Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/11/1986PLANNING COD4IISSION TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California Nq,3nesday, Jame 11, 1986 Reel 121, Side II, Tract II, 524-E]'d; Reel 122, Side I, Tract I, 000 -End, Side II, Tract I, 000-074 chairman Carico called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. in the Tann Hall Council Chambers. •• It Nt•N N i N Present: Commissioners Gottlieb, Kaufman, Lachenbruch, Struthers, Yanez and Chairman Carico Absent: Commissioner Siegel Staff: Michael W. Enright, City Engineer; Nancy Lytle, Town Planner; Leslie Mullins, Secretary - City Council Rep: Counciluuman van Tamelen N a � 0 B.1. removed: (Lytle & Carico ) Ns. Lytle amended the minutes on page two, second to last paragraph to add: Commissioners opinions were not based upon public hearing, as this item is preliminary assessment of the applicants proposal. Carico amended the minutes on page two, last paragraph to add: Reasoning for statement is that,the applicant could apply for subdivision (one lot) to accomodate another dwelling. Carico amended the minutes on page four, fourth paragraph to add: Commission asked for legal interpretation of this application, as applicant indicated the proposal had previously received City Council approval. MOTION sBcoNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Gottlieb, seconded by Struthers and passed unanimously to approve the minutes of May 28, 1986 as amended. Commissioner Lachenbruch abstained from approval. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Gottlieb, seconded by Struthers and passed unanimously to schedule the folle;dng items for public hearing for the ,Time 25, 1986 Agenda: 1. Lands of Corkett, 28155 Christophers Lane, Appeal of Administrative Decision for proposed addition. 2. Ordinance Amendment concerning setback lines for residence structures STUDY SESSION: �. Zoning Ordinance AmendMent (Bulk) -Planning Commission (thanon to ossiole Joi;.t Steiy 5esslm w to City Council) . Commissioner Kaufman abstained. Planning Cammmission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Two C. REPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 4, 1986: 4 Commissioner Yanez reported the City Council approved Special Land Use Permits for Sonek, Binder and Wong; Right -of -Way acquisition for Miller Property on S -Curve Project continued to June 9, 1986 at 2:00 p.m.; Kerman, Matadero Creek allowed to exceed building coverage and developnent area; relocation of Fremont Road entrance; discussion of landscape bond increase. Chairman Carioo informed ccnmission she has received a letter from Mayor Fuhrman regarding the Fremont Road entrance relocation, asking Commission to give input, this item will be discussed under "New Business". D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. LANDS OF E 4BERG, FILE #TP4 12-84, Taaffe Road, APN: 182-13-007, (Nowack & Associates - Engineer), Proposed Four Lot Subdivision, and Negative Declaration Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated June 4, 1986, informing Camussion the applicant proposes to subdivide the 7.61 gross acres into 4 lots, noting the property is currently developed with both a primary and a pre-existing secondary residence, accessory buildings and amenities. Ms. Lytle gave Comnission a brief description of the proposed subdivision in terms of zoning and subdivision requirements, noting the proposed subdivision complies with state and local subdivision ordinance requirements. Ms. Lytle informed Canmission issues related to the subdivision include: Geotechnical Constraints; Pathways; Conservation Easement; and Building Site Constraints. Ms. Lytle recomnerded that the Planning Commission adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the filing of a Negative Declaration for this project with the Santa Clara County Clerk; and that the Planning Commission adopt a motion recamending that the City Council approve the Lards of Elmberg `ipntative Map, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, to the Staff Report. Camussion questioned the use of gravity sewer system, proposed lot configuration and sizes; and possible need because of the shape of the lots for variances with regard to future developent. The Public Hearing was then opened with regard to the Negative Declaration. Mr. Paul Noack, representing Owner, indicated the proposed lots can accomodate houses which'can be easily screened with existing trees on the property, noting the proposed conservation easement provides open space. Mrs. Wendy Correll, 26811 Taaffe Road, informed Crnmission the deer population has decreased over the years, noting she is pleased to see conservation easement proposed. Commission discussed the conservation easement proposed, indicating the need for fences allowed Which would allow the movement of animals from adjacent properties. The Public Hearing was then closed. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Struthers and passed unanimously to recc miend the City Council approve the filing of a Negative Declara- 4W tion for the Lands of Elmberg, with the Santa Clara County Clerk. Conmission discussed proposed pathway easements and connections to existing with Mary Stutz. The Public Hearing for the Tentative Map was then opened. planning Comussian Minutes - Sure 11, 1986 page Three D. PUBLIC LiF'ARINGS: ( 1. LANDS OF EIM EIC: (continued) Mr. Paul No,,ck, informed Cumussion, Mrs. Elmberg has reviewed the proposed Conditions of Approval and only opposes Condition 1.D. regarding the pathway easerent. Carmissioner Gottlieb expressed concern over recomending approval of a subdivision which lots do not meet our zoning ordinances, noting property owners will feel the need for requesting variances in future, noting she would prefer the map be sent back to engineer for re -design of a three lot subdivision, which would better accomodate future developnent. Cmmissioner lachenbruch noted he appreciates Gottliebs cori. ts, however, the property can accarodatefour lots, if designed differently, noting concern over Lot #2, re: Section9-4.603(c); 350'circle; noting this is not a very usable configuration, and needs to be redesigned to better accrnndate four lots. Ms. Lytle informed Commission the Subdivision Committee held two reviews of the subject property, noting it was their concern also over the proposed lot configuration, however, Mrs. Elmberg is comtitted to this design for many reasons (i.e., trees, driveway, etc.), reconrending the Camaassion do not recamend disapproval should the applicant disagree because of mandated subdivision laws regarding time periods. Conmissioner Struthers and Yanez indicated the same concerns voiced by Gottlieb and Lachenbrvch, asking the applicant for re -design to better accoodate four lots. Comdssioner Kaufman noted the lots are legal, they meet all ordinance and state requirements, noting he did not feel without legal reasoning that the Commussion could recortnend disapproval of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Nowack informed Cmmission that he did not feel there would be any point in going back to the owner, noting this is what she wants, the lots meet ordinances, asking cmmission to reca m d approval of the proposed tentative map to the City Council. The Public Hearing was then closed, cmmission began review of the proposed Conditions of Approval. MOl'ICN SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Struthers, seconded by Gottlieb and passed unanimously to amend Condition I.A. to read as follows: The owner shall dedicate a Conservation Easement as re -redlined by staff (over to edge of property) on the 7�-ntative Map (dated Received,"April 22, 1986" to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Tbwn Planner. No structures, grading or vegetation removal shall be allowed within the easement, except brush clearing for fire protection purposes, and small ornamp-ntal garden structures to the satisfaction of Site Developmnt Camndttee, and open style fences which would not prohibit migration of native animals. Passed by the following Roll Call vote to Amend Condition 1.C. as follows: The owner shall dedicate private right-of-way for the first approximately 60 feet of access off Taaffe Road for Parols 2,3, and 4, as redlined by staff on the Tentative Map and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. AYES: Commissioners Kaufman, Iachenbruch, Yanez and Carico NOES: camussioners Gottlieb and Struthers planning Oammission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Four D. PUBLIC BEARINGS: 6 1. LANDS OF EEK3ERc:(continued) ` MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Struthers, seconded by Lachenbruch and passed unanimously to amend condition I.D. to read as follows: The owner shall dedicate a pedestrian/equestrian easement, 10 feet in width along the entire westerly property line, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Pathway Committee Chairmen. MOTION SECCNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Kaufman and passed unanimously to approve Conditions 2.A., 2.B., and 2.C. as re -numbered. (Shown in Staff Report as 2.A., 2.B., and 3.B.) MOTION SECONDED AND CAR=: Moved by Gottlieb, seconded by Struthers and passed by the following roll call vote to amend Condition 5.B. as follows: The applicant shall enter into a recorded agreenent to preserve mature trees along tho westerly property line, and mature oak trees, (i.e., 30" on Parcel #4; 24" on Parcel #2, between Lots 3 and 4). AYES: Commissioners Gottlieb, lachenbruch, Struthers, Yanez and Chairnen Carico NOES: Commissioner Kaufman Passed by Consensus to anend Condition 6.A. to read: 4 lots @ $200.00 Per lot, MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Lachenbruch and passed by the following roll call vote that the pathway easement be cleared along the westerly property line. AYES: Comiissioners Gottlieb, Kaufman, Lachenbruch, Struthers and Chairman Carico NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Yanez Ms. Lytle suggested the Commission recommend approval of the 'tentative Map subject to the applicant's engineer revising Lot #2 to meet the 350' rule brought up earlier by Commissioner Lachenbruch. MOTION SECONDED AMID .CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Struthers and passed by the following roll call vote to recomnend approval of the Lands Of Elmberg, File #IM 12-84, to the City Council subject to the Conditions of Approval attached to the Staff Report dated June 4, 1986, and as amended by Planning Commission, and with the non -conformity of Parcel #2, being corrected by Nowack & Associates prior to being presented to City Council for their consideration. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kaufman, Iachenbruch, Struthers, Yanez and Chairman Carico NOES: Commissioner Gottlieb ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Gottlieb noted she voted against recommendation of approval for the subject Tentative Map because the lots are too restrictive as designed. 2. LANDS OF BORKE., CAMERON, MURPHY (OWEN), FILE #PM 2-85, APN: 175-32-049, 050, 051, and 048, Lot Line Adjustment and Lot Consolidation Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated June 5, 1986, noting the proposed project involves four .lots created in 1984 under the Lands of Fowle Subdivision, and is currently being proposed to allow the applicant to construct an estate style residence with numerous residential amenities, i.e., tennis court, pool, cabana, caretakers cottage, residence, etc., noting the lot line adjustment is proposed to better accomodate the design of the main residence and driveway. MIs. Lytle noted staff has not raised any issues of concern identified with this application, recortmending Ccmmdssion adopt a motion approving Tentative Int Line Planning Camuission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Five D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. LMDS OF CWEN (Lot Line Adjustment) Continued: Adjustment and Consolidation, subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the June 5, 1986 Staff Report. Comuissioner Kaufman requested docunarts reflect "Old Trace Lane" not "Old Trace Read" throughout. Comnussioner Lachenbruch requested that the IAF, Average Slope, Site Circle Slope be included on maps when presented for review. Ms. Lytle infonued Larhenbruch and Commission this request is not a requirement of our Subdivision ordinance. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Ken Pastrof, poen Companies, infoneod Omission he has reviewed the Staff Report and concur with Conditions stipulated. The Public Hearing was then closed. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by lachenbiuch and passed unanimously to approve the Lands of Owen, File OM 2-85, Lot Line Adjustment and Consolidation subject to Conditions of Approval attached to the June 5, 1986 Staff Report 3. LAMIDS OF MURPHY/CWEN, OLD TRACE LANE, Request for Site Development Permit for New Residence, Driveway, Tennis Court, swimming Pool, Cabana, and Caretaker's Cottage Mr. Enright referred to his memo of June 6, 1986, noting in his review of the proposed development he has recommnded conditions of approval for the Site Develop- nrent Permut and general comrents regarding the proposal. Mr. Enright informed Cannission before review of the project, the Co,umission should first review the proposed 12' retaining wall at the westerly end of the garage. Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated June 5, 1986, noting the applicant is requesting a Site Developrent Peanut for New Residence, Driveway, Tennis Court, &T mning Pool, Cabana, and Caretaker's Cottage on old Trace Lane, noting in conjunction with this application, the applicant filed for a lot consolidation lot line adjustment and conditional use peanut. MIs. Lytle noted the proposal should be reviewed according to the Site Development Ordinance, sUnUarized in the Checklist (provided), in addition to the checklist, the following issues should also be addressed: 1) Retaining Wall as described by Mr. Enright in his June 6, 1986 Memo; 2) Forty Foot Setback determination; 3) Tbwn Geologist, Fire Department, and City Engineers recd mendations and convents should also be incorporated into any approval; and 9) Recovendation to City Council regarding Special Land Use Pendt, (Guidelines attached). The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Ken Pastrof, Owpn Cmpanies, referred to Mr. Enrights mend of June 6, 1986, noting they agree to stipulate to Conditions 1,2,3,5, and 6,. noting #6, he has tried to relate to Coumission in his letter of May 30th as to the reasoning [ for the proposed retaining wall. If the retaining wall was lowered, Mr. Pastrof 4/ infonned Caumission, they would then need to adjust the slope and possibly renove sane of the existing eucalyptus trees, noting he does not believe that the garage area is out of proportion for this residence. Mr. Pastrof noted they have had discussions with neighbors and are trying to he sensitive to them and the property as the project is very large. Planning Comnission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Six D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 3. LANDS OF MURPHY/UfEN (continued) The Public Hearing was then closed. Commission discussed the intent of the Wall and Fence Ordinance with regard to the proposed retaining wall, discussing possible alternatives and sizes, location and heights. Mr. Bob Owen, informed Commission he has been working on these plans for two years, and has spent much time with the neighbors and Mrs. Cameron, noting the garage has been dropped into the ground so it will not be an impact and the necessity for -the proposed retaining wall. Mr. Owen informed 0mmission the project is for himself and his immediate family, noting the project is 2,000 sq.ft. under the max5noim allowed by ordinance. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Iachenbruch and passed by the following roll call vote to interpret the proposed retaining wall shown on the Site Develornent Plans meets the intent of Y micipal Cade Section 9-5.503 (c). ROLL CAIS,: AYES: Camdssioners Kaufman, Lachenbruch, Yanez and Chairman Carico NOES: oomm ssioner Gottlieb and Struthers ABSTAIN: None MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Lachenbruch and passed unanimously that the forty foot (40') setback be taken from old Trace 6 lane. Commission began a review of the Conditions of Approval in the Mery dated June 6, 1986 by Michael Enright. Passed by Consensus to approve Conditions 1, 2, 3, and 5 as written. Condition #4, passed by consensus to add: The eucalyptus tree shall not be disturbed with construction of retaining wall. Condition #6, passed by consensus to amand "Authority" to "COmmittee". Passed by Consensus to Add Condition #7, to read as follows: As per letter from Stuart Farwell, Los Altos Fire District, dated March 4, 1986, the applicant shall install a fire hydrant at a location selected by the Fire Department. The hydrant shall be capable of flawing 1,000 G.P.M. or better. In lieu of the above, all buildings on parcel 1 shall be protected by residential fire sprinklers. Passed by consensus to Add Condition #8, to read as follows: Site and Geotechnical Plan Review - The geologic and geotechnical reports were prepared in 1982 and 1983, and need to be updated. The applicant shall retain the services of the subdivision geotechnical consultants to inspect the current site conditions, review and modify (as needed) the subdivision geotechnical report, and review and approve the geotechnical aspects of the development plans, (i.e., site preparation and final grading, site drainage irprovements, and design parameters for the foundations, retaining walls, etc.) to ensure their conformance with existing site conditions and the subdivision geotechnical report. The results of the site and plan reviews shall be sumnarized in a letter by the geotechnical consultant and submitted to the Toon to be reviewed and approved by the Town Geologist and Engineer prior to issuance of Site Development and Building Permits. Planning Camuission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Seven D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 4W 3. LANDS OF MURPHY/OWEN (continued) Passed by Consensus to Add Condition #9, to read as follows: 9. Geotechnical Field Inspection - The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (asneeded), and approve all geotechnical aspects of project construction. These inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements, and foundation and retaining wall excavation prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final project approval. Passed by Consensus to Add Condition #10, to read as follows: Excavation material shall be removed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Lachenbruch, seconded by Yanez and passed unanimously to approve the Site Development Permit for the Lands of Murphy/ Owen, Old Trace Lane, New Residence, Tennis Court, Swimming fool, Driveway, Cabana, Caretaker's Cottage subject to Conditions of Approval as amended. MOTION SBMNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Carico and passed unanimously to recommend approval of the Special Land Use Permit for the Lands of nxuphy/Oaen, Old Trace Lane to the City Council subject to the height of structures at 27'. 9. LANDS OF MURPHY/OWEN, FILE #CUP 10-85, OLD TRACE LANE, Peguest for approval of Conditional Use Permit to allow a secondary dwelling unit Ms. Lytle referred to her staff report dated June 5, 1986, noting this application is for a C.U.P. to construct a caretaker's cottage on property located on old Trace Lane. Ms. Lytle noted findings in Section 9-5.1107 (a)(i-iv), necessary to grant a C.U.P. can be made, as the secondary unit conforms with the Zoning Ordinance, is properly located, adequate to accomodate the use, site is served by adequate roads, and the use is not anticipated to adversely effect the abutting property, as may be conditioned by the Site Development Authority. Ms. Lytle noted the requixee is for secondary dwelling units as set forth in Section 9-5.703 (k) can be met with the proposal, the unit is detached and limited by ordinance to 1,000 sq. ft. (proposed unit 985 sq.ft.), the unit is architecturally ccapatible with the primary residence and will be connected to sanitary sewer. Ms. Lytle informed Commission there are two additional potential secondary dwelling units proposed within this development plan, noting staff has determined that neither fits the administrative definition of a secondary dwelling unit, the cabana is primarily an open-air facility and the dormitory above the garage will not be allowed to have 220 volt electrical or gas cennection and therefore a CUP would not be required or Variance. Staff reconmends the Planning Commission adopt a notion to approve the above referenced Conditional Use Permit subject to the attached staff recce ended conditions of approval. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Ren Pastrof, Owen Companies, in review of the Conditions of Approval, we agree to 1 through 9, but request Condition #10 be deleted, as this proposal due to the size, we would require two meters, for both water and electric. The Public Hearing was then closed. Planning Cmmission Minutes - Jure 11, 1986 Page Eight D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (' 4. LANDS OF MURPHY/G9jRN (continued) ;l MOTION SEOCNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Iachenbruch and passed by the following roll call vote to delete Condition #10. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kaufman, Lachenbruch, Yanez and Chairman Carico NOES: Commissions Gottlieb and Struthers MDTICN SECONDFD AND CARRIED: Moved by Iachenbruch, seconded by Kauffman and passed unanimously to approve the Lands of Murphy/OWM, File #CUP 10-85, subject to amended Conditions of Approval attached to the June 5, 1986 Staff Report 5. LANDS OF cAR4 S, 14090 Tracy Court, Request for approval of Site De,elopsot Permit for Gest House/Studio, Swimming Pool, Fool Decks, Driveway Modification, Retaining Walls and Fence Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated June 5, 1986, noting the applicant is requesting a Site Developrent Permit for a swfmling pool, studio/ guest house, pool decks, driveway =codification, retaining walls and fence, noting this property is one of those severely damaged in the July 1, 1985 fire, and the rebuilding of the primary residence, front walk, back patio and arbor was previously approved by the Disaster Site DeveloEment Camiittee. Along with the rebuilding, Ms. Lytle noted, the applicant has a desire to make same improvements to the property. Ms. Lytle informed Commission, the project (40 should be reviewed according to the Site Development Ordinance, sucmmarized in the Checklist attached to the Staff Report. Ms. Lytle recamended that Cmudssion approve the Site Development Permit, subject to conditions as listed in the Jame 5, 1986 Staff Report. Mr. Enright noted a condition should be added that the drainage for the subject project be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Don Brandeau, Representing Owner, asked for clarification of when the Landscape Plan would be required. Staff indicated prior to final inspection of Bailding Permit for the Swimming Pool and Gest House. The Public Hearing was then closed. MOPICN SECCNDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Gottlieb, and passed unan -mously to approve the Site Development Pezmit for the Lands of Carnes, subject to Conditions of Approval as in the June 5, 1986 Staff Report and new Condition: #2: Drainage shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. LANDS OF CARDS, FILE #COP 4-86, 14090 Tracy Court, Request for approval of Conditional Use Permit for Secondary Dwelling [mit Planning Camdssion Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Nine D. PUBLIC BEARINGS: 6. LANDS Cr CARNES: (continued) Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated Jame 5, 1986, the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a studio/guesthouse, of 400 square feet. In staff's opinion the findings in Section 9-5.1107 (a) (i -iv) necessary to grant a C.U.P. can be made, as the secondary unit conforms with zoning ordinances, the proposed use is properly located, the site is adequate to accomodate the use, the site is served by adequate roads, and the use is not anticipated to adversely effect the abutting property, as may be conditioned by the Site Developnent Authority. Ms. Lytle noted the requirements for secondary dwelling units as set forth in Section 9-5.703 (k) can be met with the proposal, noting the unit is 400 sq. ft., and allowed to be 1,000 sq.£t., the studio/guest house will be architecturally canatible with the primary residence, and will be connected to sanitary sewer. The Public Bearing was opened and closed with no ode speaking for or against this iter. MOTION SEMMED AND CARRIED: Moved by Iachenbruch, seconded by Yanez and passed unanimously to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the lands of Carnes, File #CUP 4-86, subject to Conditions of Approval as attached to the June 5, 1986 Staff Report. E. NEW BUSINESS: 1. letter from Don Brandeau, dated June 4, 1986, requesting a preliminary discussion of a proposed sound berm at 14090 Tracy Court, Lands of Carnes Ms. Lytle referred to her Staff Report dated June 5, 1986, informing Commission Mr. Brandeau is requesting an informal discussion of the proposed sound berm at 14090 Tracy Court, for which an application for variance has been filed. Ms. Lytle noted the variance is necessary to allow grading within ten feet of the property limes, and possibly exceed the naxim fence height allowance along roadways. Ms. Lytle informed Comnission that Mr. Brandeau and staff have met with Mr. Bill Carlson from the Santa Clara Valley Water District, noting in general staff recommends that grading, vegetation clearance and other forms of land use be held back from all drainageways within the ccnmunity, noting in this situation, and other, staff encourages riparian habitat restora- tion and enhancement. Commissioner lachenbruch noted there are many items which should be considered with this type of project, i.e., landscaping between pathway and roadway; landscaping between pathway and creek; and landscaping between creek and property which would be consistent with Santa Clara Valley Water District. Mr. Brandeau presented Ooanission with an informal presentation of the proposed cross sections. Chairman Carico noted she would not bein favor of a fence on top of the berm, and noted it is very difficult to make recommendations without seeing the plans. Connissionner Struthers indicated perhaps a small retaining wall such as that shown on the creek side would be a solution, or trove berm closer to roadway giving more space to Santa Clara Valley Water District. planning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Ten [[ E. NEW BUSINESS: `• 2. letter from Marcia Accola, dated June 6, 1986, regarding definition of Floor Area Ms. Lytle referred to Staff Report dated June 6, 1986, informing Cmmission Mrs. Accola has described a problem with the definition of Floor Area that is being used ux:der Urgency Ordinance #300 guidelines, noting staff would appreciate assistance from the Commission in improving the wording of the definition for the upcoming draft zoning ordinance revision, likewise, an interpretation from the Commission for use in the case of Mrs. Arcola would be appreciated. Ms. Lytle noted as pointed out in Mrs. Arcola's letter, according to the existing definition of Floor Area used by the 'Town, a structure which appears exactly the same from the outside would have a different square footage based on the location of the interior ceilings, noting this was not the intent of staff when the recamendation was made. Ms. Lytle noted it is necessary to use a definition which can be easily measured and understood by the camunity. Commissioner Lachenbruch thedefinition is something that staff should come up with, noting three basic problems: 1) attic space; 2) high ceilings; and 3) basements. If the ceiling is 15' you court it once, if it is 16' you count it twice: Formals: 15' over 8 X 1 = sq. R. which would measure the volume of the building, asking if staff felt that this type of formula would help mitigate this concern; Mrs. Accola, 27461 Sherlock Road, as bulk is the sane on the outside, and our house is currently designed with cathedral ceilings, feeling it does not seem fair to be penalized for this, when if they added another floor it would not be counted. Mrs. Accola indicated with this rule their proposal exceeds the guidelines by approximately 280 sq.ft. Ms. Lytle noted the applicant should go with the literal definition as written in the guidelines. Mr. IIuright suggested perhaps the Accola's might wish to go to the City Council and request relaxation of guidelines, or conform to the existing guidelines. Comdssimer Kaufman informed Accola's that the revised ordinance is likely to be more stringent on high ceiling mons. 3. Possible relocation of 'Town Hall Entrance Chairman Carico informed Camrissioners Mayor Fuhrman has requested the Cmvission review a possible proposed relocation of the entrance to 'Town Hall, noting the City Council at their June 4th meeting discussed this project and would like input from Committee Members and Commission. Cmmissicner Struthers indicated discussion over this item came up when the Heritage House was placed in the back of Tuan Hall and a problem relating to NIDA. We thought it would be better to have the entrance off of Fremont Road because of confusion of people trying to find us, and our lights reflecting f into those hares on Esperanza and Concepcion when leaving late at night. V' Commissioner Lachenbruch questioned if the existing entrance would be preserved? Planning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1986 Page Eleven E. NEW BUSINESS: 3. Relocation of Town Hall Entrance (continued) Cmmissioner Gottlieb indicated perhaps it would be :rare beneficial to hold off on our reccmxmdation until we have had a chance to review the proposal and look more carefully at the property. Commissioner Kaufman indicated there are a couple of issues which would need to be addressed: 1) Driveway to a major intersection (direct contradiction with General Plan and Fremont Road access); 2) would like to see re -determina- tion of forty foot setback is taken; and 3) request that any action of this come to the full Commission, not Site Developmnt Committee. Chaixman Carico noted there are sae other factors which should also be taken into account: 1) Money; 2) we just spent money last year re -paving the Town Hall driveway entrance; and 3) unless we have a problem with our meeting NIDA, then why is there a need to proceed. Cmmissioner Yanez if there are no problems, no concerns, then why change the current entrance, it is very unobtrusive. Cheri mn Carico suggested that perhaps Cmmission should spend Dore titre to think on this issue, as the hour is late, look at it with regard to General Plan and Land Use Purpose. F. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Lytle gave Cmmission a brief update on the Keenan property, noting Keenans have written a letter to City Cbuncil asking for relief of Stop Work Order, and the City Attorney has been consulted, noting it has been determined the Stop work was placed legally, noting the City Attorney indicated they: 1) hake interpretation to concur with ordinance; or 2) require variance, which could require setting a special meeting so that the issue does not go back and forth fram Cmmissiou to Council. reins :. •. �ko There being no further new or old business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:50 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Leslie Mullins Engineering/Planning