HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/1979PLANNING COMMISSION
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California
Wednesday, May 9, 1979
Reel 78, Side 1, Tr. 1, 845 to End; Side 2, Tr. 2, 001 to 529
Chairman Stewart called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order in the
Council Chambers of the Town Hall at 7:45 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Lachenbruch, vanTamelen, Dochnahl, Kuranoff, and Stewart
Absent: Commissioners Carico and Rydell (both excused absences)
Also Present: City Manager Robert Crowe, City Engineer/Planner John Carlson,
Secretary Ethel Hopkins
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The Minutes of the April 25 Planning Commission were corrected as follows: On page
three, on Condition 4.D: Place a period after "standards" and delete "prior to the
filing of the final map. On page five, under the motion on the Lands of Oliver,
40 add the following vote tally: AYES: Commissioners Dochnahl, vanTamelen, Kuranoff,
Stewart NOES: Commissioner Rydell ABSTAIN: None. On page seven, item five, third
line, delete "has" and add 'he' instead to make the end of the sentence read "...where
he had recently moved."
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRED: It was moved by Chairman Stewart and seconded by Commission-
er vanTamelen to approve the Minutes of April 25 as amended. All Commissioners present
voted for the approval of the Minutes except Commissioner Lachenbruch who abstained.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. OFFICIAL PLAN LINE FOR THREE FORKS AND SOUTH FORK LANE, Request for Recommendation
of Approval of Negative Declaration and Official Plan Line: (Continued from April 11)
Mr. Carlson reviewed the latest events on the above request, referring Commissioners
to his May 4 memo and items of information requested as a result of the neighborhood
meeting on May 1. He asked Commissioners to list any further items needing clarification
so that all the information on the development of the Three Forks area might be presented
at the same time.
Commissioner vanTamelen suggested that rather than develop an "Official Plan Line"
for the area, a better way would be to develop a Circulation Study for a Sub -area
as was done for the Chaparral Way area. The difference between the two approaches
to the areas being developed was discussed, and the consensus was that Commissioner
vanTamelen's suggestion to develop a Circulation Study for the area of Three Forks
Lane was the preferred method for outlining and delineating the area's development.
V Chairman Stewart read into the record a letter from Wallace Stegner of 13456 South
Fork Lane, and Commissioner Kuranoff responded to the request made by Mr. Stegner
for Three Forks traffic to go out via the Via Feliz exit to Page Mill Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 9, 1979
Page two
kW PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
1. OFFICIAL PLAN LINE FOR THREE FORKS AND SOUTH FORK LANE: (continued)
Commissioner Kuranoff noted that Mr. Stegner's intent was to express a preference
in the light of impending development. Should development not occur, Mr. Stegner
would prefer that Three Forks Lane remain as it is at present, an opinion stated in
discussion with Mr. Kuranoff and echoed, Mr. Kuranoff reiterated, at the neighborhood
meeting of May 1.
Commissioner Lachenbruch asked that while staff is preparing information requested
in the May 4 memo, that staff address those areas which should be preserved in con-
servation easements in the Three Forks area and that the reasons for holding
these easement areas in conservation be stated. He suggested that the Chaparral Way
study method of identifying all possible development in the area, possible phases
for this development, and access and traffic yield as it related to lot development
be used in the Three Forks area study, and other Commissioners concurred in this. The
hearing was opened to the public discussion.
Robert Bahr, 13464 Three Forks Road, noted that Carl Cottrell could not attend the
May 7 meeting because of getting an agenda date too late.
The public hearing was closed, and discussion returned to the Commission.
MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Three Forks and South Fork Lane
Study be continued to the meeting of June 13 so that Mr. Carlson may develop further
information on a Specific Plan Line study to include the three items listed on the
owr May 4 memo from Mr. Carlson and other items named by Commissioners in discussion re
road plans, street improvements, conservation easements and project development.
The motion was made by Chairman Stewart, seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl, and
passed with the unanimous consent of all Commissioners.
Commissioners noted that the Three Forks information developed for the June 13th
meeting would be reviewed in a study session before it is sent to the Council for
approval.
2. CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE LOS ALTOS HILLS GENERAL PLAN for the Chaparral
Way Sub -area Located Generally between Moody Road and Altamont Road and
Julietta Lane:
Mr. Carlson discussed the background of the above request as detailed in his April 16
staff report and procedure for implementing the proposed amendment to the Circulation
Element of the General Plan as outlined in sections of the Government Code and in the
memorandum from City Attorney Gillio dated May 4, 1979. He reviewed maps showing the
various alternatives for the development of the Chaparral Way area.
Commissioners discussed the need for a drainage study for the Chaparral Way Sub-
area and surrounding lands so as to ensure that the whole area is properly provided
for when future development occurs. Chairman Stewart noted that professional help
should be available to Mr. Carlson out of Planning Commission budget should the need
occur during the study. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by
Chairman Stewart and seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl to request Mr. Carlson to
develop a drainage study for the sub -area, giving particular consideration to the
Chaparral and Moody Road area.
Commissioner Lachenbruch noted that engineering standards for Chaparral Way development
should be addressed in the specific plan study. He pointed to the wishes of area
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 9, 1979
Page three
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
T rTQr111ATTnN FIFMFNT OF THE LOS ALTOS h
residents to keep the road as rural as possible. Other items cited by the Commissioner
to be considered were trails in the area and who would be responsible for the maintenance
of the fire road. Thereafter the hearing was opened to the public discussion.
Bob Poole Chaparral 4i4y, commended the Town on the Chaparral Way study, stated that
drainage problems could be handled by proper engineering techniques when development
occurs, discussed the cost of the maintenance on Chaparral Way, spoke of the problem
with outside traffic in four-wheel drive vehicles using the road for sport, noted that
provision should be made for future development but advocated if possible to keep the
road as it exists or as a cul-de-sac to be as private and rural as possible, and spoke
against an assessment district to pay for road improvement. He noted that Alternate 28,
Exhibit 7 was his preference for road design if something must be recommended to the
Council. He asked also that when development is planned for that he be allowed access
to the flat area of his property, and for an easement through the Horton property to
Altamont Road.
Mrs. Nancy Horton, 505 Lau relwood Road, Santa len
discussed her subdivision of
t e adjacent Lands of Horton, expressed er preference for the "do nothing" plan
preferred by Mr. Poole and her desire to keep the cul-de-sac on her property as a
private road, spoke against an easement across her property to Altamont Road, and
noted her concern for outside traffic as an unwanted intrusion, and noted that her
41 engineer Mr. Sandis had made a study of drainage in the area of her subdivision.
fir' Bob Looper 27369 Chaparral Way, agreed with Mr. Poole in stating that Chaparral Way
is a safe road, and expressed a preference for the "do-nothing" plan for the road.
GayKrause, 27275 Julietta Lane, asked what effect this area development would have
on Ju Tetta Lane and was Lulu that Julietta was not really affected by the Chaparral
Way development. Thereafter, the public hearing was closed.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: It was moved by Chairman Stewart and
seconded by Commissioner Dochnahl to continue the Circulation Element of the Los
Altos Hills General Plan for the Chaparral Way Sub -area until the meeting of May 23
or until the Staff and the Commission have had an opportunity to study the drainage
for the area.
At 9:35 p.m. a short recess occurred. The meeting resumed at 10:53 p.m.
3. LANDS OF CHU, File #VAR. 7058-79, 26701 Palo Hills Drive, Request for Recommendation
of Approval of Variance for Pool and Tennis Court:
Mr. Carlson discussed the request as reviewed in his staff report of April 25, and
as reviewed by the Variance and Permit Commission at their April 25 meeting. He
noted that it was determined at that time that the pool could be built without a
variance, and instead a variance was being sought for the construction of a tennis court.
Chairman Stewart discussed the location of Dr. Chu's tennis court as it related to
`„ a tennis court constructed on the adjacent Sisson property and landscaping Dr. Chu could
provide to screen the court from neighbor's view. Discussion by other Commissioners
concerned the number of variances that had recently been requested to construct tennis
courts, Town policy on the granting of variances in light of Resolution 694 and whether
this policy regarding tennis courts and variances should be revised by the City Council,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 9, 1979
Page four
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
3. LANDS OF CHU, File #VAR. 7058-79: (continued)
and the need for a search through the variances that had been granted for tennis courts
to discover what underlying reason motivated the granting of the variances. Chairman
Stewart noted that a variance had been granted to the Kubby land for a tennis court,
and thereafter the hearing was opened to the public discussion.
Dr. Chu, Applicant, reiterated that the swimming pool had been removed from the variance
req ue en�i - en reviewed the six reasons he had provided to affirm that the variance
should be granted. He discussed landscaping and the need for a regulation -size court,
the location of the court as proposed by Chairman Stewart, and the fact that Sissons
have no objection to the court being closer to their property. He requested a recommenda-
tion of approval for the variance.
Mel Micheletti, 26724 Palo Hills Drive, noted that there was no neighbor objection
to the variance request. He urged the Commission to recommend approval.
Norman Rossen, 26763 Palo Hills Drive, stated that the site proposed was the logical
use of t at ind of and. He again noted that there was no neighbor objection to the
tennis court proposal, and called attention to the letter from the Kull family dated
May 7 which gave support for approval.
The public hearing was closed, and Commissioners discussed whether they could justify
the granting of the variance beyond doubt because of affirmative responses to Section
9-5.1107 (b) of the Municipal Code. It was acknowledged that affirmative responses y
could not, be given on points (1), (2) and (3) of this section, and the following
motion was passed:
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: It was moved by Commissioner Lachenbruch and seconded
by Commissioner vanTamelen that the application for the Lands of Chu, File #VAR. 7058-79,
be denied without prejudice due to the lack of justification for Item #1 of Title 9,
Article 5, Section 9-5.1107(b), Variance of the Planning and Zoning Ordinance.
The variance for a tennis court within the building setback line does not meet the
criteria of extraordinary circumstances or conditions that warrant a variance; the
house design and location precludes a tennis court within the setback lines; and
the original developer did not design or locate the house to accommodate a tennis court.
AYES: Commissioners Lachenbruch, vanTamelen, Dochnahl, and Kuranoff
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Chairman Stewart
Chairman Stewart requested that a note be sent to the City Council with the variance
request recommendations, stating that the Commissioners could not agree on the
affirmative answers to points (1), (2) and (3) of Section 9-5.1107(b) of the Code,
but that they could find positive justification for items (4), (5), and (6) of this
section. He informed the Chus that they could appeal the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and that the policies of granting variances would be reviewed
shortly and perhaps new recommendations would be made.
OLD BUSINESS
L 1. LANDS OF STAMSCHROR-SILVER, File #CU 8029-78, 25231 La Rena (Secondary Dwelling) J
Chairman Stewart noted that the above item would be continued until a later date be-
cause the City Attorney had not had an opportunity review file information and respond
to Planning Commission questions on this matter.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 9, 1979
(( Page five
4r OLD BUSINESS: (continued)
2. LANDS OF HOM, File #TM 2084-78, Elena and Robleda Roads, John Riley, Engineer:
Commissioner Lachenbruch stated that a technical problem existed on Lot 4 of the
Lands of Hom subdivision. Lot 4 of the development could not accommo-
date a 160 foot circle. He could not find in the record that this had been mentioned
in the discussion. He was informed, however, that the subdivision had been recommended
for denial without prejudice and that the applicant would be coming in with a smaller,
three lot subdivision.
NEW BUSINESS:
Dates for Public Hearings for
It was moved by Chairman Stewart and seconded by Commissioner Lachenbruch and passed
unanimously that the following public hearings be set for May 25:
Variance and Permit Commission: Lands of Warren, File #VAR. 7059-79
Lands of Binder, File #VAR. 7055-78
Lands of Closs, Files BSA 6100, 6101 and 6105-77
Planning Commission: Lands of Tryon, File #CU 8034-79
The Adobe Creek ,Use Permit, File #CU 8035-79
2. Report from the City Council Meetin of Ma 2, 1979: Commissioner Dochnahl reported
on t e ity ounce passage of t e Lands of Low, Fi e #TM 2088-78 and the Lands of
Love, File #BSA 6103-77.
Commissioner Lachenbruch asked that Commissioners, at the time of site development,
require,for the Lands of Love that the combined structural coverage not exceed 15%
of the acreage and the combined impermeable surface not exceed 40% of the whole acre.
No action was taken by the Commission on this suggestion.
3. Election of Officers for the Planning Commission:
On the Motion of Chairman Stewart, seconded by Commissioner Lachenbruch, Commissioner
vanTamelen was nominated as Chairman of the Planning Commission. Thereafter, it was
moved by Commissioner Dochnahl and seconded by Commissioner vanTamelen that the
nominations be closed and that the secretary cast a white ballot for Mary vanTamelen
as Chairman of the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Chad;rman Stewart.
On the motion of Commissioner vanTamelen, seconded by Commissioner Kuranoff, it was
moved to nominate Commissioner Dochnahl as Vice -Chairman of the Planning Commission.
Thereafter, it was moved by Commissioner Lachenbruch and seconded by Commissioner
vanTamelen that the nominations be closed and that a white ballot be cast for the
election of Joseph Dochnahl as Vice -Chairman of the Planning Commission.
Chairman Stewart thanked everyone on the Planning Commission for their tremendous
help and cooperation during his term as Chairman. He turned the gavel over to
the newly -elected Chairman vanTamelen who in turn commended Commissioner Stewart
for two years of great leadership.
�✓ 4. Demolition of Structure at Altamont and Black Mountain: Commissioner Lachenbruch
note tat a structure at the a ove ocation was being demolished. His concern was
that the demolition of older dwellings would become a common practice in favor of
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 9, 1979
Page six 1J
NEW BUSINESS: (continued)
the construction of very large, new dwellings.
Mr. Carlson responded that a demolition permit had been issued to take the building
down to the foundation, and then a new structure would be built.
Commissioner Lachenbruch requested that the Commission be informed on the size of
the new structure to be built, as this kind of development could have important
implications for the future of the Town.
5. Site Development en Packets: Commissioner Lachenbruch requested that Planning
Commissioners be called whtheir Site Development packets will be delivered or
sent out late. He noted that when packets are received late there is little time
to inspect sites. The suggestion was made that it would be just as easy for the
Commissioners to pick up their packets on the way to inspect rather than wait for
a late delivery and then have no opportunity to prepare properly for Site Development.
6. Altamont and Pa a Mill Structure: Commissioner Dochnahl expressed concern on
a house eing constructed y Munsey Development at the above location. He was informed
that the house would have a stepped foundation.
7. Committee Assignments for Next Year: Newly -elected Chairman vanTamelen proposed
that Committee assignments be eight weeks in duration rather than the present month-
long assignments. Commissioner Kuranoff expressed some concern, however, on the
4W site
of work that would have to be missed over an eight week period if, for instances
site development was once a week for this long a period. No further action was taken.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further new or old business, the meeting of the Planning Commission
was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. by Chairman vanTamelen.
Respectfully submitted,
Ethel Hopkins
Secretary
J