS OF EESPRD, LLC; 13671 Burke Road, File #131-16-ZP-SD; A request • a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening and lighting plan for a pre '•usly approved new residence and second unit. CEQA review: Categorical Exemp '•n per Section 15304(b) (Staff- S. Avila). Ex Parte Dis• osures: Chair Couperus said that he had spoken with neighbor Chris Vargas. ere were no other disclosures. Planning Director Su .nne Avila presented the staff report. Commission asked questions . staff. Commissioner Partridge inquire• about the Town's lighting policy. Director Avila said that additional lighting cou • be approved per the Municipal Code for safety as needed. Gregory Badros, applicant, spoke to his applica 'on and the concerns raised by the Commission. Dustin Moore, Landscape Architect, also spoke to the ..ncerns raised by the Commission. Chair Couperus opened the PUBLIC HEARING. Seeing no one wishing to speak Chair Couperus closed the PUBLIC HEA' . 6 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 23,2016