HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/12/1994APPROVED
Minutes of a Regular Meeting
Town of Los Altos Hills
PLANNING COMMISSION
Council
January 12,1994,7:00 P.M.
ambers. 26379 Fremont Road
cc: t-asserres tti-7Y l'i
1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
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, Schreiner, Stutz &
Takamoto
Absent: Commissioner Sinunu
Staff: Linda Niles, Town Planner; Suzanne Davis, Assistant Planner; Lani
Lonberger, Planning Secretary
4 An announcement was made for those attending the public hearing for the Lands of
Eshner. This item would not be heard this evening.
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
January 12,1994
Page 2
4. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 15 1993
AND JANUARY 5 1994
4.1 Commissioner Cheng reported the following items were discussed at the December
15th City Council meeting: Lands of Helliwell was pulled from the consent calendar
and would be scheduled for public hearing January 5,1994; request to remove a 34"
diameter Valley Oak from the Lands of Naumann was approved; reports from the
Residential Design Guidelines subcommittee and the Town Handbook subcommittee;
and Lands of Lohr continued from December 1st Council meeting was approved as
recommended by the Planning Commission and amended by Council.
4.2 Commissioner Schreiner reported the following items were discussed at the January
5, 1994 City Council meeting: request from County for General Plan conformance and
contiguity/annexation statement for Lands of Oleynik,10225 W. Loyola Drive, Los
Altos; support of Measure B, school bond issue; Town Handbook; Lands of Helliwell
approved subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning
Commission and amended by Council; and the new State requirement which will go
into effect shortly requiring fencing around all pools.
Commissioner Ellinger will be the Planning Commission representative for the January
19th City Council meeting.
5. PIJBLIC HEARINGS
5.1 LANDS OF RAMSAY, 13060 Alta Lane North; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a Landscape Plan.
Suzanne Davis introduced this item, stating on September 9, 1992 the Planning
Commission approved plans for a new residence, pool and spa. A condition of
approval required a landscape plan to be submitted to the Site Development Committee
for approval. The Site Committee reviewed and approved the landscape plan on
November 23, 1993 with a condition added that staff visit the site to determine if
additional trees should be added to the plan to replace the trees which were removed.
She discussed the site visit of November 25th, commenting on the trees which had been
removed. The Commission at their November 30th meeting decided to review the plan
in light of the fact that a number of existing trees had been removed from the site
without Town approval.
Commissioner Schreiner asked staff what were the requirements that were to be
completed as far as the island was concerned. She also asked if there were requirements
for site distance around the corner and for any landscaping in that area. Ms. Niles
noted that no high planting is proposed in that area because of site distance.
taw
Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED
January 12, 1994
Page 3
OPENED PUBLIC HEARING
Jim Flack, 13070 Alta Lane South, neighbor, presented photos of the area and voiced
several concerns regarding the following: triangular area created by the required turn
around; landscaping that has been affected by the project; landscaping originally in the
triangle area; property owners not proposing any plantings in the triangle area; old
street sign was removed and replaced with a new street sign which is incorrect as it
reads "Alta North and Alta South" leaving out "Lane"; temporary utility pole needs to
be removed; builder should restore the road way on Alta Lane South; and maintenance
of triangular area as garbage tends to collect there. Mr. Flack noted his neighbor Ginger
Howard has experienced problems with trucks using her driveway for a turn around
and driving over her property and onto some landscaping. Mr. Flack also discussed
maintaining the Eucalyptus trees on Alta Lane South. Since they are now in the road
right-of-way, he would like to continue to maintain them with the Town's permission.
Mr. Flack speculated that it may not be possible for fire equipment to use the turn
around. Commissioner Ellinger asked if anyone had made a determination that it can
or cannot be used by fire equipment. Mr. Flack did not know.
Ms. Niles commented that the City Engineer had reviewed the design of the turn
around. She was not sure if he had consulted with the fire department, however the fire
department is a regular department that the City Engineer does consult when reviewing
the right-of-ways. She did not have the answer and will discuss this with the City
Engineer. She did not know if the turn around was for the fire trucks or for people who
get up there and use residents driveways to turn around. Mr. Flack suggested a
"Private Road" sign.
Chairman Comiso asked for the City Engineer. Ms. Niles noted that he attends
meetings when there are items on the agenda that have engineering issues. This is a
landscape review and she did not anticipate the re -review of engineering.
Commissioner Schreiner felt that during a meeting, you never know when you will
need an engineers input. Chairman Comiso requested that the City Engineer attend all
Planning Commission meetings.
Discussion ensued regarding removal of the triangle. Chairman Comiso reminded
everyone that this application was for a landscaping plan only.
Shelley Doran, Environmental and Design and Protection Committee, suggested four
additional 24" box trees along the rear property line where the grade breaks to a severe
grade from the rear of the back yard. This would provide adequate screening as viewed
from across the canyon on West Sunset Drive. There was a concern regarding planting
over a leach field. It was noted by staff that this property will be connected to sewer.
Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED
January 12,1994
Page 4
4W Mr. Szabo, 13081 Alta Lane North, neighbor, suggested adding some shrubs in the
island and irrigation so that they will survive. Shrubs which had survived without
water until the construction began had been removed. New plants would need to be
cared for. He also noted he did not think residents on Sunset Drive were very affected
by the homes on Alta Lane.
Michael Dillon, landscape architect, discussed the landscaping noting they have added
trees to mitigate the trees which were removed. The island (triangular area) is not part
of the property due to dedication. This area will be planted with grass and wildflowers
so that it will be returned to a more natural state without irrigation. Mr. Dillon would
prefer to plant shrubs behind the house to mitigate views of grade change from built
slope to natural slope below. He felt trees would likely grow too high and would need
to be removed or topped so the owner's view is not lost.
There was a question regarding whether or not the entire corner is a dedicated right-of-
way or whether it is roadway and a portion of shoulder around the road that separates
the triangle from the property. Ms. Niles will direct this question to the City Engineer
and report back to the Commission.
Commissioner Schreiner suggested planting four to five trees in the rear area near the
house to soften the view of the house as seen from the rear.
Chairman Comiso was concerned about the impact of the house. There is a need to
mitigate bulk while still keeping some views for the property owner. Trees would
provide some relief, however the view from residents in outer areas should not be
impacted significantly.
Mr. Dillon noted he would like to work with staff in placing some trees at the rear of the
house so locations will be acceptable to the Town and the Ramsays, as he was
concerned about their view.
Commissioner Stutz felt more trees needed to be added as some of the proposed trees
were more shrub -like. Some people do not even consider them trees. She also noted
the landscape map did not include contour lines or a good north south arrow. She also
suggested moving the pool equipment to a better location. Commissioner Stutz did not
see on the plan a fence or pillars and asked Mr. Dillon if they were planning either.
Mr. Dillon commented that they were not planning a fence. They were planning two 3
foot pillars placed at the driveway entrance..
Commissioner Schreiner felt this was a very visible house in a very rural area. She was
very concerned regarding the type of lighting to be installed. She asked Mr. Dillon if
they had a lighting plan. Mr. Dillon responded that the landscape lighting was very
Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED
January 12, 1994
Page 5
low and minimal. He noted nothing has been constructed and further discussed the
lighting plan. The lighting plan is part of the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Schreiner discussed the need to determine who is responsible for the
triangle island. Ms. Niles noted if the property is right-of-way, it will be maintained by
the Town. If the right-of-way encircles the triangle, Mr. Ramsay will be in charge of
maintaining it. She will report back to the Commission as to who is the responsible
party. Ms. Niles recommended proposed planting be drought tolerant shrubs, be native
and something that does not require continual irrigation. The Town does not allow
irrigation in right-of-ways.
Commissioner Schreiner asked for conditions to restore road right-of-way on Alta Lane
South. She would like to ensure any damage done to the neighbor's property (Ms.
Howard) be restored. She noted there should be some sort of an agreement with the
Town to allow Mr. Flack to maintain the Eucalyptus trees. Ms. Niles commented that
the City Engineer will be able to propose something that will work for Mr. Flack. His
help is appreciated. Commissioner Schreiner also felt there was a need for requiring
more trees to be planted -some in the back and some to mitigate the front. Twenty-five
trees were taken out. Seventeen were larger than 6" in diameter, eight were smaller. It
is true that they put in 27 trees, however at least half of the proposed trees are very
small and are more like shrubs. There should be a requirement for more sizable trees
6W around the back.
Commissioner Ellinger noted that the street signs should be corrected. He felt it would
be appropriate to have a sign that denotes turn around as long as it is tastefully done.
He also felt the need for trees in the back area to help mitigate the view of the house.
There should also be landscaping around the pool equipment enclosure as well as
relocating it. Ms. Niles noted that the house on the adjacent lot was on the opposite side
of this property and the area in-between that house and the Ramsays outdoor living
area is a driveway turn around with some existing landscape mitigation. The landscape
architect is proposing additional screening on the side property line.
Commissioner Takamoto felt the pool equipment was in a good location as it is lower
than the adjacent property and more than 80 feet away. He agreed that more trees were
needed. A few trees would not impact the Ramsays view and some species change may
also be needed.
Chairman Comiso noted when the story poles were originally up and reviewed from
across the canyon, the view of the Ramsay site was somewhat mitigated by the existing
trees. The trees which were removed should be replaced. She would like to see a plan
that shows this house a little more mitigated from all the neighbors. Originally, when
the house was approved, one reason was due to the number of trees shown on the
e property. She requested, in the future, keeping those photos for comparison when the
project returns.
Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED
January 12, 1994
Page 6
Commissioner Cheng noted more mitigation was needed and felt the Site Development
Committee and staff should decide on the location of the trees.
Commissioner Stutz felt they could continue this to Site Development. She suggested
requesting a minimum number of trees to be added and their general location. She
suggested one large tree to the left of the front door, one large tree on the south side of
the house and four sizable trees across the back -something that will grow at least 40 feet
high. She asked for the same number of trees that were removed, 15 to 17 additional
trees than were proposed, changing species of Myrtle and Rosebud. Commissioner
Stutz felt the owners should have to replace the trees which were removed. The
original plan was approved because of the amount of vegetation on the site at the time.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION SECONDED, AMENDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commission Schreiner
and seconded by Commissioner Ettinger to continue to Site Development with
suggestions and recommendations as discussed including a site visit by the Site
Development Committee which includes staff, a pathway committee member, an
environmental and protection committee member and at least one Commissioner.
Motion amended to include modification to Condition #2 for a landscape deposit of
$5,000 rather than $1,000.
Commissioner Takamoto noted he was against discussion in terms of numbers between
$1,000 and $5,000. The Commission needs to change the way they arrive at the deposit
figure so that it is consistent and the applicants know what to expect. Further
discussion ensued regarding the size of trees and their cost. Ms. Niles discussed the
original conditions of approval relating to tree removal and felt it was an excellent
suggestion to add into the condition in the future the possible dollar cost for
replacement of trees removed.
AYES: Chairman Comiso, Commissioners Stutz, Cheng, Ettinger & Schreiner
NOES: Commissioner Takamoto
ABSENT: Commissioner Sinunu
This item will be scheduled for a Site Development meeting at an undetermined date
5.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS: An ordinance of the Town of Los
Altos Hills amending various sections of the Zoning and Site
Development Ordinances (continued from November 30,1993):
Zoning Ordinance
L. a. Section 10-1.208 - definition of Basement;
Planning Commission Minutes
January 12, 1994
Page 7
APPROVED
b. Section 10-1.233 - definition of Floor Area;
C. Section 10-1.227 - definition of Height, structure;
d. Section 10-1.401 - Non -conforming Structures; and
e. Section 10-1.504 - Height.
Site Development Ordinance
a. Article 7, Section 10-2.702 (b) and (e) - Conservation easement
setbacks from creeks.
Basement discussion ensued.
Commissioner Stutz did not feel it was appropriate to put a garage under a house. She
likes the original concept of a basement with walls on all four sides with an exit door or
a window well that comply with UBC. This area would be exempt from being counted
as floor area. Garages underground promote three story facades. If you remove
basements from floor area consideration, you would not be concerned with the height
of the basement.
Chairman Comiso felt a height restriction should be placed on basements to prevent
someone requesting a two story basement. She had no objection to a basement over
t seven feet.
fir'' Commissioner Ellinger agreed that basements are a free space if unseen as long as they
comply with the Uniform Building Code. One of the things required in basements over
1,500 square feet is an automatic sprinkler system. UBC does not make a distinction as
to the use of the area. He discussed underground garages which cannot be seen off site,
using spiral drive ramps, hydraulic facilities and lifts. Saying no below ground garages
may miss the philosophy that they want to balance the cut and fill on the property. If
the lot is suitable to this type of usage, he would not be troubled with the garage even if
it were two levels and all underground.
Commissioner Schreiner asked if they are counting the garage on the floor level and a
garage that is underground and open on one side as floor area. All were in agreement
that both would count as floor area. She noted another option would be to count a
percentage of anything underneath with three sides and one door like a garage.
Commissioner Stutz stated she would object to a percentage as she felt this would create
problems. As long as it has one wall underground, everything would be counted.
Commissioner Takamoto noted that if you do not allow any exits (windows or doors)
from a basement, then the basement is limited to 600 square feet as per UBC. He was
against a door leading outside from a basement. If the basement is totally underground
with no outside exit, it would not be counted as floor area.
6.9
Planning Commission Minutes
January 12, 1994
Page 8
APPROVED
Ms. Niles clarified the discussion. One concept discussed was not counting any of the
area that is wholly underground but allowing the required UBC exits if they cannot be
seen. Another concept is only allowing 600 square feet underground because anything
more than that, by the UBC, would require an exit and then not be wholly enclosed on
four sides. The basement definition being proposed does not mention being back filled
on all four sides. The ordinance being proposed in the staff report states 'basement
shall mean a space wholly underground and having its entire height, measured from its
floor to its ceiling, below the adjoining grade", (adding) "except for required exits." It
continues, "exits shall be provided (instead of required) from basements as required by
the Uniform Building Code (UBC), which may be either a window or door that is not
visible from off-site." Ms. Niles noted this is the first concept discussed by the
Commission. They would have to change this definition if they wanted to do it
otherwise. She noted the "floor area" section would be the correct place to insert if
garages are counted as floor area or not. She felt the Commission was more in favor of
garages counting as floor area. She noted that everyone felt the 7 foot was useless and
suggested striking it altogether.
OPENED PUBLIC HEARING
Pong Ng, architect, commented that the UBC requirements go a little beyond just exit
door square footage. They also have light and ventilation requirements of no less than
5% of floor space. If everything is 100% enclosed on four sides, that space would not be
habitable space per UBC. If the goal is to eliminate or minimize a three story facade,
maybe one alternative would be to say the underground space would not count if from
any one perspective from the home you see no more than two stories. If from any one
perspective you see three stories, it all counts. He felt it would be unfair to discourage
homeowner or architect to make use of the topography and sink most of the units
underground thereby reducing the bulk of the main house but not having a three story
house. For clarification, if someone presented them an architectural elevation and in no
case on that architectural elevation, regardless where anyone stood on the site, would
they see a three story facade. A true two story house is when the basement is tucked
under. This would achieve their purpose.
Tong Ng discussed the ordinance stating the original intent was to encourage people to
sink as much of the house into the hillside as possible so the visible height is minimized,
especially on hillsides. At that point, square footage was not a major issue. That is why
they allow the square footage not to count as an incentive to sink the house. He felt a
6,000 square feet sunken and 2,000 square feet on top was a much more desirable house.
It was what you can see rather than a number.
Further discussion ensued.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 12, 1994
Page 9
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
APPROVED
Ms. Niles clarified if garages, since they are open on one side, count as floor area. Also,
if a garage is connected to 2,000 square feet, for example, that is totally underground on
four sides, all the area counts. If there is any one side open, no matter what it is, it all
counts.
Commissioner Ellinger noted that if a basement is enclosed (by earth) on all four sides,
it is a basement or even with UBC exits, it's acceptable. When you build a basement and
you decided you want to build a house on top of the basement, it cannot be higher than
27 feet above the finished grade or the natural grade which ever is lower. If any side is
open, all area counts. There shall be no additional exits other than required by UBC. If
you daylight a wall in the basement, it is no longer considered a basement and the area
counts.
PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To recommend to the City Council the above definition of a
basement as presented by Commissioner Ellinger.
The remaining items will be continued to the January 26th meeting.
6. NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Comiso requested the City Engineer be present at all Planning Commission
meetings, questioned the Packard story poles, requested pathway shrubs at La Barranca
Road and Purissima be trimmed and she would like to discourage same type house
designs within a subdivision.
OLD BUSINESS
7.1 Discussion of Interpretation of what qualifies as hardscape-continued.
Ms. Niles provided the Commission with a letter from John Scruby regarding a product
that he is using for tennis court surfaces that is more pervious than some soils, sod or
any grass related product. He suggested a site visit by the Planning Commission. The
Commission agreed on a site visit January 19th at 5:00 p.m. at a home in Los Altos.
7.2 Discussion of the Town's Adopted Color Board.
Commissioner Ellinger asked the staff to take the color board into a paint store to see if
they could obtain reflective values of the Town's color board before the Commission
reviews new colors.
Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED
January 12, 1994
C Page 10
M 7.3 Report from the Design Guidelines Sub -Committee -continued.
Commissioner Schreiner gave a brief update noting the next scheduled meeting would
be January 14, 1994.
7.4 General Plan Elements -Continued
a. Path and Trail Element -Continued (to be re -scheduled by Staff).
b. Land Use Element -Continued to January 18, 1994 at 5:30 p.m.
C. Circulation Element -Continued (to be re -scheduled by Staff).
d. Conservation Element -Continued.
e. Scenic Highways Elements -Continued.
f. Noise Element -Continued to January 18, 1994 at 5:30 p.m.
g Seismic Safety/Safety Elements -Continued to January 18, 1994 at
5:30 p.m.
h. Open Space Element -January 26, 1994 at 5:30 p.m.
8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
8.1 Approval of the November 30, 1993 Minutes -continued from December 8,
1993.
MOTION PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the minutes of November 30, 1993
with Commissioner Ettinger abstaining and Commissioner Sinunu absent.
8.2 Approval of the December 8,1993 Minutes.
MOTION PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the minutes of December 8, 1993,
changing "Commissioner" to "Commission" on page 13 with Commissioner Sinunu
absent.
9. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF
DECEMBER 21 JANUARY 4 AND 11 1994.
9.1 LANDS OF BEN-ARTZI, 27800 Via Feliz; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a Lighting, Landscape and Pool Enclosure Plan.
Approved December 21st with conditions.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 12, 1994
Page 11
[
APPROVED
9.2 LANDS OF MIELKE, 25026 La Loma Drive; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a Pool, Sport Court, Lighting and Landscaping
Plan. Approved December 21st with conditions.
9.3 LANDS OF TAKAMOTO,13680 Robleda Road; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a Landscape Plan. Approved January 4th with
conditions.
9.4 LANDS OF DZAU, 12101 Dawn Lane; A request for a Site Development
Permit for a Decking and Pool Plan. Approved January 4th with
conditions.
9.5 LANDS OF LEFEVRE, 14850 Manuella Road; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a Tennis Court, Koi Pond and Landscape Plan.
Approved January 11th with conditions.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:50 p.m.
4 R``ess��p'e''��ctt��ff'ully submitted,
LaniLonberger
Planning Secretary
4W