Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/31/1979 (2)PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL JOINT MEEIING Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California MINUTES OF AN AD.70UPTiED MEETING Wednesday, January 31, 1979 Reel 76, Side 1, Tr. 2, 031 to 536 Mayor Lucile Hillestad called the joint meeting the the City Council and Planning Commission to order at 7:43 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Town Hall. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmen McReynolds, Nystrom, Perkins, Proft, Mayor Hillestad Planning Co ssioners Lachenbruch, Rydell, Dochnahl, Chairman Stewart Also Present: City Manager Imbert Crowe, City Engineer/Planner John A. Carlson, Secretary Ethel Hopkins STEERING COMMITTEE REPORT - DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF ACTION ITEMS: 4W Mayor Hillestad asked for an update from Council and Planning Canmission members regarding the status of the November 16, 1978 list of "Reconrended Action Items" assigned to various members by the City Council for follow-up. Mayor Hillestad reported on her meeting with the Environmental Design Committee, and their decisions regarding Item 1.A. "Brochure" on the November 16 list. It was their decision to publish on a one-time basis to take the place of one publication of the newsletter, two brochures, one on the orientation to the co munity, i.e., philosophy, goals, information on paths and fences, etc., in the Town; the other brochure on the characteristics of the Town, population, land mass, open space, roads, and rules or regulations pertaining to these matters. On Item I.B "Newsletter", the Mayor reported that the deadline for the March 1st newsletter is February 20th. Another newsletter would be mailed out by June 1st. Any information desired to be included in the newsletter for March 1st should be sent to Susan Buttler, Deputy City Clerk or Mayor Hillestad by February 20th. On Item I.0 "Orientation for Staff", the Mayor reported that nothing had been assigned. She moved on to Item IIIA "Staff Functioning and Operation" and noted that she had met with the City Manager and a flaw chart had been made up. The effort was being made to establish a record and method on all procedures carried out by the Town. Item D. "Seminars and Study Sessions" - The Mayor reported that a good seminar had been held, but that no further priorities had been established. Item E. - "Provide Updated Planning Tools" - The Mayor reported that staff was in `, the process of obtaining prices on updating the 400' map referred to. More informa- tion was needed on the handbook, and this information, plus a flaw -chart and procedures would be sent to Planning Commissioners when it is available. She advised Commissioners or others to submit any information they wanted included. JOINT MEETING OF THE PIANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL January 31, 1979 4 Page two ire DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF ACTION ITEMS: (continued) Items suggested for inclusion in the booklet were the reasons for denial of the tentative and final maps, six conditions for granting a variance, conditions for conditional uses, and tennis court lighting policy. Mayor Hillestad stated that Item F. "Critically evaluate current, recent and mature developmwnts in the Town" had not been acted on as yet. Some discussion followed on how to evaluate recent and past subdivisions and roads created. The suggestion was made that CounciLaeambers and Commissioners list key subdivisions that need to be studied, and submit their suggestions and requests for slides, etc. on improvements, roads, etc. to City Manager Crowe. Staff would than take slides of suggested areas and possibly a field trip would be arranged to view problem areas or good developments, whatever the case may be. A deadline was set as the first meeting in March for representative slides to be available, and it was decided that only the more recent subdivisions would be studied. Thereafter, it was decided that another joint meeting would be held on February 28 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. As this would be a date for a regular meeting of the Planning Commission also, no Variance and Permit Commission meeting would be scheduled. Further discussion on representative subdivisions to be studied would be discussed. Councilman McReynolds reported that nothing had been done on Item III.B. "Coamittee Review". On Item C. "Professional Support and Planning Consultants", he reported that it was the consensus that the Planning Commission should have some professional help, and discussed various ways of dealing with this matter, whether the planning help should be on an hourly or a contract basis. A general discussion followed on ways that planning help should or could be implemented along with what was being done right now by a professional planning firm. The consensus was that some help was needed by the Tuan, but it was not certain as to haw much help the Tuan could afford. The matter of legal support for the Planning Commission (under Item C) was discussed, with the need for legal support on the matter of dealing with marginal lots or lots that have been approved before the Tom was incorporated. Coamissioner Lachenbruch emphasized the need for support, possibly paid for on an hourly basis, to help deal with special problems. Co miissioner Stewart noted that the City Attorney was avail- able to talk with directly on particular problems. Councilman Nystrom noted that Staff was available to deal with engineering and planning support for the Pathway Committee, and that instead of putting problems to be dealt with in the Minutes of the Committee's meetings, they should be written out in a specific request for the Staff to deal with. On this same matter, Comtission- er Dochnahl recommended that all committees be provided with a job description of their work and priorities to be provided to them by the City Council. Jean Struthers, Pathway Camdttee, noted that the Staff had been giving a lot of help to the Pathway Committee, and that the only job description provided their Committee Lwas an ordinance stating that the Tann shall have paths. Discussion continued on Item C., specifically "LTprove use of Toon Geologist" and "Obtain services of soils engineer to support Town" with Councilman Nystrom suggesting JOINT MEETING OF THE PIANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL January 31, 1979 4w Page three DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF ACTION ITEMS: (continued) that these matters should be handled by Staff. Commissioner Lachenbruch noted that the firm of William Cotton and Associates included at least three professionals, at least two of wham are expert soils engineers and that this is a broad spectrum of professional help that is available to the Town. It was emphasized by Councilmen Perkins and McReynolds that the review of soils and geology reports should include a visit to the site to see what actually exists in the ground. The soils and geology review should not be a cursory review of documents. Mayor Hillestad asked that all letters of transmittal for material be reviewed and available for Council, and that in the near future Mr. Cotton be invited to a Council meeting to discuss his role as Town Geologist. Councilman Perkins reported on Item IIID "Subdivision and Site Development Committee". He noted he was not prepared to report yet on the Subdivision Committee and moved on to the Site Development Ccnmittee report. A report was given on discussion with City Engineer/Planner and research on the ways site development is handled in other towns. Areas pointed to as crucial for appropriate site development review were ordinance compliance and the meeting of certain aesthetics. Ways of meeting Site Development Committee responsibilities were discussed. These were: 1) a review of the list of conditions for the applicable subdivision and a review of the subdivision map, 2) an evaluation of the site development plan to determine if the plan was in accord with purposes set forth in the General Plan. Certain problem areas needed clarification: one of than was that the ordinances needed to be clarified. In this regard, it was noted that one of the areas that needed to be clarified was the matter of foundation type for slope areas exceeding 14%. While the foundation type was delineated in Ordinance 232, it was not set out in the Site Development ordinances, and this resulted in problem situations such as the Saul site development plan. One last way of an adequate site developnent review was that all nxmbers assigned to the Site Development Committee be present for the meeting. On Items:E and F "Review Fee Schedules" and "Other", it was noted that some informa- tion is being compiled, and that the date for consideration of these matters can be set at the February 28th meeting. Chairman Stewart of the Planning Commission reported On Items ii and iv, noting that because of the press of work and unavailability of some Planning Commissioners, little more than committee assignments had been accomplished. Work would begin as soon as Commissioners were aval}lab�l1 �p�". LnHe caid�� hnowgver, report that a limitation of 1,000 square feet had been seta 6y"fie Carmrssron�s until a more thorough con- sideration of this matter could be Worked out. One more matter was mentioned, the question of whether a study should be made for ordinance revision to allow joint tennis courts in subdivision such as Lands of Berger, with large houses taking up a great deal of the land area. Mr. Crowe, however, noted that such joint efforts were contrary to present ordinances and that this matter had been discussed in the Last in the Tam with the result that Town ordinances had been upheld. (k4w . 'mat ee ADJOUROUNT: There being no further business to discuss, the joint meeting was adjourned by Mayor Hillestad at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully sutrmitted, Ethel Hopkins planning Secretary