Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/1986PLANNING Ca4uSSICN ( TUC OF ILS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Ins Altos Hills, California Wednesday, September 10, 1986 Reel 124, Side I, Tract I, 000-1172 Chairman Siegel called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Hall Council Chambers. A. IULL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Present: Commissioners Carico, FhTding, Kaufman, Struthers, Yanez, and Chairman Siegel Absent: Comissioner Lachenbruch Staff: Michael Enright, City Engineer; Nancy Lytle, Town Planner; Leslie Mullins, Secretary City Council Representative: Concilwumn Dronkert i�i1Z�l�ia\It7G\ A Camuissioner Carico asked for clarification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Adobe Creek Lodge, is this a public hearing? Chairman Siegel explained that the item on the Agenda this evening is to address if the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Adobe Creek Lodge and Country Club, prepared by Farth Metrics, is adequate to proceed with processing. Siegel noted if the FEIR is found to be adequate by the Commission, the iter will be scheduled for public hearing at a later date and will care back to Commission for review. Commissioner Emling questioned why the item is even on the Agenda, noting the subject property has a pending sale currently. Chairman Siegel indicated the last hearing we held was quite extensive, since that time there have been many changes made to the EIR and Staff has made some supplemental cements (Staff Report dated September 9, 1986), noting now the Commission has a chance to see if this is adequate. Siegel further noted we are dealing with an item in process, and we're not ready at this time to issue a Conditional Use Permit. MOPICN SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Yanez, seconded by Emling and passed unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - August 27, 1986 2. Acceptance of Filing Tentative Map: a. Lands of Zappettini, File #TM 4-85 Altamont Road APN: 182-23-004; Gross Acreage; 8.10+; Net Acreage: 7.33+ Requested Number of Lots: 5 Planning Commission Minutes of September 10, 1986 Page Taro B. CONSENT CALENDAR: (continued) 1 2.b. lards of Corrie, File #TM 3-86 O'Keefe Lane APN: 175-48-056 Gross Acreage: 12.79+; Net Acreage: 11.37+ Requested Number of Lots: 9 3. Setting Public Hearings for September 24, 1986: a. Lands of Currie, File #'LM 3-86 Tentative Map and Negative Declaration b. Lands of Vanchieri, 25333 La Lama Drive Appeal of Administrative Decision c. Lands of Zappettini, File #TM 4-85 (continued for further consideration by Staff and Subcommittee on resukmittal) Commissioners Siegel and Struthers abstained from approval of minutes of August 27, 1986. C. REPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1986: Commissioner Yanez reported the City Council approved Special Land Use Permits for Wubbels, Carneghi and mamnnd; denied Special land Use Pernit for Tam (due to geologic concerns and 2nd story structure not adequate for sub3ect property); Adopted New Zoning Ordinance; Mr. Yanez provided Cammmissioners with a handout of the presentation by Nancy Lytle and Lori Scott with regard to the new zoning ordinance, and referred to Town Crier article regarding the new ordinance. Mr. Yanez indicated the City Council asked that Commission appoint 2 Commissioners to work with Councilwoman Dronkert and Mayor van Tamelen on a subcommittee regarding time zoning ordinance. Yanez reported the Council continued the Nuisance Ordinance for further review; accepted resignation of Councilman Rydell in November and Council- woman Fohrman in October, noting Council will appoint new members to fill vacancies. Commissioner Kaufman informed Commission he was on the Site Development Committee for Lands of Tam, new residence, noting the main reason for denial of the Special Land Use Permit by City Council was aesthetics, noting it is a very visible lot. Kaufman indicated the Council expressed some concerns to the designer as to relating house to hillside. Kaufman informed Commission the Subcommittee set up to review the new zoning ordinance, will look into cleaning up some areas of concern: Dronkert raised concern over artificially implaced materials (sand - tan bark, etc); Tryon raised concern over limited NIDA on smaller lots. Commission appointed Comissicners Carico and Iachenbruch to work with SubcOwnittee on newly adopted Zoning Ordinance. P>I�:II:IIICy:lai\ i1�TeG•R 4/ 1. Lands of Collinson, File #VAR 5-86, 27500 Edgerton Road, Request for 4W variance approval to allow encroachment into setback and height envelope for construction of 15'5" carport. Planning Carmission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Three D. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Lands of Collinson (continued) Ms. Lytle referred to Staff Report dated September 4, 1986, informing Commission the proposed project is to construct a carport within the 40 ft. setback along Edgerton Fuad, noting the project conforms with the existing and recently adopted zoning ordinances. Ms. Lytle indicated that the findings in Section 9-5.1107 (b), necessary to grant a variance can not be supported with evidence, noting in particular, the first finding is difficult to support. Staff recommended that the Cammission deny the request for variance, based on an inability to make the required findings. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Tan Sloan, Custom Hare Design, informed Commission the Collinson's do not presently have a garage or carport, noting the location proposed is the most economical and feasible, primarily because the rear of the lot is inconvenient and not accessible for Mrs. Collinson to go frcm garage to kitchen (groceries, etc). Mr. Sloan informd Co mission the house is sited difficultly on the site for placement of carport and is most effective to the front of the house, noting there is not as mach grading involved for this location and there is existing mature landscaping to mitigate the structure. Dr. Collinson, 27500 Edgerton Road, inforned Connussion that his wife has arthritis and needs to have the carport close and accessible to the kitchen area. 4 Commissioners questioned Dr. Collinson if he had considered a one car carport?; another location whichwould not require intrusion into setback area to the end of the residence?' and impact of structure upon neighbors. The Public Hearing was then closed. Commissioner Kaufman expressed concern over the excessive encrcachm t into the setback area, noting the structure would be very visible and intrusive, noting he did not feel he could make the six findings required, particularly when there are alternative locations. Kaufman noted he would more easily be able to make findings for a variance to the side setback for a small encrcaclm�t, asking for continuance of the item with the applicants consent to redesign. Co missioner Yanez noted he felt the Collinson 's have sham all their needs, and if he can re -design with a smaller encroachment he would be able to make findings, asking that the applicant re -design and return. Cmmissioner Struthers requested the item be denied without prejudice. Commissioner Carico indicated she preferred the item be continued with applicants permission, noting she could make finding #2, but not any others. Commissioner Ending noted he felt staff could assist Dr. Collinsar with V modification to make his proposal work for him and the Town. Chairman Siegel expressed concern over the proposed variance, indicating he would like to see what cores back, before making any recomendations. Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Four D. PUBLIC BEARINGS: I. Lands of Collinson (continued) MOTION SEON2IDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Carico and Passed unanimously to continue the lands of Collinson, Variance # 5-86, with applicant's consent for re -design. E. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Request for Setback Determination, Lands of Heinrich, 27200 Deersprings way Mr. Enright referred to Staff Report dated September 5, 1986, informing Commission the Site Development Committee met on August 6, 1986, to consider a request by the Heinrich's to have their 40.' setback from Byrne Park Lane, and 30' setback from Deersprings way. Mr. Enright informed Commission after hearing the presentation from applicant and their building designer, the Site Development Committee voted to refer the decision to the Commission. Mr. Enright noted Commissioners Carico and Siegel recommended that the Heinrich's be given favorable consideration of their request; and the City Engineer abstained from decision. Mr. Enright noted the question of setback determination is before Commission so that Commission could determine if the issue is a matter of setback determination or variance procedure would be nore appropriate. Mr. Heinrich, 27200 Deersprings Way, informed Commission the necessity for setback determination is in the need for solar access to residence. Camnissioner Kaufman raised some concerns over the house location on top of ]moll, addition of bulk, noting the 40' setback would be taken from Deersprings u4m re driveway is, noting it seems more appropriate to apply for variance. Conmissioner Struthers noted there is special aspect with regard to this proposal, (i.e., solar access) and should be given setback 40' from Byrne Park and 30' from Deersprings. Struthers questioned if there would be a problem with height envelope? Mr. Heinrich. noted the height conforms. Commissioner Carico indicated the Site Development Committee suggested that they extend out front walk, but this would mean removal of a large oak and limits sun access. Commissioner Yanez questioned if solar access is justification for setback determination. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Yanez, seconded by Carico and passed by the following roll call vote to approve request for Lands of Heinrich, forty foot (401) setback shall be from Byrne Park lane and thirty foot (30') setback shall be from Deersprings Way. ROLL CALL: AYES: Camnissioners Carico, Enling, Struthers, Yanez and Chairman Siegel NOES: Commissioner Kaufman ABSTAIN: None rm Planning CamAssion Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Five E. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Interpretation of Section 9-5.703 (e) regarding Day Care and Nurseries Ms. Lytle referred to Staff Report dated Septenber 4 and 10th, 1986, with regard to a request mady by California Children's Camunity for potential Conditional Use Permit to open a Day Care Facility within the Town. Ms. Lytle indicated Section 9-5.703 (e) allows these facilities to operate with CUP, however, it includes a provision stating "ten or fewer children", the proposed facility would be for 200 children. Ms. Lytle referred to State Requirements for zoning of family day care hares. Ms. Lytle recomended that the Cannission interpret Section 9-5.703 (e) to include no restriction on the size of the day care facility. Camdssioners discussed processing of Conditional Use Permit for Day Care School as we would for Private Schools within Town. MDPIQ9 SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Carico and passed unanimusly to interpret Day Care Facilities under definition of Private Schools, processing through Conditional Use Pennit, which would allow regulation of number of students, access, }ours, etc. 3. Camussioner Kaufman referred to Aorkshop with County Planning Co mission with regard to design, and siting of large (comercially placed) antennas. Kaufman noted this does not directly affect Ips Altos Hills, but in the future we may be asked for placement of cellular telephone antenna, and there will be discussion over open space and park land. 420 F. OLD BUSINESS: 1. Request for Preliminary Review of Develognent Concept and potential variance request on Lot #7, Horseshoe lane (George Dai) Ms. Lytle referred to Staff Report dated August 21, 1986 inforning Commission Int #7 is currently undeveloped and is a highly constrained site due to an average slope of 37.98, LUF of .39 and limited potential for access. Ms. Lytle noted the applicant has submitted sore concept plans for preliminary review and he would appreciate feedback from the Camnission on the following issues: Minimum Parking Requirements; and Access. Ms. Lytle inforred Ca[¢nission the property would be subject to new ordinance and would require a Conditional Developaent Pernit since the IUF for the lot is less than .5. Chainren Siegel infonred Camussion this is a Preliminary Review, with potential for variance request, noting the applicant would like to discuss his concept. Siegel further noted the Cartnission, shall take no fornal action and are free to change their mind when application is filed with Town. Mr. George Dai, Horseshoe Lane, inforned Camrission access to the lot is only as proposed on plans, noting the previous property owner tried to gain access along Arastradero Road and was turned down. Mr. Dai inforred Camussion he has spoke with adjacent neighbors regarding my proposal and will have to meet applicable ordinances, noting the main residence is not a problem / but the garage will be due to extrane slope of site, therefore I feel it 1r must encroach into setback and height envelope, therefore requiring a variance. Camussicners, Staff and applicant discussed the difficulty of access to the subject site, steepness of lot and allowable developre t area, noting the Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Six F. OLD BUSINESS: [ 1. Lands of Dai (continued) Proposed residence is very bulky for subject site. Mr. Bob Latta, 27061 Horseshoe Lane, adjacent neighbor, informed Camnission he has reviewed plans prepared by Mr. Dai, and is confident that the residence will be unobtrusive, as Mr. Lai is an architect as well as a neighbor of the proposed lot. With regard to access, Mr. Latta expressed concern of danger on Arastradero Road; and use of frontage driveway up Horseshoe which may be a possibility, noting this would keep the structure closer to my property, asking the garage be kept low profile so not to interefere with views. With regard to access on easement, Mr. Dai indicated he uses the access easement only for pool maintenance, etc. Mr. Enright informed Commission the easement is primarily for access to Lot #8, and would require Mr. Nakajima's approval, noting also there is no easement over Lot #8, and world make Mr. Dai's lot even more non -conforming by reducing net area, and expressed concern over septic systems for the three lots. Cmwdssioners, Staff and applicant discussed further access wer existing easements, La Cresta access; restrictiveness due to septic system, slope steepness and allowable development area, asking applicant to re -think 4 his proposal taking into consideration all of these constraints. 2. Final Environmental Lnpact Report for the Adobe Creek Iodge and Country Club Chairman Siegel informed Commission and public, the item before us this evening is a Final Envirommantal Impact Report, noting we had a good public hearing last time, and Earth Metrics was to have taken our comments and make the subject Final EIR, staff has indicated the Cammission should see if the FEIR is adequate to set a public hearing and then pass on to the City Council who will also hold a public hearing and then we would proceed with the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Siegel noted let's have Commission make review and comment on the FEIR and then we will have public speak, noting however, the public will get another chance to speak at the scheduled public hearing with both Commission and City Council, Commissioner Carico expressed concern that the FEIR very inadequately addresses concerns raised at the last public hearing, noting the responses made by Earth Metrics with regard to mitigation are unacceptable. Comnissioner Kaufman expressed there are two major environmental impacts: 1) traffic and 2) noise, noting he did not feel that the report adequately addresses traffic along Moody Road (ie., Hidden Villa Master Plan, peak load hours, flow hours); with regard to Noise impact from traffic, Mr. Kaufman noted it was computed incorrectly and world like to see a combined noise index. Cal Ms. Lytle informed Commission tonight the Commission is to cement on their comments made in reference to the last public hearing, and to decide whether or not we should set a public hearing and recommendation to City Council. Planning Ccam-fission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Seven F. OID BUSINESS: 2. Final Environmental Impact Report (continued) Cmmissioner Emling expressed concern over the validity of the documnt, noting he felt it very sloppily written; traffic and parking concerns are not adequately addre;sed; questioned how many families are living on the property presently? Chairnan Siegel again stressed that the Commission is to decide whether this FEIR is adequate for us to set a public hearing, noting along with the FEIR frau Faith Metrics, Ms. Lytle has prepared comments to mitigate sae of the issues not in the FEIR, noting this documnt helps us decide whether the document can adequately deal with the application, noting it does not deal with the Commission allowing any use of the property, it deals with traffic, noise,etc. If Cmmission decides it is inappropriate to use as a club, then this all becomes irrelevant. Me, Lytle also noted that if we decide this is completely inadequate, the Town would have to go into litigation withthe preparer of the report and would have to re -capture the costs through legality. Commissioner Kaufman then indicated, the EIR is not an approval of the Project, it is in place of a Negative Declaration (we've hired a firm to docu:ent what the impacts are)- we hope this reflects our concerns, and can quantify the environmental issues, noting Cmmission should be prepared to document why this documnt is right or not right at the public hearing. Kaufman noted if we wish to dispute a finding made, we must have factual information, expressing concern to public, this is not the place to stop a project, but at the Conditional Use Permit application process. Cmmissicner Struthers indicated the document is not readable, noting the public hearing she had asked for charts, where are they? Cmmissioner Yanez indicated that there are still questions which may never be answered, noting he does not believe that by blocking the EIR is the right thing to do, and indicated he did not feel another consultant would do a better job, that would only delay the process. Yanez expressed concern that traffic and noise issues are still not adequately addressed, noting there is no comprehensive analysis. Yanez indicated the EIR should be forwarded to City Council with individual statements, that by hashing this out ever and over again at Cmmission level does not make sense, and feel we are ready to move this document on to the City Council without another public hearing. Mrs. Sherrie E mling, 11853 Murietta lane, informed Oc mission there are 9 rental units on the subject property existing presently; raised concerns over traffic, noise, parking (all weather vs. dry weather) , and the creek. Mrs. Judith Zurbriggen, 11800 Marietta Lane, informed Commission the responses made by Earth Metrics are not adequate, raising concern over development area, other large property in the vicinity which could be further subdivided not included in analysis, and increased usage of Hidden Villa every weekend for horse shows. 4W Mr. Gay Pang, 12025 Moody Springs Court, questioned if all neighbors were notified with regard to Final EIR? Staff responded yes. With regard to the EIR, Mr. Pang informed Ccamission, he felt that staff should summarize the sumaary made by Earth Metrics, an executive summary which would show where the inadequacies are, noting the cmments made by Envirormmntal Design Committee Planning Canission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Eight F. OLD BUSINESS: 2. Final Environmental Impact Report (continued) were not addressed. Mr. Pang indicated he felt the EIR did not address traffic adequately, feeling it should say the increase in traffic will be 1448. Mr. Steve Hunton, 11991 Marietta Lane, informed Commission the issues of an EIR are to provide information to Planning Department in order to make judgement on: 1) traffic, 2) hydrology, 3) impact on neighbors; and 4) siting of proposed use. Ms. Lytle asked to interrupt the proceedings, this document does not address those issues, they will be addressed in the Staff Report prepared for the Conditional Use Permit at a later date. Mr. Steve Hunton, indicated there are many areas which the EIR glosses over, i.e., pedestrian/equestrians and bicyclists. Have the consultants ever used a traffic counter, I've never seen one; and questioned what has happened to the Master Plan Update? Ms. Lytle informed public, the Housing Element is a part of our work p and rogram which will be considered firstly by Commission and Council, other General Plan Amendments will Tollow. Mr. Steven Gaither, Menlo Park, informed Conmission he is the individual who has the property under control from Mr. Eellucci, informing Ccumission he has read the EIR, noting he is under the impression we got what we paid for, indicating there is a document and it's adequacy is questionable. Mr. Gaither informed Commission his proposal is a new concept, different that what was proposed by Mr. Hellucci; and there is ample time for neighbors to help with coordination of consultantsU etc. With regard to stopping the procedings on this application, Mr. Gaither informed Commission Mr. Hellucci feels that he is entitled to completion of the process. Mr. Pang asked that his coo ents previously made should be included in public hearing, but should not be included as part of the EIR. Ms. Lytle explained the certification process: Per CEQA Guidelines: 1) EIR completed and in compliance with CEQA guidelines; and 2) reviewed by Agency, decision making body did review and recommend on the report prior to making any decision on the project. MOTION SECONDED AND WI'hmRAM: Moved by Raufman, seconded by lhuling and withdrawn to Agendize the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Adobe Creek Lodge and Country Club for October 8, 1986 Agenda. MOTION SECONDED AND WITHDRAWN: Moved by Yanez, seconded by Kaufman and withdrawn, that the Planning Commission finds the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Adobe Creek lodge and Country Club acceptable and forward to City Council, noting there are significant impacts and the City Council mitigate issues. `y MOTION WITHDRAFLI DUE TO LACK OF SECOND: Moved by Yanez, to have no certification of document, Final Environmental Impact Report for Adobe Creek Lodge and Country Club. The Final Davi ronnental Impact Report will return on a later Agenda as a Public Hearing after further review by Earth Mettics and Staff. Planning Coamission Minutes - September 10, 1986 Page Nine 3. Counissioner Siegel will take Cmunissioner Iachenbruchs place for the September 17, 1986 City Council Meeting. 7 4. Commissioner Struthers will take Site Development Committee on October 3rd with Cmmissioner Carico. 5. Discussion over time and day of Site Developament Camtittee Meetings: Crnmissioner Emlmg indicated he would be able to attend more meetings if they were held in afternoon, from 3:00 to 5:00 P.M. Cmmissioner Yanez indicated that he too Mould be available more often. Camdssicners Struthers and Caricm concurred. Staff will arrange to hold Site Development Committee Meetings on Tuesdays, afternoon 2:00 - 5:00 P.M. II�S�17i�1:�WIg�Y1F There being no further new or old business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Leslie Mullins Planning/Engineering no