Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/22/199340 Minutes of a Regular Meeting Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Council cc: Cas: September 22, 1993, 7:00 P.M. mbers, 26379 Fremont Road APPROVED Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Cheng, Ellinger (arrived at 7:25 p.m.), Schreiner, Sinunu, Stutz & Takamoto Absent: None Staff: Linda Niles, Town Planner; Jeff Peterson, City Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Assistant Planner; Lani Lonberger, Planning Secretary Commissioner Ellinger arrived at 7:25 p.m. 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR Persons wishing to address the Commission on any subject not on the agenda are invited to do so now. Please note, however, that the Commission is not able to undertake extended discussion or take action tonight on non-agendized items. Such items will be referred to Staff or placed on the agenda for a future meeting. None 3, CONSENT CALENDAR Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be adopted in one motion, except for any item removed for separate consideration elsewhere on the agenda. The Chairman will ask the Commission and the audience for requests to remove these items. None. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 2 4. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14.1993 4.1 The Planning Commission representative was Commissioner Cheng. Items discussed: all consent items approved; Lands of Puri variance; Housing Element sub -committee report and the State's visit to Town Hall and discussion regarding secondary dwellings; Council requesting updated list of secondary dwellings; Purissima Water District building for possible future use by Town Hall and/or Purissima Water District expanding site. Commissioner Takamoto will be the Planning Commission representative for the October 6, 1993 City Council meeting. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 LANDS OF LOHR, 24001 Oak Knoll Circle -Lot 23; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence, Pool, Spa and Tennis Court (continued from September 8, 1993). This item will be continued to an undetermined date. 5.2 LANDS OF CIMERA, 25601 Chapin Road; A request for a Site Development Permit and Variance for a Remodel, Addition, Garage and Pool (continued from September 8,1993). There was nothing further to add by Staff Commissioner Schreiner asked if any road eight -of -way dedication off Chapin was being requested and staff responded it was not requested by the engineering consultant. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Angie Acuna, 204 Vista Verde, Carmel Valley, architect, discussed the design of the new addition. They are proposing to raise the house and change the roof line. They are adding 18' to the house which will produce a new master bedroom and master bathroom on the upper level. On the ground level they will have a new pool area and a pool room. There was an existing accessory building and an existing concrete terrace to the north and to the west and some existing decks. They removed those accessory buildings, which were encroaching into the setback and removed the concrete terrace in the back to provided a concrete walk through the back kitchen door. They did not need the deck areas to the west because they would be focusing most of the outdoor activities to the east in the pool area. With this accomplished, they thought they were within the allowable square footage of the residence. However, they require a variance for 169 sq. ft. Mr. Acuna thought the only other area to reduce square footage would be in the garage area, which currently is only a three car garage . That would leave one more car Planning Commission Minutes September 22,1993 Page 3 APPROVED out in the open. He asked the Commission to grant the variance and look at the application favorably. Commissioner Schreiner discussed her site visit. She felt 169 sq. ft. would be the equivalent to a 10 x 20 room. She suggested taking off 21 /2' off the top and 21 /2 ' in length on the bottom of the new addition so they would not need a request for a variance. Mr. Acuna stated he would rather take footage from the garage, as he felt this would effect the design, especially the internal workings of the plan. He felt this was a modest master bedroom and master bath. The house only has one bath presently. Further discussion ensued regarding the fruit trees being removed only in the pool area; what constitutes a minor variance; proposing an evergreen hedge along the access road behind the property which would provide screening and block the wind coming through the pool area; increasing the number of bathrooms from one to three with the approval of the Santa Clara Health Department; losing 427 sq. ft. due to the unique easement; other properties in Town with similar easements. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING The Commissioners discussed the purpose of maximum development area; the easement on the property and the size of the variance; trouble with the first variance #finding; the lot being under one acre which does not allow the lot to be unusual or �/ unique. Chairman Comiso commented she had a hard time not granting this variance. She discussed the encumbrance on the property due to an access easement along the rear of the lot. If this encumbrance was not there, the applicant would not need a variance. She would rather not have the third car park outside, however, the Commission must have findings to grant a variance. Commissioner Stutz commented that the owner of the property bought the property with this restriction on it. She could not find the first variance exception nor could Commissioner Schreiner. A possible carport was suggested which would not be counted as floor area, only development area. Commissioner Takamoto felt the design was good and an improvement to the lot. He did not feel 169 sq. ft. would effect the privileges of the neighbors. Further discussion ensued regarding the lot being substandard and not unique in Los Altos Hills. It was suggested asking the applicant if they would be interested in a carport. `7 Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 ( Page 4 MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Motion by Commissioner Stutz (she stated she would not vote for the project) and seconded by Commissioner Schreiner to recommend approval as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Sinunu, Takamoto & Cheng NOES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Stutz, Ellinger & Schreiner The applicants were asked if they would prefer to continue for a redesign or reduce the garage area including a carport. Mr. Acuna felt a carport would be acceptable if they could screen the wall with the same roof mass, leaving both ends open which would be a good carport with a garage. He suggested re -submitting the plans for staff review for the carport with a garage. Mr. Acuna questioned Condition 18 and the possible liability to his client due to the slope. Chairman Comiso suggested the applicant, pathway committee and staff work on the safety of the pathway on Chapin Road to the satisfaction of staff. MOTION WITHDRAWN: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger to continue for re -design was withdrawn. i. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Takamoto and �/ seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve the application with the addition of a carport, meeting MFA, to the satisfaction and approval of staff and to change Condition 18 to read, "A Type IIB path shall be developed within the Chapin Road right-of-way to the satisfaction of staff and pathway committee prior to final inspection and release of occupancy permits." AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Cheng, Ellinger, Schreiner, Sinunu, Stutz & Takamoto NOES: None This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period before final planning approval. Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1993 Page 5 APPROVED 5.3 LANDS OF CURRIE, 26343 Esperanza Drive; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Remodel. Staff had nothing further to add to the Staff Report. Commissioner Schreiner asked if the small accessory structure in the setback would remain. It is shown on page 2 of the plans. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Mark Sandoval, 885 San Antonio Road, architect, to answer Commissioner Schreiner's question, stated the small structure was a tool shed which had been there for approximately 25 years. The main building is 30 years old. Mr. Sandoval discussed the project stating most improvements were interior and some cosmetic adjustments in regards to adding stucco to the exterior face as well as new windows and doors. Siesmic upgrading would be done. Mr. Sandoval agreed with all conditions of approval. It was noted the pathway conditions came in late and the applicant had not received a copy prior to the meeting. Mr. Sandoval asked where the pathway goes. The Master Pathway Plan was discussed. Mr. Sandoval felt there were no problems with the pathway condition. L CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING fir' MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Sinunu to approve the application as submitted, adding Condition 8 to read 'Path on Esperanza Drive be upgraded to a IIB path. The path along the lot line between Esperanza and Ascension be kept free and clear during construction. The driveway shall be a roughen surface where it crosses the pathway. All planting and sprinklers be placed five feet back of the path." The variance was not part of this approval. AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Ellinger, Schreiner, Simmu, Stutz, Takamoto & Cheng NOES: None This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period before final planning approval. The Commission discussed the late notice of the pathway requirements. Everyone agreed this was not fair to applicants and the process needed correction. Ms. Niles suggested future noticing of a project for public hearing would not be scheduled until the pathway requirements are received. Planning Commission Minutes September 22,1993 Page 6 APPROVED 4 5.4 LANDS OF TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, 26379 Fremont Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Cutting Shed Display for Historic Equipment. Staff had nothing further to add to the Staff Report. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the fence and equipment being allowed in the setback. Ms. Niles clarified that a fence and equipment are allowed in the setback. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Jerry Bishop, 13031 Alta Tierra Road, has donated his services as architect and general contractor. He discussed phase two of this project started by Scott Ellinger as part of his Eagle Scout project, which was very successful. Mr. Bishop would like to continue in the same vein having a facility that is an asset to the community, provide a viewing area for various pieces of equipment that the Town Historian has managed to collect over the years, and have a demonstration area for an annual apricot cutting and sulfuring facility. Mr. Bishop, in approaching the design of this very simple structure, tried to replicate cutting sheds he had visited in the Valley, specifically Mr. Mowers cutting shed on Fremont Road and cutting sheds on Olsons in Sunnyvale. He kept in mind the materials they used for those sheds and duplicated something similar. kow Commissioner Sinunu asked if the shed would be used for cutting and for the display of equipment. He was concerned that the equipment inside would be weathered. Mr. Bishop replied the shed would be used for one cutting during the summer and for a gathering place where school children could come and view the process so they would become familiar with some of the heritage of the area. Mr. Bishop was not concerned with the equipment being exposed to the weather. Commissioner Ellinger appreciated Mr. Bishop donating his time. He was aware that some of the equipment awaiting display dated to the Civil War. If the equipment is left out in the rain, it may not do well. He asked Mr. Bishop if he knew if this equipment was targeted for the cutting shed. Mr. Bishop felt Rosemary Meyerott would be the person who could answer this question. Commissioner Ellinger asked if he had an estimate of the cost of the project and what the fund raising plans would be. Mr. Bishop has not made an estimate of the materials as yet, as he wanted to see how far the project progressed. Linda Swan, President of the Historical Society, would be handling the fund raising. Chairman Comiso stated some of the equipment was old and would need protection. Was there ever any thought that this might require more than a roof and perhaps a garage to enclose the equipment? Mr. Bishop discussed this with Linda Swan. The pieces of equipment which possibly could be vandalized would have a wire enclosure Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1993 Page 7 APPROVED to keep people away from the equipment itself. As far as protecting the equipment from the weather, he felt the roof provided by the structure would be adequate. Commissioner Stutz discussed the history of the project and suggested painting the corrugated roof brown. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Ellinger clarified that there was ample MDA and MFA in case the project needed additional room for design changes. The Town had no objection to the conditions of approval with an additional condition that the corrugated roof have a non -reflective surface in a dark brown color. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger and seconded by Chairman Comiso with the addition of Condition 7 requiring the roof have a non - reflective surface in a dark brown color. AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Cheng, Ellinger, Schreiner, Sinunu, Stutz & Takamoto NOES: None This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period before final planning approval. Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1993 Page 8 APPROVED 4 5.5 LANDS OF LOHR, 24009 Oak Knoll Circle, Lot 26; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence, Pool and Spa. Staff had nothing further to add to the Staff Report. Commissioner Schreiner asked if there would be a requirement to provide a fence around the boundary where the pool is located between this property and the adjacent property, as the retaining wall falls off very quickly. She could see a child getting hurt. The area in question was the whole perimeter where the retaining wall is located. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Steve Lohr, J. Lohr Properties, 586 Lagunita Drive, Stanford, discussed the one-story house conditioned to be limited to a 540 foot elevation and the views from the three neighboring houses being preserved. In answer to Commissioner Schreiner's question, they plan to fence the property between lots 26 and 27 so there would not be a problem with someone going over the retaining wall. The conditions of approval were acceptable. Commissioner Schreiner suggested minimizing the impact of the fence, as she normally ( does not like fences. She suggested requiring a 50% open fence no higher than 4'. She asked Mr. Lohr if the colors for the house had been selected. He replied no. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Schreiner liked the house and complimented the Planning Commission and the City Council for the restrictions placed on the subdivision. Her two concerns were the color which she would request to be a deeper color, as the house is very visible, and to condition a 50% open fence. She was open to the height. The Commissioners discussed conditioning the fence and felt they would like a fence for safety reasons. However, they would prefer not to condition it, as the applicant was more than willing to add a fence between lots 26 and 27. Possible landscape benching or something other than a fence was discussed. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Cheng and seconded by Commissioner Takamoto to approve the application as conditioned. AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Ellinger, Schreiner, Simmu, Stutz, Takamoto & Cheng NOES: None This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period before final planning approval. Planning Commission Minutes September 22,1993 Page 9 APPROVED 5.6 LANDS OF BHANDARI, 25552 Willow Pond Lane; A request for a Site Development Permit for an Addition and Attached Second Unit. Staff had nothing further to add to the Staff Report. Commissioner Schreiner questioned the Willow Pond address accessing on Tepa Way. She felt this was a bit confusing. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Kurt Anderson, 476 E. Campbell Avenue, Campbell, architect, stated they have reviewed the conditions of approval which were acceptable to the applicant. In order to accommodate the addition of 1,135 square feet of floor area, concrete paving and pool decking would be removed to allow the desired changes while still remaining under the allowable MDA for the site. No trees will be removed to accommodate construction. Commissioner Ellinger asked if the pathway comment was acceptable. Mr. Anderson responded yes. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Sinunu and seconded by Commission Ellinger to approve the application as conditioned by Staff. AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Schreiner, Sinunu, Stutz, Takamoto, Cheng & Ellinger NOES: None This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period before final planning approval. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 10 4 5.7 LANDS OF JABBOUR, 24704 Voorhees Drive; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence, Pool and Tennis Court. Ms. Niles stated the report from William Cotton's office had not been received in time for the agenda. She had spoken to Mr. Jabbour at length and requested the Planning Commission consider continuing this item to next Wednesday, September 29, 1993. There is a special meeting planned for that night from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to discuss the General Plan Elements. The Commission discussed the request. Commissioners Ellinger, Sinunu and Takamoto would not be available at the meeting, however, the Commission would still have the needed quorum. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Chairman Comiso, seconded by Commissioner Schreiner and passed by consensus to continue the item until the September 29th meeting starting at 7:30 p.m. 5.8 LANDS OF YANEZ, 26879 Moody Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Residence (continued from September 8,1993). Ms. Niles stated there was nothing further to add to the staff report. She noted Mr. Yanez had mailed letters to all of the Commissioners, however not all were received. Ms. Niles provided them with copies. Commissioner Sinunu questioned whether the original very old topographical numbers were used or whether staff used the numbers from the pad of the house as the number used to calculate the basement. Ms. Niles stated on the original project, staff measured from the grade as shown on the survey, which was the burned down pad grade. For the project the Commission has in front of them, Mr. Yanez and his engineer had submitted a new revised old natural topo and the staff measured from the natural topo line. It was noted the house was built in 1974. Commissioner Schreiner asked Ms. Niles if she was in agreement with Mr. Yanez regarding the LUF being .68 and she responded yes. Ms. Niles commented the old building had floor area on the first and second floor. The area which staff could find that had been permitted through a building permit was the area on the second floor. Even though there was floor area existing on the second floor and on the lower floor, staff only found permits for the second floor area. However, staff indicated on the project that there was 3,905 sq. it. grandfathered in on the previously existing floor area listed on page 2 of the staff report. What was before the iaw Commission was the increase to the grandfathered figures which were actually over the Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 11 allowed numbers. The lower floor had area which was not supposed to be finished. On the plan that the staff measured, the area that was not finished was not counted as floor area. Commissioner Stutz discussed the size of the house being larger than the previously existing house by 1,811 sq. ft. development area and 1,988 sq. ft. floor area. Commissioner Schreiner, in reading William Cottons report, was struck by the number of studies and reports which have not been completed and the concern expressed by Mr. Cotton regarding the problems on this lot that were caused by the steep slopes and the potential for debris flow, the seismic shaking, etc. Ms. Niles felt Mr. Cotton, after the three reports and requesting additional information at least two times, has received enough information from the applicant's geotechnical engineer to be satisfied with the conditions that he has proposed in his September 15, 1993 letter. Ms. Niles stated we have on microfilm the plans that were permitted. Mr. Yanez stated there were permits on other items. Staff could not find permits on the shed or the bottom floor improvements. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Louis Yanez, 1082 Eastwood Court, Los Altos, applicant, discussed whether or not the natural grade should be the building pad of the house that burned down or the topography existing or the natural topography that pre-existed prior to any excavation taking place. He discussed the City Council meeting of May 19, 1993 and that they confirmed that his project would be reviewed under the basement floor area calculation interpretation as rendered on March 3, 1993. The staff is still counting the bottom floor as basement because it is not back filled on all four sides. The records show that he had a finished floor on the second floor only. He had a building permit issued for the first floor and it was finished and they had a building permit issued for the shed also, however, there is no record of either. He could not blame staff for not counting the first floor because there is no record, as grandfathered floor area. He further discussed the swale which is several hundred feet away from the property and the possible debris flow wall. Mr. Yanez was asked in what year he had applied for a building permit for the bottom floor. He responded 1978 and 1987 for the shed, although nothing could be found in file. Ms. Niles stated that the plans Mr. Yanez had submitted currently, using the old natural grade, would meet the standards for calculating floor area previously. However, it would not meet the standards for calculating floor area for the new interpretation. Further discussion ensued regarding the City Council requiring Mr. Yanez to measure the house by the new basement interpretation, the function of his first floor would be I'm Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22,1993 Page 12 for bedrooms and baths, the area not being exempt as a basement because it is not being used as a basement; the 1975 original permit being in file. Commissioner Ellinger commented that the basement ordinance was not new. He asked why this was not submitted as a variance request at this stage. Mr. Yanez stated that because the bulk of the planning process had taken place prior to the March 3rd Council interpretation, some of the Council members felt he had submitted this project in good faith and the question was, based on the new basement interpretation, whether he should start the process all over again or try to grandfather in. His attempt was to take it to Council to have it grandfathered in. The request was denied with Council agreeing to waive variance fees should he choose to apply for a variance. It was felt by Council, due to the already long process, the new interpretation and because he had already had fees in for Site Development, the variance fees would be waived. Commissioner Ellinger discussed receiving a letter from Mrs. Yanez approximately three months ago inquiring about the process and what could be done to speed it up. He wrote back explaining the process, step by step, not realizing Mr. Yanez had been a former Planning Commissioner. He commented that if the old records could not be found, the only choice would be to comply with current codes. In submitting this design, Mr. Yanez should consider the options of either complying with the code or going for a variance. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Sinunu agreed with Commissioner Ellinger in that the project either needed a variance application or a re -design, as they could only deny the application as submitted. He had some discomfort with the plan. However, that was not the question this evening. He felt the basement was not a basement but the first floor on a small lot. Commissioner Ellinger felt it needed to be redesigned as the design was not good for this small lot. It was too much in too tight a constraint. In discussing the design, he would be inclined to deny the project except for the signal sent by Council waiving the variance fees and suggesting by that action that there may be merit in the variance. Chairman Comiso felt the City Council knew this project was in process for some time and was trying to be fair to this applicant by waiving the variance fees. She could not approve this design as presented without a variance. Commissioner Schreiner was not in favor of a variance and the Planning Commission should follow current standards. Town standards are very strict now and the Planning Commission needs to be careful to make adequate findings. Commissioner Stutz asked staff if the previously existing floor area of 3,905 sq. ft. included the first and second story and was there a way to go in and out of the bottom Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 13 floor from the outside? Ms. Niles responded to the first question stating it really only included the second story. It may have included some of the bottom floor but not the entire floor. In answer to the second question, she stated, yes, as it was at the grade so it was all above grade. The whole front of the house was open on the first and second floor. For clarification, Ms. Niles stated that the back three sides of the old house was back filled by dirt just as Mr. Yanez is proposing it now. Commissioner Sinunu asked if there was actually more livable floor area now than there was before and if so, how much. RE -OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Yanez further discussed the lot size and the constrained numbers, not the constraint lot. In answer to Commissioner Sinunu's question, he stated he was using the same pad and the same area to build basically the same house which was open on the bottom as well as the top. If you just count the flattest one acre of his lot and excluded the steep slopes he could have 6,000 sq. ft. of floor area and 15,000 sq. ft. of development area. He felt the topography of the terrain and the strict interpretation of the ordinance deprived him of enjoying 6,000 sq. ft. of floor area and 15,000 sq. ft. of development area. He felt this was unique to this piece of property. He felt the mathematics penalized him in a unique way. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Ellinger suggested continuing the project for a variance or at least leave that option open. He felt staff did a very thorough job of analyzing the project and would consider staff's option 2 recommending to continue to allow Mr. Yanez to submit a variance request. Chairman Comiso discussed the options which were to continue for variance, continue for re -design or deny the request. Mr. Yanez requested a continuance for a variance. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger and seconded by Commissioner Sinunu to continue for submittal of a variance request for the Site Development Permit for review at the October 13th meeting. AYES: Chairman ComisO, Commissioners Takamoto, Cheng, Ellinger, Schreiner & Sinunu NOES: Commissioner Stutz This item will be continued to the October 13, 1993 Planning Commission meeting Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 14 Brief break at 9:35 p.m. 5.9 LANDS OF LOS ALTOS FIRE DISTRICT, Loop Road, Foothill College; A request for a Site Development Permit for a New Firehouse; and Certification of a Negative Declaration. Ms. Niles requested a continuance to the October 27, 1993 meeting as there would not be a quorum for the October 13, 1993. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Chairman Comiso, seconded by Commissioner Ellinger and passed by consensus to continue this item to the October 27th meeting. 6. WBiINES 6.1 Review of Certificate of Correction for the Owner's Certificate wording on the Final Map for McCullouch, Tract 8331; J. Lohr Properties. Ms. Niles introduced this item requesting review of the requested correction to the Final Map Owner's Certificate wording and discussion on whether the Town really intended to restrict Human Habitation Setbacks for fault lines to all structures or if it just meant 4 to prohibit habitable structures. Staff noted that in other subdivisions in Town other non -habitable structures were allowed in the Human Habitation Setback lines (stables, decks, gazebos, pools, tennis courts, etc.). Staff requested that the Commission discuss the information submitted by the applicant and direct staff accordingly. This item will need to be forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation for their final review and approval. Steve Lohr, 586 Lagunita Drive, Stanford, discussed the fact that the Human Habitation Setbacks and what it really meant came up in July when they brought in Lot 1 of their subdivision before the Planning Commission. In looking through the minutes when the subdivision was approved in 1988, there were a couple of instances, both with the Planning Commission and City Council, where references were made to the Human Habitation Setback and just what was allowed. The Planning Commission was interested that Habitation Setbacks, either geologic or noise, definitely exclude all floor area and yet there was no mention of other structures such as pools, tennis courts, stables, etc. The same concerns were brought up in the City Council meeting. What he felt was causing this problem was a simple error of wording on the Owner's Certificate. He displayed the front page of the Owner's Certificate and discussed the third paragraph with standard wording referring to no structures of any kind should be allowed where you have conservation easements, public utility easements, and such. The unfortunate wording is in the second sentence where the HHSB was also lumped into that sentence. He felt it should have had its own sentence so that the restrictions on �, the type of structures for Human Habitation are more clearly defined. Mr. Lohr Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22, 1993 Page 15 requested an amendment of the third paragraph, into two separate paragraphs so that conservation easements and public utility easements could be addressed in one paragraph and HHSB be addressed in another. Mr. Lohr stated the wording for the HHSB was being applied specifically for the McCullough subdivision and was written on the Owner's Statement in reference to the property. The wording should have been the standard for all HHSB throughout the Town. If nothing is done to correct the wording, they cannot build any structures of any kind in the HHSB. The HHSB would be applied throughout the subdivision. There are 14 lots effected by the HHSB out of 30 lots. Commissioner Stutz stated that at the time of the McCullough subdivision, the Planning Commission had spent a great deal of time going over the lots, making sure that every lot had a place for a reasonable sized house on it. She discussed the loss in property size if restricted to no use of the land by the HHSB. This would make so many lots in Los Altos Hills totally unusable. Commissioner Ellinger commented that he certainly would think they would want to review on a lot by lot basis, assuming you went with the new wording and relieved these lots of this restriction. 4bW Commissioner Stutz and Ellinger would recommend the correction of wording as proposed by Steve Lohr, which is standard wording. In order to more clearly define "human habitation setback", they would like to separate the third paragraph of the Owner's Statement into two distinct paragraphs as stated in the staff report, which would remove the first and third sentences of the statement which apply specifically to conservation and public utility easements so that could be treated as one paragraph, and taking the second sentence of the existing paragraph and having it be its own paragraph, also adding that they agree to keep setbacks free of any buildings and structures that would allow human habitation. Commissioner Schreiner felt the wording was too general and should state what structures could be allowed. She had a concern regarding swimming pools. She felt very strongly about not allowing pools in the HHSB and she was concerned with liability. She asked if wording could be added in general terms that would address hazardous proposals. Commissioner Ellinger would not allow a pool on a steep lot where it could be a problem for other properties and both he and Chairman Comiso felt that they always have the authority to deny hazardous situations. Mr. Peterson stated the HHSB would always appear on the plans. He suggested possible wording, adding to the second paragraph after human habitation, "or that are ( M deemed unsafe by the Planning Commission and affirmed by the City Council." Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22,1993 Page 16 Commissioner Ellinger on the surface liked the new wording. If you decide that it is unsafe then you can prohibit it, which you could have done anyway. He would like the City Attorney to review the new wording, if approved. Mr. Peterson suggested changing "unsafe" to "inappropriate". MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve a recommendation to the City Council that would revise the wording on the McCullough subdivision Owner's Certificate, as proposed by Mr. Lohr. The two paragraphs would replace the wording on the Owner's Certificate. AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Cheng, Ellinger, Simmu, Stutz & Takamoto NOES: Commissioner Schreiner This item will appear on the October 6, 1993 City Council agenda. 7. OLD BUSINESS 7.1 Report from the Design Guidelines Sub -Committee. Commissioner Schreiner noted the next Design Guidelines meeting would be September 27th, at which time they would discuss the format which includes a flow chart. However, the pictures would not be ready at that time. 7.2 Recreation Element -Completed. 7.3 Path and Trail Element -This will be completed at the September 29th meeting. Ms. Niles will schedule the first of the completed Elements for public hearing for the second meeting in October. It was suggested including a flow chart adding Pathway and Environmental Design Committees involvement. 7.4 Circulation Element -September 29,1993 at 5:30 p.m. 7.5 Land Use Element -September 29, 1993 at 5:30 p.m. 7.6 Conservation Element -October 26, 1993 at 5:30 p.m. 7.7 Noise and Scenic Highways Elements -November 9, 1993 at 5:30 p.m. 7.8 Safety and Seismic Safety Elements -January 18, 1994 at 5:30 p.m. 7.9 Open Space Element -January 26,1994 at 5:30 p.m. N Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED September 22,1993 Page 17 8. APPROVAf OF THE MINUTES 8.1 Approval of the Minutes of September 8, 1993. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Ellinger, seconded by Commissioner Stutz and passed unanimously with the following changes: page 9 correcting sheared to shared; correction of spelling on page 4 of the word impression to impressed. 9. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING 9.1 LANDS OF CHUA,12410 Barley Hill Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a driveway and landscape improvement plan. Approved with conditions September 7, 1993. 9.2 LANDS OF CHIANG, 26288 Fremont Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape plan. Approved with conditions September 14,1993. 9.3 LANDS OF TAAFFE, 26850 Purissima Road; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape and driveway modification plan. 4 Approved with conditions September 14, 1993. 9.4 LANDS OF CHOO,12581 Way; A request for a Site Development Permit for a relocation of pool and a landscape plan. Approved with conditions September 21, 1993. 1 AIt The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, LaniLonberger Planning Secretary MJ