Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/09/19884 PLANNING COMMISSION TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California Wednesday, March 9, 1988 Reel 124, Side I, Tract II, 000 -End, Side II, Tract II, 000-020 Chairman Yanez called the meeting to order at 7:34 P.M. in the Town Hall Coun- cil Chambers. A. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Present: Commissioners Carico, Kaufman, Patmore, Struthers, Stutz, Chairman Yanez Absent: Commissioner Emling Staff: Bill Ekern, Director of Public Works, Lori Scott, Acting Town Planner, Leslie Mullins, Secretary B. CONSENT CALENDAR: Item Removed: B.I. (Patmore) kwCommissioner Patmore requested the minutes of February 24, 1988 be amended ' as follows: On Page Five, second paragraph, motion to include "for wire mesh fence". MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Patmore and passed unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar, specifically: Plan- ning Commission Minutes of February 10, 1988 and February 24, 1988 as amended. C. REPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 2, 1988: Commissioner Struthers reported the City Council concurred with variance approval for Packard, Miller, and Markoff; concurred with Conditional Use Permit approval for Krause. City Council referred Eyvazov back to Commis- sion for review of new residence, as applicant submitted revisions to them for review. City Council upheld decision on Collison Variance. City Council adopted negative declaration for San Antonio Hills Annexation; public hearing held for installation of the Currie Sanitary Sewer System, noting some protest from residents in the district who have existing sep- tic systems which are functioning; approved ordinance on stabled animals; meeting set up for City Council on Friday, March 25th for information on Measure B; Mayor requested staff report on how zoning ordinance is pro- ceeding and questioned use of Data Base System. D REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF MARCH 1st & 8th, 1988: Commissioner Emling not present to report on March 1st. `Commissioner Kaufman reported the Site Development Committee on March 8th, approved Mele landscape plan, noting the residence is very bright; ap- proved fence and walls for Osborne on Torello Lane; approved New Residence and Swimming Pool for Scholten on Via Corite. Commissioner Stutz questioned if there was a requirement to see the color chip at landscape plan approval? Mr. Ekern informed Commission the Site Development Permit for the new residence was approved prior to the color chip requirement being included into the Site Development Permit approval. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR: PUBLIC HEARINGS: LANDS OF CHRISTIANSEN, FILE #VAR 35-87, 25605 Willow Pond Lane, Re- quest for Variance and Site Development Permit to allow redwood deck to intrude into setback by a maximum of 16 1/2' Ms. Scott informed Commission the February 17, 1988 Staff Report was pre- sented at the February 24, 1988 Meeting, noting this variance request is for a redwood deck to encroach 16 1/2' into setback area attached to an accessory structure. Commissioners were presented a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Christiansen, noting the owners are not present this evening, thereby delegating au- thority to Mr. Brooke. �VCommissioner Kaufman questioned if the accessory structure should also be included into the variance request as it is also within setback area. Ms. Scott indicated that staff assumed the accessory structure would be handled as an existing non -conforming structure, and the variance would be for the newly constructed deck. Ms. Scott noted staff reviewed Town files for permit activity at this address, noting the residence was constructed in 1958, and found no permits for the accessory structure, noting we would assume it was constructed after 1976 as it does not show on the Town's aerial photos prepared in 1976. Commissioner Carico raised concern over the Town's records missing, also asking if neighbors have seen the plans for the deck or signed any peti- tion in favor or against the deck. Commissioner Carico also noted that only the deck is on the Agenda, asking staff what should commission act on this evening. Ms. Scott informed Commission the plans show the accessory structure in its location, fees and plans are adequate with the exception of no eleva- tions have been submitted, noting she would have to ask for an interpreta- tion from the City Attorney on this matter. The Public Hearing was then opened. `Mr. Barry Brooke, informed Commission he has gone to the neighbors with the plans and have signed letter of approval. With regard to the acces- -2- sory structure, Mr. Brooke informed Commission he did not know if the structure was in place when the Christiansen's purchased the property, ad- ding the structure is used as garden utility room, it is not finished in- side, just studded walls. Commissioner Struthers questioned Mr. Brooke if he thought the structure could be easily moved. Mr. Brooke indicated it is a very heavy structure, but it is sound enough that it could be moved. The Public Hearing was then closed. Commissioner Kaufman expressed much concern over the staff report and preparation on this variance application, noting it is obvious that the accessory structure is illegal, expressing unhappiness with staff to ad- dress a variance on a structure which has no permits. Commissioner Carico concurred with Commissioner Kaufmans statements. Commissioner Stutz reminded Commissioner Kaufman that there are instances in the Town which they do not have records on file, noting her barn was constructed with permits and variance, but noted the Town has none on file. Commissioner Patmore asked staff to read the comments received from the Pathway Committee. Ms. Scott read the Pathway Committee recommendations. 4W Pathway SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Patmore and passed by the following roll call vote to Deny the Variance request for the Lands of Christiansen, File #VAR 35-87, 25605 Willow Pond Lane for a redwood deck constructed 16 1/2' into setback area. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Carico, Kaufman, Patmore, Struthers and Stutz NOES: Chairman Yanez ABSENT: Commissioner Emling Commissioners informed Mr. Brooke that there is an appeal process Mr. and Mrs. Christiansen can go through with the City Council within ten days of this decision. Commission also noted there is adequate Development and Floor Area to accomodate the accessory structure and deck if the Chris- tiansen's were to move the structures to be in conformance with setback requirements, noting this would require zoning, site development and buildng permits. 2. LANDS OF WILLIS, FILE #VAR 1-88, 26970 Arastradero Road, Request for Variance and Site Development Permit to construct a porch roof over hang a maximum of 13 1/2' in setback area, overhang to encroach 6' maximum into setback Ms. Scott referred to Staff Report dated March 2, 1988 informing Commis- sion this is a variance request to construct a porch roof overhang a maxi - 440, mum of 13 1/2' high in setback area, overhang to encroach into setback by a maximum of 61, noting the overhang is to provide protection from the —3- elements and will not add any new development or floor area. Ms. Scott ,recommended approval of the requested variance based on the required find- ings per Municipal Code Section 10-1.1107 as shown in the March 2, 1988 Staff Report. Commissioner Patmore questioned why this was a major variance request for overhangs within setback. Ms. Scott informed Commission overhangs are not allowed in setback area. Mr. Ekern informed Commission the minor variance only allows administrative staff review for 2' into setback, noting this request is 6' into setback. With regard to not seeing this type of ap- plication, Mr. Ekern informed Commission it is bay windows over 15' in height which no longer are reviewed by the Site Development Committee as a policy. Chairman Yanez raised concern over the amount of paperwork and fees the applicant had to pay to the Town to process such a minor variance request, asking if there was a way to eliminate this. Commissioner Struthers questioned staff if there was a policy to allow eaves into setback? Chairman Yanez added he thought they did not count towards development area and could be 2' into setback. Commissioner Kaufman noted the Commission can recommend to the City Coun- cil to refund the fees. The Public Hearing was then opened. (L 4/Mr. Willis, 26970 Arastradero Road, informed Commission there are two rea- sons for covering the porch: 1) rainy season; 2) rain catches on the door sill and is rotting away, noting they want to prevent any further damage to the house. The Public Hearing was then closed. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Stutz, seconded by Patmore and passed unanimously to approve the Lands of Willis, File #VAR 1-88, 26970 Arastradero Road, Variance and Site Development Permit to construct a porch roof overhang a maximum of 13 1/2' in setback area, overhang to en- croach 6' maximum into setback as based on required findings per Municipal Code Section 10-1.1107 (b) as shown in the March 2, 1988 Staff Report, and subject to recommended conditions of approval for the site development permit as shown in Mr. Ekern's staff report dated March 3, 1988. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Patmore, seconded by Yanez and passed by the following roll call vote to recommend to the City Council that the City Council apply the minor variance fees to Lands of Willis File #VAR 1-88. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kaufman, Patmore, Struthers, Stutz and Chairman Yanez NOES: Commissioner Carico ABSENT: Commissioner Emling Commissioner Carico noted she voted against this motion as the Commission can't adjust fees. - 1- (W3. LANDS OF WONG, FILE #VAR 15-87, Lot #7, Rhoda Drive, Request for Variance to exceed Maximum Development Area and Maximum Floor Area for purposes of constructing a new residence Ms. Scott referred to Staff Report dated March 3, 1988 informing Commis- sion Mr. Wong was first considered for a variance application by Commis- sion on January 13th and continued the application to allow Mr. Wong to redesign the proposal to address the Commission and neighbors concerns. Ms. Scott noted Mr. Wong has submitted two redesigns for Commissions con- sideration, Proposal "A" is a redesign of the submittal reviewed by the Commission on January 13th; and Proposal "B" is new design with the house and driveway relocated in a different configuration, staff recommends that the Commission review both Proposal "A" and "B" and direct the applicant to pursue further development of Proposal "A", noting the applicant should be informed that prior to granting of a variance, elevations and roof plan must be submitted so a full zoning review could be conducted, and an ac- curate detailed grading plan be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for review by the Public Works Director. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Vince Wong, 13456 Mandoli Drive, informed commission he has submitted two proposals for Commissioners review, noting he would prefer to con- struct Proposal "A". Mr. Wong presented Commission with cross sections of Proposal "A" for review. (( Commissioners discussed location of proposed residence, leach fields loca- Wtion as approved by the Santa Clara County Health Department, and location of existing swale which contributes to the problems over the location of proposed septic tank and drain fields. Commissioners then commented on the two proposals provided by Mr. Wong. Commissioner Kaufman noted he did not like either proposal received this evening for review, suggesting the residence be moved down slope and reduced in size. Commissioner Carico indicated the Commission has been seeing many vari- ances lately, agreeing with Commissioner Kaufman that the residence should be reduced in size so that a variance is not necessary. Chairman Yanez informed Commission he met with Mr. Osborne, who had con- cerns at past reviews and now feels Mr. Wong with his latest proposal has addressed his concerns, with exception to requesting that the Commission not allow Mr. Wong to build a chain link fence at the property line and to require him to install landscaping. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Carico, seconded by Patmore and passed by the following roll call vote to Deny without Prejudice the Lands of Wong, File #VAR 15-87, Lot #7, Rhoda Drive, to exceed the Maximum De- velopment Area and Maximum Floor Area for construction of new residence. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Carico, Kaufman, Patmore, Struthers and Stutz `,NOES: Chairman Yanez ABSENT: Commissioner Emling -15- WMr. Wong informed Commission that he has owned this lot for 6 years and has been trying to get approval for a residence with no luck, noting or- dinances have changed since he first purchased the lot, at that time the allowed development area was 7,000 sq.ft. Mr. Wong also commented on the problems which arose through the Santa Clara County Health Department review of the septic tank and leachfields, due to the a requirement that the leachfields be 501away from the swale, 50' from cut slopes on Miller property, noting he has worked out the design with Mr. Kaupert, sanitation officer of the County Health Department for this approval. Mr. Wong also indicated that the Health Department would not approve splitting of the leachfields. Chairman Yanez informed Mr. Wong of the appeal process to the City Coun- cil. LANDS OF CHARVEZ, Lot #1, O'Keefe Lane (Tract #8044), Request for Appeal of Site Development Conditions regarding circular driveway Mr. Ekern referred to Staff Report dated March 3, 1988 informing Commis- sion the Site Development Permit was issued on February 9, 1988 with one of the conditions being that the driveway be redesigned, as it was felt the circular driveway was not appropriate or necessary for this site. Mr. Ekern noted that a circular driveway increases development, less open, less rural in character and has generally been the recommendation of the Committee to not allow circular driveways except in instances where safety `issues such as site distance and steep terrain make other designs less practical, noting such a situation does not exist in this subdivision. Mr. Ekern informed Commission the applicant would like to claim that be- cause circular driveways were shown on the Conceptual Plan for the Sub- divison that it has been pre -approved, noting the conceptual plan is mere- ly for illustrative purposes and no obligation or promises are connected with it. Mr. Ekern recommended that the Commission uphold the decision of the Site Development Committee and require the applicant to redesign the driveway such that there are not two connections to O'Keefe Lane. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Mehdi Mohammadian, 3131 S. Bascom Campbell, read letter addressed to Planning Commission received at meeting, noting the circular driveway has no conflicts with Town Ordinances, will enhance the appearance of the property, and has several technical advantages. Mr. Mohammadian referred to proposed circular driveway shown on final map of the subdivision ap- proved by the City Council on July 15, 1987, as shown on page five ap- proved by Michael Enright, City Engineer at that time. Mr. Ekern informed Commission that the document Mr. Mohammadian is refer- ring to is the Improvement Plan for the Subdivison signed by Michael En- right which shows 2 cuts for driveway in the curb, noting this is not the recorded final map and does in no way obligate the town to approving 2 driveway entrances. The Public Hearing was then closed. _G_ MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Kaufman, seconded by Patmore and taw passed unanimously to uphold the Site Development Committee conditions of approval for the Lands of Charvez, Lot k1, O'Keefe Lane. NEW BUSINESS: Interpretation of Floor Area determination, Lands of Vogl Ms. Scott referred to Staff Report dated March 2, 1988 informing Commis- sion the Floor Area definition says that "Floor Area shall mean the gross horizontal area of the several floors of all buildings, including garage space, measured to the outside of exterior walls", noting the Uniform Building Code defines an exterior wall as "any wall or element of a wall, or any member or group of members, which defines the exterior boundaries or courts of a building...", which she interpreted the wall around the crawl space as an exterior wall and measured floor area to this wall. With regard to the Vogl plans, Ms. Scott informed Commission the area of discussion is the left side of the house where the crawl space is indi- cated, in calculating the floor area of the structure, most of the crawl space area was counted as floor area, at 315 sq.ft., which caused the ap- plicant to exceed the allowed floor are by 138 sq.ft. Ms. Scott noted the applicant contends that the crawl space should not be counted as floor area because the retaining wall has been located to the inside of the crawl space, and the space cannot be used as "living area". Mr. Huntzinger, 2443 Ash Street Palo Alto, Civil Engineer, informed Com- mission he was under the impression that basement and attic under 8' did Crnot count towards Floor Area, noting everything has been reduced on this site and the house design to comply with what he interprets as Town or- dinance, the garage was shortened, the driveway parking, patio and stair- ways reduced, house has been set lower on lot, asking Commission for an appeal of the Staff decision on Floor Area, as the applicant believes they have tried very hard to satisfy the the Town and believe decision made by Ms. Scott to be invalid. Mrs. Carol Gottlieb, 24290 Summerhill Avenue, expressed concern over the small size of this lot and bulkiness of proposed residence, noting this is an older area of the Town with modest homes, suggesting to the Commis- sion and applicant that a single story residence is suitable for this lot and neighborhood. Commission, staff and applicant discussed the Floor Area calculation pro- cess the planning staff uses. Commissioners commented staff is interpret- ing the ordinance correctly as the floor area definition is in keeping with the intent of regulating the outside bulk of structures as opposed to regulating the amount of living area usable by the occupant. 2. Commissioner Patmore informed Commission the City Council at their last meeting, discussed a statement the City Attorney made relating to Planning Commissioners addressing the City Council on a minority report, asking if Commissioners could be provided with a memo on this matter from the City Attorney. -1- Commissioner Carico indicated that any Commissioner could address the City ( Council on any item from the Floor as individuals, but not as a represen- ir'tative of the Planning Commission. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED• Moved by Patmore, seconded by Stutz and passed unanimously to request an interpretation by the City Attorney on minority reports by the Planning Commission to the City Council 3. Commissioner Patmore requested information on public hearings for the San Antonio Hills Annexation. Ms. Scott informed Commission it was her understanding that the Public Hearing with LAFGCO is on April 13, 1988, noting the City Council has approved the Negative Declaration at their last meeting. Commissioners stressed the importance of citizen participa- tion in the Annexation process, noting as the LAFGCO meeting is scheduled on a night of a regular Commission meeting we may want to look into can- celling or changing the date of our meeting so that Commissioners could attend the LAFGCO meeting. Ms. Scott informed Commission she would pro- vide the Staff Report to Commission which was presented at the City Coun- cil meeting and any further information on the process procedure. 4. Ms. Scott informed Commission there is an existing small dwelling on 3/4 of an acre on Hill Way, noting the applicant would like to retain the small dwelling as a guest house and construct a new residence as well, as- king if a 3/4 of an acre lot by our ordinances could accommodate a second unit and primary dwelling? 4Commissioners requested further information be provided to them prior to 1WCC any judgement, suggesting a preliminary review may be a good op- portunity for the applicant and Commission to discuss their project. Com- missioners did note there may be concern over the second unit, as it is located in the setback area. 5. Ms. Scott informed Commission The Owen Companies have resubmitted their application for Site Development on Altamont Road, noting they have reduced the amount of grading involved so that it no longer requires Plan- ning Commission review, but can be handled at the Site Development Commit- tee Level, asking Commission as this item was continued for redesign by the Commission is it required to come back to full Commission or can it be heard now by the Site Development Committee. Commissioners informed Staff as the redesign has eliminated excess grading, it could be reviewed by the Site Development Committee. OLD BUSINESS: ADJOURNMENT: There being no further new or old busisness, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Leslie Mullins Planning Technician —s-