Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/1976G:I iJG C�/iPl cS_pr.l '"%W• TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HI L'_S 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, January 8, 1976 cc; Reel 43, Side 1, Track 1; Side 2, Tract 2 - 1 to 243. Chairman Carico called the Special Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:15 p.m, in the Council Chambers of Town Hall. Chairman Carico Introduced the new secretary, Donna Pennington, to the Commission members. A. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Keith Brawn, William A. Perkins, David Proft, and Kenneth Young. Chairman Judith Carico. Absent: Commissioners Lucy Hi Ilestad and Theodora K. Schick. Staff: City Engineer Alexander D. Russell, Town Planner Kenneth R. Pastrof, and Secretary Donna Pennington. B. CONSENT CALENDAR 40 1. Approval of fIlnutes, December 10, 1975. It was moved, and seconded that the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 10, 1975, be approved as submitted. The motion carried unanimously. C. CURRENT BUSINESS 1. LANDS OF STEGNER, South Fork Lane, Sandis and Associates, File BSA 6060-75. Chairman Carico announced that this Special Meeting had been called to hear the Building Site Approval Request of the LANDS OF STEGNER, BSA 6060-75. With Chairman Carico's permission, Commissioner Young read the memo- randum attached hereto and asked that it be entered into the record of this meeting. Chairman Carico stated that Commissioners Schick and Hillestad requested that the letters which are enclosed be read Into the record. These letters explained their absence. Chairman Carico asked the secretary to be sure to put the starting time on agendas for the Planning Commissl on and for the variance and Permit Commission. Chairman Carico related why this special meeting was called. The Variance and Permit Coamissiod this apthe,lication to the, full Planning Commission for review. At the Council meeting of December 17, 1975, n voted to sen Mrs. Bonnie Davis appealed to the Council. The Council requested that the Planning Commission hold a Special Meeting to handle this application. Chairman Carico set the meeting date for the first possible time which would not conflict with other Town business. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1976 LANDS OF STEGNER - Continued Chairman Carico noted that prior to the Council asking that the Conn mission hold a Special Meetlno,the Commission, at its meeting of December 10, asked the Town Planner and the City Engineer to meet with the property owners In the Three Forks area to study the future development of that area. Staff was to have come back to the Com- mission on January 28 with Its report. The Staff agended a meeting of the property owners for Monday, January 5, 1976. Mr. Don Bahl was the only property owner able to attend. No additional data was sent out to the Planning Commissioners due to this lack of participation. Chairman Carlco noted that Commissioner Young listed on Page 2 of his memorandum negative factors. She stated that Items 4 and 5 on this list were no longer considered problems. She added that Staff had a letter from the Santa Clara Valley Water District stating that after re-evaluation, the District discovered that it had inadvertently Included a Matadero Creek tributary In the watershed area, and there- fore made demands for erosion and flood control. The Water District withdrew those demands by letter of October 20, 1975. Chairman Carico stated that information had been given to the Variance and Permit Commission at Its last meeting. Also, at that meeting, Mr. Stegner had told the Commission that he had a recorded maintenance agreement with Mr. Kuranoff for the road. Mr. Pastrof advised that Staff did have some additional verbal Infor- mation to present regarding the meeting with Mr. Bahl January 5. 16 Mr. Bahl told Mr. Pastrof that when he was granted a subdivision, he would grant a forty foot parallel easement along the existing twenty foot easement, and would grant a right of way easement in a certain triangle of land so that the approach to Three Forks Lane could be widened. Mr. Pastrof informed the Commission that when LANDS OF BAHR ultimately develops, Mr. Bahr will dedicate to the Town Three Forks Lane to where North, South, and Middle Fork begins. At such time there would be five, possibly six, lots served by South Forks Lane. Commissioner Perkins commented that if this plan were crystallized, this particular property would not be a major issue. Mr. Pastrof advised that he had been in contact with Chief Farwell, who stated that if the road were to remain private, that this property's driveway's entraeee should be flared into the Stegner lot so as to afford another pass -by for vehicles. Commissioner Brown inquired about erosion in that area. Mr. Pastrof replied that when the piece of property, currenly liknownof asthe dedication, LANDS OF BAHR develops, a drainage device, eu could be Installed which would run as far as the road and be channeled down. That would greatly alleviate the water drainage problem now being experienced by the LANDS OF STEGNER lot. - 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 19Y LANDS OF STEGNER - Cc: tire.,_.. Commissioner Perkins stated that fortunat=ly, there Is a creek on the subject property that Is seven feet below grade so there is a place for the eater to be taken off. He expressed the opinlon that the drainage problem could be handled. Mr. Pastrof explained that the road dedication requirement was placed on the property because it was not known how extensively that area was going to be developed. If that condition is removed, the road would end at the Kuranoff property and would never be anything but a private road. Mr. Russell advised that the Flood Hazard Map does not encompass this property --it comes to about the White property. Chairman Carico opened the meeting up to the public and recognized Mrs. Bonnie Davis, Kenneth Davis, Michael Kuranoff, a neighbor, and John Humber, engineer. All spoke In favor of granting this application. The Chairman closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Com- mission. Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that the Planning Commission review the Conditions listed In the Staff Report of November 11, 1975. The motion passed unanimously. After Mr. Pastrof read aloud the Conditions, the following actions were taken: CONDITION 4 Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Commissioner Young, that the wording of Condlti on 4 pertaining to the sealing of the well, be appropriately modified by Staff so that the well could be used for -wsly. agricultural purposes, If at all possible. The motion passed unan,0' CONDITION 8 Commissioner Perkins asked If the Purissima Hills County Water District had offered an explanation for their demand for "Dedication of twenty foot (201) public utility easement adjacent to all property lines which encompass the subject property." Mr. Pastrof read the letter from the Water District aloud. It did not give an explanation for the request. Commissioner Perkins stated if It had to be Included as a "Condition," all right, but he, personally, couldn't see Giving a blank check like this without having more than one sentence from the Water District saying "we need to have easements all around the perimeter," --that is no definition of what they need. Commissioner Brown asked Staff If it would be possible for the Planning Commission, assuming that It recommended approval of the LANDS OF STEGNER, to delete Condition'B as far as Plannlnq Commission approval was con - 04W cerned, but recommend to the City CounclI that the City Attorney advise Council as to whether or not the Town is required to pass on a con- dition of this nature. He was inclined to agree with Commissioner Perkins that this was a Water District problem and why put the Town in the middle of It. - 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1976 LANDS OF STEGNER - Continued �✓ Commissioner Carico asked if Commissioners Brown and Perkins would be In agreement to leave the condition as It stood, but add as a recomn- mendation to the Council that Condition 8 of the Staff Report be deleted if the City Attorney rules that it is not necessary. Com- missioner Brown responded that he just wanted to comMmuni cafe to the Council the Commissi on's unhappiness with the Water District's request, and have the City Attorney review It and advise whether it is necessary for the Commissi of to Include it in the list of conditions. CONDITION 12 Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Commissioner Young, that Condition 12, pertaining to dedication of a thirty foot easement, be deleted. The motion was unanimously carried. Chal rman Carico suggested that no further development of the South Forks area be permitted. Mr. Russell asked that the record show that Condition 12 was denied by the Planning Commission as a whole, and that he did not agree. MIDITION 13 This condition called for dedication of a ten foot path easement along ` the northerly property line adjacent to the dirt road, and along the ` adjoining easterly property line adjacent to the dirt road, and along the adjoining easterly property line adjacent to the present "LANDS OF WHITE." Chairman Carico stated that she thought the path coming as close as It does to the White property was an intruslon on their privacy and it could cause more erosion problems Into the creek. To Commissioner Brown it seemed rather hazardous to set up a pathway along that creek line where children and horses could be expected to go. Came lssloier Young stated that the Pathway Committee was hoping to get a path from Page Mill up to Natoma. It is possible that they will have a second shot at this when the Bahl property comes up again. Commissioner Proft moved, seconded by Commissioner Perkins, that Condition 13 pertaining to the dedication of a ten foot path easement be deleted from the Conditions List. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Perkins asked that the record reflect that the Commission was not opposed to paths, it just didn't understand the logic of this one. CONDITION 15c This condition elicited considerable discussl on as this was for road In lieu fees and the Commission had deleted the road dedication condition. Normally dedicati on and In lieu fees went together. No one could recall an Instance where in lieu fees had been charged for a private road. Staff advised that there was no requirement to spend the money on the road in front of the property from which the fees were obtained. - 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1976 LANDS OF STEGNER - Continued CONDITION 15c - Continued Commissioner Young commented that he hoped that Three Forks Lane would be widened to Town standards in the not too distant future. He felt that if the Town doesn't collect the In lieu fees now, that there would be an undue burden placed on those people on that part of Three Forks Lane which will be widened. He suggested that there should be some kind of fee appropriate to developing the entry way. The question of how to formulate the amount of the fee was thoroughly discussed. Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that In place of Condition 15c the following be inserted: The Planning Commissioner recommends to the City Council that an appropriate in lieu fee be prescribed to provide reasonable contribution to the ultimate development of the common entry zone of Three Forks Lane, the area defined as being from Page Mill Road to the intersection of Three Forks Lane, subsequent to dedication to the Town of this portion of the road. The motion was subsequently withdrawn since the issue, at the time, could not be defined. - 5 - Commissioner Young moved that Condition 15c stand as written. It was decided no motion in that instance would be necessary. t Commissioner Proft moved that Item 15c be deleted from the list of conditions. The motion died for lack of a second. Chairman Carlco wondered, Inasmuch as Mr. Bahr owns the road at the present time, if the City Attorney shouldn't be consulted on this. Commissioner Perkins asked tnat the recoru reflect That condition Inc pertains to a road development that the Planning Commission denied. The Planning Commission, he reiterated, does not intend that the road be developed by widening or extension. Therefore, another arrangement should be made for an equitable In lieu fee, and it particularly should be pointed towards the ultimate, necessary development of the Three Forks Lane -Page Mill Road mail box area. Chairman Carlco stated she would hate to pass on a recommendation such "Commission as Condition 15c to the Council, and then say the doesn't like It." Commissioner Proft moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that Item 15c be removed as a condition to Building Site Approval for the LANDS OF STEGNER, because not In recent memory could it be recalled that in lieu fees were charged for a parcel on a private road where there has been of the road. The motion failed on the following roll call no dedication vote: AYES: Commissioners Proft and Brown NAYS: Commissioners Perkins, and Young; Chairman Carlco. ABSENT: Commissloners Hillestad and Schick. - 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MI'MUTES - „anuar, 9, 1976 LANDS OF STEGrER - Coni, rued CONDITION 15c (Continued) Chairman Cartco stated that it was within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission to ask for in lieu fees, even on a private road. Commissioner Proft agreed that it might be within the Commission's prerogative, but there was no criteria set up to handle It. Commissioner Young moved, seconded by Commissioner Perkins, that Condition 15c read: Road in Lieu Fees, per Section 9-4.603k of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. The fees shall be estimated by Staff based upon a fair share of the cost to bring up to Town standards that portion of Three Forks Road, twenty feet (201) wide, now existing between Page NIM Road and the junction with the three driveways, also known as Middle, South, and North Fork Lanes.The motion failed on the Roll Call vote: AYES: Commissioner Young, Chairman Cartco. NAYS: Commissioners Brown, Perkins and Proft. ABSENT: Commissioners Hlllestad and Schick. Motion was made, seconded, and unanimously carried that the meeting be continued until after 11:00 p.m., with a time limit of 11:30 p.m. Commissioner Proft moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that Condition 15c pertaining to road In lieu fees be deleted from the list of conditions. The motion passed by the follow Ing vote: AYES: Commissioners Brown, Perkins, and Proft. NAYS: Chairman Cartco, and Commissioner Young ABSENT: Commissioners Illlestad and Schick. CONDITION 16 Commissioner Young moved, seconded by Chairman Cartco, that Item 16, pertaining to recordation of easements, be deleted from the list of Conditions. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Commissioner Brawn, that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that It approve the Building Site Request of the LANDS OF STEGNER, BSA 6060-75, with the Conditions that were approved or amended by the Commission on January 8, 1976, and the Commission further recommends the approval of the exemption to the two Municipal Code Sections 9-4.601(c) and (1), and the California Environmental Quality Act. The motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Brawn, Perkins, and Proft; and Chairman Carico NAYS: Commissioner Young. ASSENT: Commissloners Hi l jested and Schick. - 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January n, 1976 LANDS OF STEGNER - Continued D. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Perkins asked that the meetings not be scheduled to start before 7:30 p.m. Chairman Carico advised that due to a heavy schedule for the Variance and Permit Commission and for the Planning Commission there were times when meetings had to be aqended at an earlier or later time, however, the Chairman tried to adhere to the 7:30 p.m. schedule. E. ADJOURNMENT At 11:30 p.m. it was moved and seconded that the meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanl mously. Respectfully submitted, Donna Pennington Secretary dip Attachment: Memorandum dated December 31, 1975 from Commissioner Kenneth Young. L Enclosures: Letter dated January 6, 1976 from Commissioner Lucy Hlllestad. Letter, undated, from Commissioner T. Schick. - 7 - Enclosures to the Minutes of the Special Planning Commission Meeting of January 8, 1976. Lucv Hillestad 12847 Normandy Lane Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 January 6, 1976 I would like to have read Into the record that my absence is due to a brr!nass commitment In Hawaii. At the November 17th meeting of the Variance and Permit Commission, the Stegner property came before the Commission for the fourth time for Building Site Approval with two variances. The Commission raised questions concerning the drainage, emergency access road, a possible conservation easement and the Santa Clara Valley Water District's interest in the property as It pertained to flood control. Also, the Fire District's position, a utility easement that had not been Identified, and we wondered if any other public or private easements existed that were not recorded, and then the rationale for the pathway easement that did not lead anywhere but just dropped off Into the creek. Because of so many unanswered questions, It was continued to the December 10th meeting - giving staff time to look Into all the above questions. At the December 10th meeting of the Variance and Permit Commission, staff had not developed any new light on the questions. It was unanimously carried by roll call vote to refer the BSA to the full Planning Commission. The staff has the responsibility to Inform and report to the Planning Commission about the purposes and how specific problems In this area are going to be resolved. Without this Input and any new material, the task is as difficult as when first presented. Lucy Hillestad /s/ Chairman Carico: 1 am not attending the special Jan. 8 Commission meeting as per my Dec. 30 conversation with Mr. Crowe. At that time I expressed my feeling. The material we received was Identical to the Information the Variance Commission members had, and therefore, it did not shed any new light on the Stegner/Davis BSA. There were Important questions raised at both meetings that are not answered with the material at hand. I stated it was not fair to the Commission or the applicant to "retrace" the same material. 1 requested that answers be available prior to this meeting. I cannot In all conscience vote on a property that Staff hasn't obtained Important answers on. Commissioner T. Schick /s/ 44/` MEIIOPANDUM December 31, 1975 '1-0: P: ANNING COMMISSION FROi9: Kenneth Young, Member. �. SUBJECT: Building Site Approval 6060-75 LARDS OF STEGNER The above request was referred to the full Planning Commission because of the precedent setting nature of the application should it be approved. The building site itself is not exceptional: there may be some concern regarding the creek which flows across the site close to the only logical place for a dwelling to be constructed. The topography near the creek is of a bank with very steep , almost vertical sides down to the creek bed almost 7 feet below the level of the remainder of the site. The creek is almost choked with natural growth . The building site is accessible ONLY from Page Mill Road over a narrow strip of land owned by one of the property owners adjacent to it. This strip of land is designated as a Right -of -Way on the Assessor's Maps and is. known as Three Forks Lane, formerly Three Forks Road. Seven dwellings are served at this time by Three Forks Lana and an eighth parcel (Lands of Cottrell) received building site approval on November 5, 1975. The total length of Three Forks Lane and South Fork Drive is approximately 2,100 feet. There is no recorded agreement between the owners of properties served by Three Forks LarQ and South Fork Drive for the maintenance or repair of the road surface. Three Forks Lane , 20 feet wide , runs parallel and contiguous to, Page Mill Road for a distance of approximately forty feet, thence Three Forks Lane runs southwards for approximately 313.50 feet , thence at a right angle easterly for approximately 289.56 feet at which point three driveways meet which serve the various dwellings in the vicinity. Three Forks Lane crosses Matadero C -eek close to the junction with the three driveways. In addition it crosses two other water courses between the junction with the three driveways and Page Mill Road. Tho point where Three Forks Lane crosses Matadero Creek and 150 feet on each side thereof is designated as a Special Flood Hazard Area by NUB and The Tomo of Los Altos Hills. 4W South Fork Lane for a distance of 300 'feet frau it's intersection with Thrrae Fork Lane is also within the Flood Hazard Area. Correspondence to the Planning Commission during the bearings on tha proposed sub-divison 2. of the Bahl property (adjacent to the Stegner property) indicated a strong concern among , residents of the area regarding water run-off in the vicinity of Matadero Creek. In his � letter dated October 31, 1974 fir. Michael Kuranoff , South Fork Lane, writes , "Culverts under Three Forks run full during storms right now." and another writer refers to "torrential rains," in the Page Mill section of Los Altos Hills. Three Forks Lane , according to city staff , is paved to a width of approximately 12 feet between Page Hill Road and the junction with the three driveways mentioned previously. Historically objections to developments along private streets or driveways have been based upon concern for the safety, not only of the residents on the private street or driveway, but for the personnel of emergency vehicles summoned to give assistance in the event of accident, illness or fire etc. Construction, maintenance and repair of private streets or driveways has not always been of a standard adequate at all times to permit the safe passage of heavy equipment or even of speedy rescue vehicles. Even recorded maintenance agreements may be difficult to implement because of differences of G opinion among the parties involved. l The granting of building site approval in the case of the Lands of Cottrell may have seriously jeopardized, because of the precedent established, the entire question of development in the Town. Granting approval of a building site for the Lands of Stegner will undoubtedly render worthless any legislation currently being prepared. for control of development on'private toads.. - To, summarize briefly the negative factors for Three Forks Lane are: 1. Inadequate, -ever dar.gerous,conoection with nearest public street 2. Right-of-way width of only 20 feet 3. A right angle turn with .impaired visibility & no turn -out in first 300' (from Page Mill) 4. A designated flood hazard area 5. No repair or maintenance agreement ' 6. Insufficient paved width for two vehicles to pass. 7. Potential of more than 20 new dwellings served by this Lane 3. The principle risks affecting the residents served by Thre: Forks Lane are created in the first 6//00 feet from Page Mill Road. In an emergency, such as a dwelling fire, the blocking of Three Forks Lane,as can be readily imagined,could result in tragedy. Such a blockage could result from any nu„fiber of possible situations throughout the ys,ar but the chances mould be. enormously enhanced in winter by floodloq, The present risk factor on Three Forks Lane as represented by 7 dwellings may be acceptable to the governing body of the Town but each increase above that number,without amelioration of the defects of Three Forks Lane,may result in an unacceptable risk factor and the probability of tragedy and numerous law suits against the Town. It is my opinion that no more building permits should be granted for sites served by Three Forks Lane until such time as a road with width and surface and right-of-way meeting Town standards is constructed between Page Mill Road and the junction of the three driveways (North, Middle and South Fork Lanes). Such a road must connect with Page GrMill Road in a safe manner and cross all water courses and low lying areas at an elevation above the highest flood stage. In addition to the above the Commission should consider the probability that Three Forks Lane whilst designated.as a private street for a distance of about 60o feet from Page Mill Road could possibly be a private driveway since the fee ownership is the property of one party/ i.e. Mr. Bahr et al. Notwithstanding this , the driveways formerly known as North, Middle and South Fork Lanes 'are in fact driveways within the jurisdiction of Municiple Cade Sect. 9-3.501 and 9-3.502, o=m'� 0 1 Hexer � •�.. b' 'YI H61+ r"Yf G'eil '. F� �Y 'ep .{: v 13N'JY 4000 Dtl FlIY I � SJ 2611 i & • a obt ['vd r z'loe r'ron __ _ ___ _ ____ r^ O � arumrny uxWmly no[ ax �� £ e v voscdssv a.xnao .o 41 r u 4 Sir rnv aT t ra \ ' I 3" .ill \� et -m I «n �•\_ ...0 nu.a n.o v... 41 L 1 ��ftPOR.4 c f .'N' rnr l� rY 1, 02 .:.a:ivn��.��. .r��-� Ali 3ei.��:�.::....tY `.•Y� 1 . -10 MAY 21 97 '1 c