HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/10/1985PLANNING CORaSSION
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California
u • • ar Iq �
Wednesday, April 10, 1985
Reel 116, Side I, Tract I, 1210 -End; Side II, Tract I 000 -End; Side I, Tract II 000-173
Chalxman Kurano£f called the meeting to order at 7:50 P.M. in the Town Hall
Council Chambers.
•,• V• 11 • ••e
Present: ccudssioners Gottlieb, lachenbruch, Siegel, Yanez and Chairman
Kuranoff
Absent: Commissicners Carico and Struthers
Staff: Georg Scarborough, City Manager; Michael Enright, City Engineer;
Nancy Lytle, Staff Planner; Leslie Mullins, Secretary
••'9 Mi i I &V M ORI••'
Item Ramovrd - 8.1. Lachenbruch
YMION SFOONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Yanez and passed
unanimously to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar, specifically:
2. Acceptance of Filing Tentative Map
a. Lands of Bellucci, File ON 6-84, Tally Ho Subdivision
3. Setting Public Hearings for April 24, 1985:
a. lands of Burkhart/Zappella, Lot Line Adjustment
b. Lands of Bellucci, Tally Ho Subdivision
c. Lands of PAUSD, Bridge Design for Tentative Map
d. Lands of Tuan of Los Altos Hills, Conditional Use Permit
e. Study Session - Site Development Review
O mnissioner Lachenhruch referred to minutes of March 13, 1985, noting he
prepared a revised statement, minor corrections to page seven.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Tarhenhr,ch, seconded by Yanez and
passed unanimously to approve the minutes of March 13, 1985 as amended.
Chairman Kuranoff abstained frau approval.
Cp ssioner lachenbruch referred to minutes of March 22, 1985, noting he
would like changes to page one, second sentence to include after Tentative Map...
it showed the 100 year flood world not reach top of bank; page four change
motion as follows: Moved by Iachenbruch., seconded by Carico and passed unanimously
that within portions of the Conservation Easement atleast 70' from the top of
the creek bank agricultural use (withcut structures) and pathway use would be
permitted.
Planning Cancdssion Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page TWO
B. CONSENT CALENDAR: (continued)
y0TICN SECCNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Yanez
and passed unanimously to approve the March 22, 1985 minutes as amended.
Crnmdssioner Lachenbruch requested the minutes of March 27, 1985 be
amended as follows: on page seven, last two motions; MOTION SECONDED AND
CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Lachenbruch and passed unanimously
to rescind two previous motions and approve the following: Alterations
referred to in Section 9-2.09 (b) will not be exanpted from the parameters
of the Site Approval Chapter unless: 1) less than 258 of the existing
house total floor area is altered or the structure is increased by less
than 258 the existing house or 2) the alterations go through the Site
Development process.
M7TICN SECCNDED AND CLRRIM: Nerved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Kuranoff
and passed unanimously to direct staff to review Site Approval process
with the intention of simplifying or improving, with the idea of shifting
function of that to the Site Development process if possible.
MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by la hent,uch, seconded by Gottlieb
and passed unanimously to approve the March 27, 1985 minutes as amended.
C. REPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 3, 1985:
Commissioner Gottlieb reported the Council reviewed 3 Special land Use
Permits for three new residences, all of which were approved; adopted an
ordinance regarding care of pets as per Santa Clara County; voted favorably
into moving a small house from downtown Los Altos to the Heritage Preserve
Area behind Town Hall; Gas Tax Bill discussed; and audit contract approved.
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. LANDS OF STORINO, FILE #VAR 1-85, 25631 La Lanne Court, Request for
variance to exceed maximum wall height as specified in Section 9-5.503 (c)
by five feet.
Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report dated April 3, 1985 noting this is a
public hearing to consider a variance request to exceed the maximum wall
height allowance, as specified in Section 9-5.503 (c), by five feet, for
the purposes of an eight foot sound wall, 250 feet long, located on Foothill
Expressway. With regard to the necessary findings for approving a variance,
Ms. Lytle indicated findings 1-3 are supportedby the fact that the site is
located adjacent to Foothill Expressway and subject to exceptionally high
noise levels due to traffic; Findings 4-6 are supported by the fact that
this variance world not be detrimental to the public or injurious to nearby
properties; would not authorize a use not allowed by the current zoning
regulations , and would be in keeping with the intent of the Zoning Chapter
and the General Plan. Ms. Lytle recamended that the Planning Commission
adopt a motion approving the variance subject to Conditions of Approval
attached to the April 3, 1985 staff report.
The Public Hearing was opened and closed with no one speaking for or against
( this item.
MOT[CN SBMMED AM CAM=: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Siegel and
passed by thefollowing roll call vote to approve the lands of Storino,
File #VAR 1-85, for an eight foot sound wall, 250' long located on Foothill
Expressway, subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the April 3, 1985
Staff Report.
planning Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Three
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Lands of Storino (continued)
ROLL CALL:
AYES: C=ussioners Lachenbruch, Siegel, Yanez and fhainVan Kuranoff
NOES: Commissioner Gottlieb
2. LANDS OF PLCFJGH, FILE #VAR 8-84, 24692 Olive Tree Court, Request for
variance to: 1) encroach into the front yard setback by maxinnmm of
ten feet and side yard by maximmm of six and one-half feet; and 2)
encroach into building height envelope by maximm of approximately
fourteen feet.
Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report dated April 4, 1985, noting this
is a public hearing to consider variance requests to: 1) encroach into
the front yard setback by a maxima of ten feet and the side yard setback
by a maxii of 6Y, and 2) encroach into the building height envelope
by a maximmm of approximately 14' at the right side of the residence.
M. Lytle indicated the application was brought before the Comnissim at
their March 13, 1985 meeting for consideration of a variance for the set-
backs Only, it was noted at that meeting that the height of a proposed
future addition would encroch into the height envelope, the item was
continued to allow the applications to resubmit their variance application
to include the height envelope. encroachments. Ms. Lytle indicated the
lot was created in 1961 and residence and carport built in 1965, noting
portions of the existing residence and carport encroach into the front
and side yard setbacks and into the height envelop. Ms. Lytle informed
Commission the owners are requesting the variances in order to construct
a new 3 -car garage and to add a master hedroorwbath as part of remodel.
Ms. Lytle recammended that the Planning Commission: 1) approve the variance
request to encroach into the side yard setback a maximus of 6'' and into
the front yard setback a maximus of 10' for the purpose of constructing
a garage; 2) allow for existing non -conformities regarding setback encroach-
ments and height envelope encroachments; and 3) deny the variance request
for further encroachment into the height envelope for purposes of remodeling.
The Public Hearing was then opened.
Mr. Kenneth Plough, 24692 Olive Tree Court, informed o mmdssion they have
three vehicles, and for both aesthetic reasons and protection of the vehicles
would prefer a three car garage over carport.
The Public Hearing was then closed.
Commissioners questioned applicant if existing carport could be incorporated
into the garage design to lessen the oncroachmnt, noting this site is built
to max9m m at present.
YDrLCN SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Gottlieb and
passed unanimously to allow for existing non -conformities regarding setback
encroachments and height envelope encroachments for the Lands of Plough,
24692 Olive Tree Court.
Planning Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Four
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2. Lands of Plough (continued)
Mr. Plough indicated he will go back to his architect and redesign without
the need of height encroachment variance and will withdraw that part of
his variance application.
MOTICN SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by huranoff and
passed by the following roll call vote to: 1) Approve the variance request
for the lands of Plough, File #VAR 8-84, 24692 Olive Tree Court to encroach
into the side yard setback a maximnn of 6'' and into the front yard setback
a maxi, of 10' for the purpose of constructing a garage; and 2) Deny the
variance request for further encroachment into the height envelope for
purposes of remodeling.
ROIL CALL:
AYES: Commissioner Gottlieb, Siegel, yanez and Chairman Ruranoff
NOES: Oaminissioner Lachenbruch
3. LANDS OF HUNICN, FILE #PM 9-84, 25600 Fernhill Drive, Request for Lot
Line Adjustment
Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report dated April 4, 1985 noting this is
a public hearing to consider the request of a Tentative Lot Line Adjustment
for an adjustment between two lots located at 25600 Fernhill Drive and 23715
Camino Hernoso, both lots are developed with single family residences and
owned by Huntons. Ms. Lytle indicated the purpose of the request is to adjust
a lot line between the subject lots, in order to assure additional develop-
ment setback restrictions from the residence on Parcel "A", noting Mrs. Hunton
has indicated in the future they may sell Parcel "B" and wish to maintain
as much privacy and open space on Parcel "A" as possible. Ms. Lytle indicated
both parcels will remain in conformance with zoning ordinance requirements.
Ms. Lytle recamiended that the Planning Ocaudssion grant conditional excep-
tion to the requirement of a Coded Slope Classification Map, Section 9-4.506
(37); and that the Planning Commission adopt a notion approving the 'Tentative
Lot Line Adjustmnet, Lands of Hunton, File #PM 9-84, subject to Conditions of
Apprwal attached to the April 4, 1985 staff report.
The Public Hearing was then opened.
Mrs. Hunton, 25600 Fernhill Drive, informed comussion the reason for this
request is to allow the privacy when the property on Camino Hermso is sold,
asking why the need to widen the road as proposed by the City Engineer.
Mr. IIiright informed commission and applicant the reason for the right-of-way
dedicatation is to bring the property in conformance with todays ordinances.
The Public Hearing was then closed.
MOTICN SECQIDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Gottlieb, seconded by Siegel and passed
unanimously to approve Tentative Lot Line Adjustment, Lands of Hunton, File
#PM 9-84, subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the April 4, 1985 Staff
Report: and to grant a comlitional exception to the requirement of a Coded
Slope Classification Map, Section 9-4.506 (37).
Planning Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Five
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
4. LANDS OF WUBBEIS/ALVAREZ, FILE #PM 7-84, 13861 La Palm Road,
Request for Lot Line Adjustment
Ms. Lytle referred to her April 4, 1985 Staff Report noting this is a
public hearing to consider the request for a Tentative Lot Line Adjustment,
for an adjustment between two lots located at 13861 Is Paloma Road, noting
the Alvarez lot is developed with single family residence and the Wubbels
lot is undeveloped. Ms. Lytle indicated the purpose of the request is to
adjust a lot line between the subject lots in order to improve their
future residential development potential. Ms. Lytle recommended that
the Planning Commission adopt a motion approving the Tentative Lot Line
Adjustment, subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the April 4,
1985 staff report.
commissioner Gottlieb questioned if a pathway dedication could be picked
up at this time, rather than during Site Development process for the
Wubbels lot, as we would only obtain a small portion.
Oo<mmissioier Lachenbruch requested that included in the staff reports
the net and gross acreage be listed, the average slope and circle slope,
MDA and IDF for reference.
The Public Hearing was then opened.
( Ms. Wubbels asked Commission if they could proceed with zoning and site
development process with submission of the Parcel Map.
Ms. Lytle indicated the zoning and site development could be conditioned
upon acceptance of Parcel Map, and the Building Permit not be issued until
the Parcel Map is approved and recorded.
The Public Hearing was than closed.
Y02ION SECONDED AMID CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Yanez and
passed unanimously to approve Tentative Lot Line Adjustment, Lands of Wabbels/
Alvarez, File #PM 7-84 subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the
April 4, 1985 with amendment as follows: Add Condition #6: Type IIB pathway
shall be constructed within road right-of-way on La PalCMa Road.
E. OLD BUSINESS:
1. Subcommittee Report on Antennas
Chsirman Euranoff informed Cemussion and audience that this item is not a
public hearing, but a report from Subcommittee of the Planning Commission
on their recammendatims, and would ask the audience to limit their cements
and suggest perhaps five speakers for both sides (pro&con) address the
oaamission, noting public hearings will be held when ordinance s<mndMcnts
are proposed.
Commissioner Gottlieb as (chairman of the Subcommittee referred to memo dated
March 7, 1985 giving commission a review of the types of antennas and the
application process they would go through,
Commissioner Lachenbruch requested on page one, of the March 7, 1985 memo,
Item #2, be changed from 5 to 3.
Planning C mdssian Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Six
E. OLD BUSINESS•
1. Antennas (continued)
Mr. Scarborough informed Coumissim that this item was referred to the
Planning Comnissim fran the City Council for a report, noting the correct
format this evening would be a report to the City Council, based upon
the subcommittee report if desired, thereby the City Council would have
the City Attorney prepare an ordinance to process through public hearings
with Planning Oamnission and City Council.
Mr. Marc Kaufman, 14100 Donelson Place, member of Subcamnittee, referred
to his memo dated February 28, 1985 and informed Commission he disagrees
with the proposed thresholds as presented in the March 7, 1985 memo,
noting there is no problem with staff review and site development, but
with Conditional Use Peunits. Mr. Kaufman indicated he felt neighbors
should be able to review and ca hent on the placement and siting of the
antenna.
Mr. Robert Lewis, 14554 De Bell Drive, informed camiission there is an
antenna in his neighborhood which is a very obnoxious structure and out of
character, asking ccnmission not to changeregulations, but enforce the
current regulations.
Mr. Jim Tteybig, 27200 Altamont Road, informed camussim amateur radios
are very valuable to our country, indicating zoning is-hmrealistic and
illegal, noting crank up antennas should be allowed to 80', feeling the
operators in Tbm can help to encourageantennas be kept doom when not in
use. Mr. Treybig indicated he felt no need for neighbor review.
Mrs. Marjorie Evans, 14511 De Bell Drive asked Comnission to keep in mind
the founding values of the Town when incorporated, i.e., protection of
views, quiet space, etc. when considering amendments to the existing
ordinance regarding height allowance.
Mr. Edward Radlo, 25811 Estacada Drive, informed commission fixed antennas
should be allowdd up to 75' and crank up to 901, noting with regard to
safety aspects, Mr. Radlo indicated ham operators within the Tour would
be willing to kelp.
Mr. Don Amyz, Union City informed camdssion of the value of amateur radio
operators and his experiences in saving several lives, noting the minimmn
height should be 65' to 70'.
Mr. Chris Clare, 12620 La Cresta Drive, informed mmiissim his current
conplaint is out regarding amateur antennas, but TV antennas, me in
particular in his neighborhood which is on top of a two story building,
blocking his view.
Mr. Roger Nelson, 12992 Vista Del Valle, informed commission he felt the
current height is unreasonably restrictive, noting the ordinance should be
kept simple and measured by height only not wind factor, noting 75' is a
L reasonable height.
1r Mr. Robert Brawn, 25830 Estacada Drive, informed cacmission he has no objection
to amateur radios, kut do object to the number of antennas and height thereof,
noting there is one in his neighborhood which interferes with television
viewing, noting they should have to contact neighbors and landscape, noting
he felt 40' is high and Cmmission should limit the allowed number of antennas
per household.
planning Crnmission Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Seven
E. OLD BUSINESS:
1. Antennas (continued)
Mr. Mike Minerez, Santa Clara informed cmmission he thought it unreasonable
to place unreasonable restrictions upon amateur radio operators, as they
are life saving, asking commission to look not only at aesthetics.
Mr. Charles Anderson, Ortega Drive, informed camissim he has had a antenna
for 30 years and has never had a problem with. neighbors.
Mr. Ron Rueter, San Jose informed commission the FCC is currently considering
federal preexemption upon limiting types of antennas, noting the Commission
should gather all appropriate facts before making a decision.
C3mnissioner Siegel recommended there be no regulations regarding the height
of antennas as the Town should not regulate things we can't enforce, noting
we have a 30' height limitation now that we can't enforce. Mr. Siegel indicated
with regard to landscaping of antennas it would be an additional chore for
staff and commission.
commissioner Iachenbruch indicated the Town's regulations are much more
stringent than those anywhere on the peninsula for reasons of preserving
the rural atmosphere, noting he recamends Site Development process so that
neighbors are notified, and review for siting and landscaping thereof. With
regard to CUP process the limits should be pushed up higher, and the fees
reduced.
MOTION SECOM ED AMID CARRIED: Moved by Yanez, seconded by Gottlieb and
passed by the following roll call vote to recamend to the City Council
that they adopt Subcannittee reca miendation as presented in the March 7,
1985 memo from Subcacmittee Chairman, without specific numbers until a
later date as based upon public input this evening. We recamend the
format and types of procedures as outlined in the March. 7, 1985 memo
with modifications for crank -up antennas and a reduction in application
fees.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Commissioners Gottlieb, Lachenbruch, Yanez and Chairman Kuranoff
NOES: Cannissicner Siegel
F. NEX BUSINESS:
Item #3 to be heard before 1 and 2.
3. Request for change to 40' setback - Dori Lane, Lands of Koxrmfield
Mr. Walter Chapman, 620 S. El Monte Avenue, Designer, asked ca mission to
approve a change in the 40' setback for a proposed addition to existing
residence at 26209 Dori Lane, referring to plans submitted dated March 26, 1985.
Mr. Kornfield, 26209 Dori Lane informed commission 2 past staff members bad
previously looked at the property and indicated they would reconnend the
change, as the house takes advantage of the lot the way it was built and the
change world be appropriate for the site.
Ms. Lytle informed connission at present there is some inconsistencies with
the zoning application, as the MDA information is erroneous, noting this
application will be subject to the Urgency ordinance, #295.
planning Cawassion Minutes - April 10, 1985
Page Eight
F. NEW BUSINESS:
3. Dori Lane
MOPION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Yanez, seconded by Siegel and
passed by the following roll call vote to approve the applicant's
request to change to 40' setback as shown on plans dated March 26, 1985,
for the lands of Kornfield, 26209 Dori Lane.
1. Setting possible date for Joint Study Session (City Council - Planning
Commission) for review of Housing Element
It was suggested the Chairman get in touch with Louise Drcnkert to set
a date for the joint meeting possibly the 5th Wednesday in May.
2. Setting possible date for Study Session (Planning Commission) for
review of Draft Site Development Ordinance
Date Set: Monday, April 22, 1985 at 5:15 p.m.
Wednesday, April 24, 1985
4. Changing day of Site Development meetings
Mr. Scarborough informed Commission staff needs to change the day of
Site Development meetings from 'Tuesday to Wednesday. Commissioners
indicated morning hours are preferable, 8:30 a.m. with a time limit not
to pass noon.
5. Ms. Lytle referred to letter received frau Mr. and Mrs. Eberz dated
"Received, April 9, 1985" requesting a deletion of the Site Approval
process for their proposed new residence as per commission's decision
last week on alterations and Site Approval process.
It was a consensus of the Commission that the new definition on
alterations and Site Approval does not apply to this particular case,
as it is a new residence in a different location.
G. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further new or old business, the meeting was adjourned at
12:40 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Leslie Mullins
Engineering/Planning Secretary