Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 i 3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS October 19, 2006 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A SWIM]\IING POOL, SPA AND LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN; LANDS OF DUBEY, 26475 ASCENSION DRIVE; 114-06-ZP-SD-GD FROM: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the recommended conditions of approval in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Development Permit to install an 850 sq. ft.. swimming pool and spa, hardscape improvements, and landscape screening. The subject property is located on the west side of Ascension Drive where the construction of a new residence is nearing completion. Surrounding uses include single-family houses on adjacent properties to the north and west, single-family houses across Ascension Drive to the east and water tanks maintained by the Purissima Hills Water District on the adjacent lot to the south. On July 24, 2003, the Planning Commission approved a site development permit for a 5,591 sq. ft. single story residence with a 4,571 sq. ft. basement and a 704 sq, ft. detached garage on the property (SDP# 187-01-ZP-SD-GD). Per condition of approval #2 of the site development permit, the applicant submitted a landscape screening and erosion control plan to the Town on June 21, 2006. CODE REQUIREMENTS Per Section 10-2.301.b of the Site Development Ordinance, this application has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. The Zoning and Site Development sections of the Municipal Code are used to evaluate the proposed pool and spa including development area limitations, grading, drainage, height, setbacks, and visibility. Section 10-2.802 of the Site Development ordinance is also used to evaluate landscape plans to address erosion, noise, visual effects, maintenance, tree preservation, views and amount required to adequately screen the new construction. Staff Report to the PlanningCommission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 2 of 8 DISCUSSION Site Data: Net Lot Area: 1.025 acres Average Slope: 13.1% Lot Unit Factor: .957 Development and Floor Area: Area(sq.ft.) Maximum Existing Proposed Increase Remaining Development Area 13,320 10,283 13,201 2,918 119 Floor Area 5,616 5,591 0 0 25 Trees and Landscaping In 2001, the property owner removed existing vegetation from the property, including several heritage oak trees, without benefit of Town approval. The removal of trees and shrubs on the property exposed the view of two 20' tall water tanks on the adjacent parcel to the neighbors. As a condition of the new residence approval, the Planning Commission required the applicant to immediately revegetate the area to mitigate the negative view impacts that resulted from removal of existing trees and shrubs that occurred prior to project approval. During an inspection of the property in September 2006, staff found that two 24" box prunus caroliana and a 72" box quercus agrifolia that were required to be planted in front of the water tanks were missing or dead. Staff is recommending that three replacement trees, including one (1) oak tree with minimum dimensions of 25'(tall) x 16" (wide) and two (2) 24" box prunus caroliana trees, be planted in the same area prior to final inspection of the new residence. (Condition#3) Replant 1 oak and 2 prunus caroliana y s trees in front of water tank L View from driveway looking south towards water tanks Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 3 of 8 On the other side of the property, a 16' wide public utility, storm drain and sanitary sewer easement runs the entire length of the north property line boundary and no new plantings are allowed within the easement. To mitigate the view of the new residence from the adjacent neighbor to the north (bands of Hahn, 26491 Ascension Drive), the applicant is proposing to install eight (8) 24" box maple and birch trees on the north side of the house and in a planting area by the front entrance. The view of the new residence is substantially screened by an existing oleander hedge along Ascension Drive. To supplement the existing landscaping on the property, the applicant is proposing to install a number of trees and shrubs including a total of twenty- one (21) 24" and 36" box maple, birch, and pear trees that will help further break up the view of the house from off-site. The new trees are required to be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. (Condition#2) �•rr. t ' 9 � +fir... _.. _. ..__'..... ,..., Jam- ...... , Yi . 12 12. Views from Ascension Drive showing oleander hedge along front of the property Grading&Drainage A drainage improvement plan was approved as part of the site development permit for the new residence in 2003. The applicant has made minor modifications to the system to accommodate the new swimming pool and spa. The Engineering Department has reviewed the grading and drainage plans and has recommended conditions of approval as specified in Attachment#1. Committee Review The Environmental Design Committee noted that the original landscape mitigation required for the water towers is inadequate. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 4 of 8 CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 of the State CEQA Guidelines ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Site Map 3. Worksheet#2 4. Planning Commission meeting minutes dated July 24, 2003 and September 11, 2003 5. Comments from Environmental Design Committee dated July 2, 2006 6. Development plans: site, grading&drainage and landscape plans cc: Prabhat and Anita Dubey 835 Mesa Court Palo Alto, CA 94306 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 5 of 8 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A SVMAM[NG POOL, SPA, AND LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN LANDS OF DUBEY; 26475 ASCENSION DRIVE File# 114-06-ZP-SD-GD A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. All landscaping required for screening purposes (as redlined on the approved landscape plan dated 10/19/06) and for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. 3. One (1) coast live oak (Quercus Agrifolia) with minimum dimensions of 25' tall x 16' wide and two (2) 24" box prunus caroliana trees shall be replanted along the south property line in front of the water tanks prior to final inspection. 4. The terraced retaining walls south of the new residence shall be filled and planted per the landscape plan (Sheet L2) prior to final inspection. 5. A landscape maintenance deposit of $10,000.00 shall be posted prior to final inspection of the new residence. An inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after installation. The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable. 6. Existing vegetation along the east (front) property line provide significant screening of the new residence and shall not be removed from the property for a minimum of two years from the date of the final inspection of the new residence. 7. Prior to beginning any grading operation, all significant trees are to be fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and structure (chain-link) to clearly delineate the drip line. Town staff must inspect the fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to commencement of grading. The property owner shall call for said inspection at least three days in advance Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 6 of 8 of the inspection. The fence must remain throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the drip lines of these trees. Existing perimeter plantings shall be fenced and retained throughout the entire construction period. 8. Standard swimming pool conditions: a. Lights shall be designed so that the source is not visible from off-site. b. Drainage outfall structures shall be constructed and located to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c. Equipment shall be enclosed on all four sides with a roof for noise mitigation and screening. 9. For swimming pools, at least one of the following safety features shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Town Building Official. a. The pool shall be isolated from access to the residence by an enclosure (fencing). b. The pool shall be equipped with an approved safety pool cover. c. The residence shall be equipped with exit alarms on those doors providing direct access to the pool. d. All doors providing direct access from the home to the swimming pool shall be equipped with a self-closing, self-latching device with a release mechanism placed no lower than 54 inches above the floor. 10. Air conditioning units shall be located a minimum of 40' from the front property line and 30' from the side and rear property lines. 11. No grading shall occur within 10 feet of the property lines. 12. All new fences shall be constructed of the materials indicated on the approved plans. Any changes to the location, height, or construction of any proposed fences or columns shall first be approved by the Planning Department. 13. The 4'6" high wrought iron front yard fence shall not encroach within the 16' and the 5' easements along the north and south property lines. 14. The 4'6" high wrought iron fence shall be located a minimum of 30' from the centerline of the Ascension Drive right-of-way. 15. The applicant shall be responsible for confirming all property line locations and verifying that the new fence is located within the property lines. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 7 of 8 16. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on the approved site plans. No lighting may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights. Lighting shall be down 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. Any additional outdoor lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 17. 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. 18. 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. 19. If any trees or large shrubs are proposed to be planted within the right of way or public utility easements, a letter shall be required to be submitted which has been stamped and signed by a registered civil engineer verifying that the proposed plantings, when mature, will not conflict with any existing public utilities that are located either underground or overhead and will not negatively impact the available sight distance for traffic on the adjacent roadways or block existing pathways or roadways. The letter shall be required to be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to final project approval and prior to commencement of planting. 20. Any, and all, areas on the project site that have the native material disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 21. 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. 22. The location and elevation of the pool and spa shall be certified in writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being in/at the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Dubey i 26475 Ascension Drive October 19,2006 Page 8 of 8 approved location and elevation shown on the approved Site Development plan prior to final inspection. 23. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways,prior to final inspection and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the date of this notice. The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department after November 10 2006, provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Planning and Engineering Departments two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until October 19, 2007). 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. SITE MAP Lands of Dubey 26475 Ascension Drive 114-06-ZP-S D-G D A , 1, HILLS1.6•�1!8U:NIT N1 V.: ; 41. 4. ft .,f, m ., +.,,�"�... .rte � � ., � � A '7•�•� .,�� �.�� '23: D> LOT 2 Larl r yrs ►.s � , ' � ' ; zr � �s � . k w ,:Ti1r4FFL:5U8; r. "4 y.. •. S h 6 p "` v• lr,� ,g2a 1r1271C y116SAEt �p� �: 1 C-94 A44 - :... 1 9 .1 y 1:,.. Y y� f.�` Project Site 7 :A�r �" cD CK Mme. pSCEN51gq--Q N ATTACHMENTS TOWN 0-F LOS ALTO RM RECEIVED eLANtIN.G DEPARTMM 26399 fr-mont Road.Los Altos Hills,California 940 2•(650)941-9222'FAX(650)941-31605 E P 4 8 2006 WOR E ` T#2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA = TURN IN Wrin YOUR APPLI�ATIQN• Rk4PERTY OWNERS NANS ---—- PR.QPERTY ADDRESS Le � CALCULATED BY ` DATE 9. lE�PN ENT AREA Existing Proposed Total (SQT.TA&E FOOTAGE) t (AddifMmWDewons) A. House and Garage(foram Parc 3.A) �j _ j t ✓ R. Decking -UA N T�i c-SC\5 _ C. Driveway aBd Parkin (Measnrett 100`alongceu%r3ine) -3::S 6-.>5!> D. Patios and Walkways E. Tennis Court , r � F. Pool and Dccking G. Asxessory Btulding°s g� H. Any other coveFage ,6^ t 5. i/ �1 T-OT 7 Maxum Development Area Allowed-MDA(frQrjL Worksheet M) 2. TQ2TAL�ERVIOUS SURFACE ];xisting Prapctsed Total JS AAEFOOTAGE) TOTALS 3. MOR AREA (sQuAn Foo rAeE) Existing PromTotal (Additiaas/UeteNQns) A. House and Chorage a. 1st Floor b. 2nd F1Qor c. Attic and Basement _ d. Garage - F B. Accessary Buildings _ . _..- a. Ist Floor b. 2nd Floor c. - Attic a-d Basement TOTALS S' Maximum Floor Area Allowed-MFA(from WQrksl #�l). � `3',___ ! TOWN USE©M.YHY DATEt p Js" o Rev.3Jl20102 page l of l Town of LOS Altos Hills ATTACHMENT L} Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/14/03 July 24,2003 Page 2 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Vitu and seconded by Commissioner Cottrell to recommend to the City Council approval for renewal of a Conditional Use Permit for operation of an existing wireless (ESMR) telecommunications facility, Lands of Nextel Communications,Inc. (Lands of Fenwick),28011 Elena Road. AYES: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Kerns, Mordo,Vitu&Cottrell NOES: None This item will appear on a future City Council agenda. 3.2 LANDS OF DUBEY, 26475 Ascension Drive (187-01-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a 5,591 square foot new residence (maximum height 26.5 feet)(continued from April 11, 2002). (staff-Debbie Pedro) Staff introduced this item by reviewing the previous continued application dated April 11, 2002, with instructions to address concerns, as discussed, regarding working with the neighbors regarding landscape screening from neighbors and street, drainage, reduce grading, increase setback for landscaping/screening,move house farther away from the water tank, and resolve the drainage issues on the Hahn property. Staff further discussed the changes that were made to the current plans. Staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring that the proposed swale be constructed entirely within the Dubey's property boundaries unless the applicant can obtain approval from Mr. Hahn, the next door neighbor, incorporating their drainage design into the existing swale. Regarding landscape screening, the landscape architect met with the neighbors and made further revisions to the landscape screening plan based on their input. Copies of the new plan had been placed in the Commissioner's boxes. The new screening plan includes three (3) 84" box Coast Live oaks, a row of 24" box Carolina Laurel Cherry trees and shrubs and two (2) 48" box magnolia trees. Once installed, the trees and shrubs should provide immediate and substantial screening from the industrial looking buildings on the Water District property next door. Staff is recommending a condition that the proposed planting is installed within 30 days from the date of the permit approval. Regarding the illegal grading which occurred on the site without Town approval, staff is recommending a penalty fee in accordance with the Municipal Code of$14,850.00. It was noted that the 84" trees at installation would be 25 feet tall and 16" to 22" wide. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Mrs. Dubey, 26475 Ascension Drive, applicant, discussed the changes to the plan from the April 11, 2002 meeting. They have met with many neighbors and felt they have met requests made regarding design, grading and planning ideas. Hopefully they have satisfied the neighbors and can move forward. Commissioner Vitu asked Mrs. Dubey to explain the plan showing the channeling into the drainage swale on the Hahn property and if they have agreed with this proposal. Mrs. Dubey was not sure if they have agreed with the new plan. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/14/03 July 24, 2003 Page 3 Scott Stotler, 300 S. San Antonio Road, Los Altos, project architect, described the design changes which included flip-flopping the house which is a better alternative with less grading and with a more natural driveway coming onto the site and it will provide additional area for landscaping, and eliminating extra grading. He has met with the neighbors to mitigate their concerns. Ashfaq Munshi, 26450 Ascension Drive, felt the Dubeys have done a good job listening to some of their concerns. He still had concerns regarding the safety of his family with the contractor using his properties and driveways to park trucks during the building process. For the record, if they have to continue to call the police in the process of construction,they will take severe action if it becomes necessary. Also, in the past, they have had threats from the contractors during the grading process, in particular, the contractor, George Jordan. A second issue was not being able to meet with Mr. Dubey regarding the project. He understands Mrs. Dubey is available although he has not seen her since the previous public hearing. Commissioner Clow suggested getting the applicants cell phone numbers as previously mentioned at the April 11, 2002 meeting. He also noted he did not know if the story poles were accurately placed on the property. Vincent Zunino, 26555 Ascension Drive, wrote a letter which summarized his concerns. He agreed with Mr. Munshi regarding comments involving George Jordan and other contractors involved with the property. He requested only licensed contractors work on the project. He referred to Mrs. Dubey's letter stating they were hiring a licensed general contractor to manage this project and yet they maintain the right as owners to choose the companies they wish to build their home. He asked that the conditions of approval require a licensed general contractor be in charge of this project. He further noted that there is still a major flooding issue on this property. In the 15 years he has been there, this property has flooded seriously three times. The last flood was in 2001. He further illustrated the area involved. He felt the plan as submitted is a disaster waiting to happen. Regarding screening, he had no issue after meeting with the landscape architect. He described the house down the street which is also in a flood area but built two feet higher on the property so the water would go around the house, not through it. He would certainly not recommend a basement on this property and he would suggest raising the house. William Hahn, 26491 Ascension Drive, has been in the area for 40 years and has seen four floods plus El Nino so he wanted to make the applicants and staff aware of the potential problems with flooding. He noted a previous problem where the workers illegally dropped a PG&E line which set off his alarm system. He does not want any future problems of any kind with this construction. He also noted that he had spoken with the engineers regarding the proposed swale being constructed on his property. He felt if they do the job as discussed with him,there should not be a problem unless they experience a big flood situation. Mr. Munshi stated that the applicant had received a permit to demolish the house however, part of the process is to have the gas turned off. The PG&E employee showed up two weeks later to cut off the gas. He asked that they be extremely careful on this project (history of issues). His primary concern is with the safety of his family. ti Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/14/03 July 24,2003 Page 4 Scott Stotler discussed the use of a qualified civil engineer and working closely with the public works department. They understood the problems with the site and the civil engineers will work to solve any water issues that may come up. The end result with be a positive rather than a negative. Regarding the basement, it is something the applicants are requesting and the basement will have floor drains installed as well as area drains installed on the lot. There will be area drains in the back yard to pick up and disperse water. If nothing else, the basement could capture the water in a flood situation. He felt they have taken care of any flooding issues. He asked that the City Public Works department look into some of the other issues that relate to the cause of the water coming down onto this lot. He will recommend to the applicants that a soils engineer be involved through the borings and grading and all of the processing of the construction of this home to make sure everything is done with the soils engineer's recommendation and in accordance with the Public Works department. They all will do the best they can to make this the safest property possible. Mrs. Dubey referring to previous statements stated that Mr. Munshi has their telephone numbers and Mr. Zunino knows her address. She will be giving them all the numbers they want. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Kerns felt the applicants have done a tremendous job of trying to work with the neighbors, flipping the house, working with drainage, and landscape screening. From an engineering standpoint, he felt the issues with drainage will be dealt with and be better than the current situation. He felt it was up to the applicants if they want a basement or not. He was in support of the project. He noted the previous Planning Commission minutes indicated that the landscape plan would return to the Commission. It was noted that was due to the screening of the water tank which has been addressed. Commissioner Vita also felt they have done much to address drainage which should be better than before. Regarding the contractors,the Town cannot require they use of a general contractor but can require all subcontractors to be licensed. They have done a good job on landscaping and she felt the water tanks would be screened. Commissioner Cottrell agreed noting you reach a point in time where you have to recognize the rights of a property owner. This owner has bent over backwards to meet the requirements of the Planning Commission and the neighbors. There are 33 conditions of approval! He believed the applicants will make an effort to be available to the neighbors. He was in support of the project. Commissioner Mordo concurred. The major problem is the drainage and they are taking the risk. Everyone has warned them and told them of the issues and they still want to move forward with the project. He questioned Mr. Munshi's concern with the contractors using his property asking if there was a condition to address this issue. Staff noted condition#25 addresses this issue. Chairman Clow felt, compared to a couple of years ago, they have all come a long way. He felt this was a good design with adequate screening. The concerns now are regarding process and having the applicants telephone numbers if there are any issues with the contractors. If the Y Planning Commission Minutes Approved 8/14/03 July 24,2003 Page 5 applicant stands behind the project from a flood point of view,he felt it was their business and he can support the project. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Vita and seconded by Commissioner Kerns to approve the request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence, Lands of Dubey,26475 Ascension Drive,with the recommended conditions of approval. AYES: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Vitu, Kerns, Cottrell&Mordo NOES: None This approval is subject to a 23 days appealperiod. 3.3 LANDS OF PINEWOOD SCHOOL, 26800 Fremont Road (85-03-ZP-SD-CUP); A request for a Zoning Amendment to exempt synthetic turf material from development area calculations when used in athletic fields at community recreational facilities and private schools (Section 10-1.502.b.2, Development Area); a Site Development Permit for grading (2,000 cubic yards), drainage improvements, installation of synthetic turf soccer field; and a Conditional Use Permit amendment for Pinewood Private School. (staff-Debbie Pedro) Staff introduced this item by reviewing the staff report as it relates to the conditional use permit. Commissioner Cottrell was concerned with the wording of the exemption where it states "material used in athletic fields at recreational facilities" asking how do they define recreational facilities which was answered by staff(i.e. the little league field). It was suggested adding the word "public recreational facilities" to make it very clear that it is not private sport courts or something similar. Commissioner Mordo asked what was wrong with real grass which was addressed by the Planning Director (looks like real grass without the watering, and low cost annual maintenance, low incident of injuries). Commissioner Kerns did not feel this should be considered for private properties. Commissioner Cottrell felt that perhaps in the future this product could be used for tennis courts and count as 50% allowance for development area. Discussion ensued regarding the look of the product (color). They should stay consistent with a rustic look, natural appearance (green). The Planning Director did not feel they would have many requests for this type of material. Further discussion involved a variance request versus a conditional use permit. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Scott Riches, President of Pinewood School, 26800 Fremont Road, discussed the primary reason for synthetic turf rather than grass was the safety issue of the field. It will reduce water use and maintenance and it is good during the rainy season. Many Parks & Recreation and schools are going this way. If you are 20 feet away, it looks like real grass. He provided a sample of the product and discussed the life span of the product being resurfaced every 10 years. It was suggested to include in the Use Permit that when the product wears out, it is replaced in a timely manner. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/09/03 September 11, 2003 Page 4 MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Vitu and seconded by Commissioner Cottrell to uphold the original Site Development Permit and request the applicant to underground the utility services per the Town's Municipal Code, Section 8-2.02, Lands of Dallas, 26530 Weston Drive AYES: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Kerns, Cottrell,Vitu&Mordo NOES: None Mr. Dallas asked if he is unable to obtain the necessary easement, will the Commission reconsider their decision. Chairman Clow stated this is a subject for the Planning Director. The Commission is saying that the requirement remains in place. The Planning Director stated that the applicant should proceed forward with exploring and investigating their options, working with the City Engineer and the Building Official if there are unanticipated issues. If all else fails, staff will advise the Commission. This approval is subject to a 23 days appeal period. 3.3 LANDS OF DUBEY, 26475 Ascension Drive (187-01-ZP-SD); A request for a modification to an approved condition of approval for Site Development Permit for a new residence approved July 24, 2003, substituting three (3) 84" box oak trees with three (3) 72" box oak trees. (staff-Debbie Pedro) Staff introduced this item by reviewing the staff report regarding the planting of 72" box oak trees rather than the requested 84" box oak trees, several of the Prunus Caroliniana trees planted within the public utility easement, and portions of the slope along the south property line were graded with up to 2 feet of cut. Staff supports the permit modification with the modifications to the conditions of approval. She also noted the receipt of a letter from Vincent Zunino at 26555 Ascension Drive,noting five issues of concern. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Anita Dubey, 26475 Ascension Drive, applicant, stated they have completed all of the prior conditions of approval as approved at the July 24, 2003 meeting. She explained the change to the size of trees and felt they accomplished the needed screening. They could not obtain the requested 84" box oak trees in a timely manner. She does not have an issue regarding moving the trees from the public utility easement. She has also changed their landscape contractor, as instructed. Vincent Zunino, 26555 Ascension Drive, noted that he had submitted all of his comments in writing. He did clarify that the three additional shrubs were planted in the PUE. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/09/03 September 11, 2003 Page 5 Commissioner Cottrell stated that, after hearing from the applicant that she intends to meet all of the requirements,he did not feel there was an issue. He did not feel they could dictate what kind of landscape contractor people could use and he did not feel there was a significant difference between a 72" and a 84"box oak tree. He supports the project and hoped that everyone would be better neighbors. Commissioner Vita agreed with the previous comments noting the trees do need to be moved out of the PUE. Commissioner Kerns also agreed and felt the neighbors need to work together finding ways to solve problems, not create them. He does have a problem with adding conditions that talk about specific irrigation and maintenance plans as it sets a bad precedent. Also, he felt that condition #15 was not necessary. Commissioner Mordo only disagreed with the process. Mr. Zunino did a good job bringing to their attention things that were not right. He felt if an applicant agrees to conditions, they should follow through with completion. Chairman Clow agreed with Commissioner Cottrell's comments. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Vita and seconded by Commissioner Cottrell to approve the requested permit modification to substitute three (3) 84" box oak trees with three (3) 72"box oak trees subject to the revised recommended conditions of approval, Lands of Dubey, 26475 Ascension Drive. I AYES: Chairman Clow, Commissioners Mordo, Cottrell,Kerns &Vitu NOES: None This approval is subject to a 23 days appeal period. 4. OLD BUSINESS 4.1 Report from subcommittees-none 5. NEW BUSINESS 5.1 Review of the Development Area Policy on Tennis/Sports Courts, Driveway, and Pervious Surfaces (staff-Debbie Pedro) Staff introduced this item by reviewing the staff report and requesting feedback from the Commission regarding noted issues. If the Commission fmds that an amendment to the policy is necessary, staff should be directed to prepare a revised Development Area Policy and schedule the item for a public hearing. Chairman Clow asked if a tennis court that had a natural grass surface would count as development area? The Planning Director responded yes, according to the current policy. Even with a lawn tennis court, the surface has to be very flat and drain quickly. Usually, a tennis court has a gravel base. Commissioner_Mordo felt there were two different issues: permeability; and aesthetics. He asked if they wanted to limit the unnatural (plastic)material. The Planning Director stated when you look at a plastic lawn,there is a foot of gravel underneath. Gravel counts as 50%. Discussion ensued regarding what counts as development area and how much. OPENED PUBLIC SESSION -71 Er- PL�D LI ATTACHMENT 5 Landscape/Hardscape Evaluation Environmental Design and Protection Committee Date: AKlI icants name and address: Reviewed by: .01 Mitigation: Af - ` r Creeks,drainage, easements: Planting Plan: n i Si cant issues/comments: