Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/27/1994APPROVED 9/14/94 kw Minutes of a Regular Meeting Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Council cc: Cas: July 27,1994,7:00 P.M. mbers, 26379 Fremont Road ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners Cheng, McMahon, Gottlieb, Comiso & Stutz Absent: Commissioner Takamoto Staff: Linda Niles, Planning Director; Jeff Peterson, City Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Assistant Planner; Lani Lonberger, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR Persons wishing to address the Commission or, 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. Andi Compton, 27855 Via Ventana, discussed the sewer problems on Via Ventana for the last 14 years, the current situation with sewage in her backyard and in the creek basin, and damage to her pathways. She noted that Mr. Peterson was aware of the situation, notifying CSMS, the sewer contractor. If something is not done, she will contact the Public Health Department as her backyard is a health hazard. Commissioner McMahon noted 27975 Via Ventana also experienced sewer problems. Walter Babbott, 27911 Via Ventana, discussed the history of the sewer problems. The type of sewer pipes used are not proper, noting something has to be done. Mr. Peterson reported that the sewer contractor had been out Tuesday and Wednesday. He was aware of the sewer problems, noting replacements would require major budget funds. Commissioner Comiso commented that this was a health and safety issue. She asked if CSMS kept records of their calls as she would like to know of �, problem areas in Town. She requested the City Council be notified of the sewer Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 Page 2 �+ situation. Commissioner Stutz felt the Council should hold a special meeting regarding this subject. Ms. Niles commented that she would relay their concerns to the Council, noting two members are out of town. Robin Knudsen, 27999 Via Ventana, was present to discuss the Jones property and their lot line adjustment. Construction has started and she expressed concern with the streets being damaged under heavy truck use in the area and the dirt that is being dumped on her property and onto her oleanders. She has spoken to the contractor, to no avail. She asked for permission to use stakes or to place a temporary fence around the area to keep the trucks off her property. The health of the oak trees on the island was also a concern. Mr. Peterson noted that construction has not actually started on the Jones property. They are fulfilling the conditions of approval relating to undergrounding of utilities. Ms. Niles will contact the contractor, warning of concerns and discussing their responsibility to the property and trees in the area. 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. 4. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF IULY 20 1994 4.1 Chairman Schreiner reported the following items were discussed: the approval of consent items; request from Bullis Purissima School for the funding of crossing guard services at the intersection of West Edith and Fremont Road; and the public hearing items, Lands of Chen and Fremont Hill Country Club. 4.2 Planning Commission Representative for September 7th will be Commissioner McMahon. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 LANDS OF ROSE, 24931 Prospect Avenue (107-94-ZP-SD); A request for Site Development Permit for a second story addition. There was nothing further to add to the staff report. The Commission discussed the requirement to connect to sewer (condition #16) which would require a pump. Commissioner Comiso requested a standard condition relating to connection to sewer to be placed in the conditions of approval on all projects in the future. She felt it would be easier to remove the condition rather than missing it. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED9/14/94 July 27, 1994 4br Page 3 OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Terry Rose, 24931 Prospect Avenue, applicant, discussed the project, noting that everyone in her area that has remodeled has not had to connect to sewer. Her engineer recommended staying with the septic system. She has read the conditions of approval and agreed with all except for connecting to sewer. She asked if she had to landscape in the front of the property. Mrs. Davis responded no, just in the location of the addition. Pam Schwartz, 24941 Prospect Avenue, adjacent neighbor, was supportive of the project. She noted that the Rose's pool deck extended over the common property line. If the deck is rebuilt she would like to have it not encroach onto her property. She also wanted to make sure the drainage from the house is not directed towards her property. Ms. Niles explained that the encroachment of the deck was a civil matter. The project before them was a second story addition. Commissioner McMahon noted that a hip roof is a design which could be handled in such a way that drainage could be directed away from the Schwartz property. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING The Commission discussed the request from Les Earnest, Pathway Committee Chairman and Commissioner Gottlieb for in -lieu fees for pathways. Commissioner Stutz objected to this request as she felt in -lieu fees should be requested on larger projects. The request appears to be a hit or miss fee. Commissioner Comiso asked why would they request an in -lieu fee if the pathway is across the street. It was suggested to place an "in -lieu fee" discussion on an upcoming agenda. Ms. Niles noted that they need to determine if an in -lieu fee request would be appropriate. Usually the request would be for projects 900 square feet and over. Commissioner Gottlieb discussed the history of in -lieu fees. In discussing connecting the property to sewer, Commissioner Comiso was not in favor of pumping stations although she is in favor of connecting to sewer, whenever possible. Commissioner Stutz agreed, noting if they have a good working septic system, they should be able to continue using it. They should not require them to connect to sewer at this time. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve the Site Development Permit for a second story addition; deleting condition #16. AYES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners Gottlieb, Cheng, Comiso, Stutz & McMahon NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 Page 4 This approval is subject to a 10 day appeal period. Commissioner McMahon clarified the reason for deleting condition #16, noting it was not because a neighbor was not required to cormect to sewer. Each site is looked individually. This particular lot is not required to hook up to sewer due to pumping as it is not desirable. 5.2 LANDS OF VAN ELDEREN, 25601 Fernhill Drive (84-94-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a major addition and pool. Staff had nothing further to add to the staff report. Chairman Schreiner and Commissioner Gottlieb were concerned with the amount of pavement in the setback which is the back-up area for the garage with a basketball hoop. They noted driveways can be within 30 feet of setback, however turn around or parking could not be in a setback. Commissioner Cheng walked the property and noted that there were no oak trees by the pool as shown on the plan. Commissioner Stutz noted that pool conditions were not listed in the staff report and that the Commission in the past has allowed drive aprons and back ups in setbacks. Ms. Niles commented Town policy needs to be reviewed if a turnaround is not wanted in a 4/ setback. Chairman Schreiner asked if the shed presently located in the setback was properly permitted. Staff did not know. Bruce Chan, 2317 Broadway, Redwood City, architect, had no concerns regarding the conditions of approval except for pathway requirements because of the oak trees along the front of the property. They would have to grade within the dripline of the oaks to install the path. He explained the missing oak trees mentioned by Commissioner Cheng. The trees were on the survey, however they were never installed. Staff recommended that the plans be corrected to indicate the number and location of all trees. Commissioner Stutz commented when the house was approved, a native path was required specifically due to concern for the oak trees. Les Earnest, Pathway Committee clarified path request stating the committee would request the path to stay at the toe of the slope. It does not need to come up to the road, out across the driveway. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Schreiner summarized the discussion: pool conditions need to be added; add condition stating that if a permit has not been issued for the shed, it shall be Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 L Page 5 �r moved out of the 30 foot setback or the applicant should apply for a variance; change the word "will' to "may" in condition #4; William Cotton conditions will be handled as they relate to condition 12; and the concerns with the amount of paving which can be redlined on the plan showing where pavement is to be removed. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve the application with the following changes/additions: 1. Add to condition 4 that the number and location of trees on the site to be checked and marked by staff prior to issuance of building permit. 2. Add standard pool conditions to conditions of approval. 3. Hardscape removal at garage and replaced with grass ring as redlined by staff. 4. Add condition noting "if shed is not a permitted structure, it shall be moved out of the setback". Motion withdrawn for further discussion regarding the path. Commissioner Gottlieb reiterated the importance of installing a Type IIB path. She noted that the City Engineer had visited the site and thought minimal grading would be needed. MOTION SECONDED, AMENDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Stutz to approve application with the following changes/additions: 1. Add to condition 4 that the number and location of trees on the site to be checked and marked by staff prior to issuance of building permit. 2. Add standard pool conditions to conditions of approval. 3. Hardscape removal at garage and replaced with grass ring as redlined by staff. 4. Add condition noting "if shed is not a permitted structure, it shall be moved out of the setback". 5. Add to condition 16, first sentence "or native path or combination'; third sentence "and to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department "and the Pathway Committee". AYES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners McMahon, Gottlieb, Cheng, Comiso & Stutz NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto This approval is subject to a 10 day appeal period V Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 L Page 6 �r 5.3 LANDS OF GRUNEWALD, 27040 Elena Road (109-94-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a major addition to an existing residence, and a new detached garage and office. A letter had been submitted by an adjoining neighbor (Kay Barchas) on the east side who was concerned with vegetation for screening. Discussion ensued regarding the detached structure (accessory building) not being architecturally compatible with the house and garage. In the discussion it was noted that accessory buildings do not have kitchen facilities. A secondary unit requires one additional parking space. Chairman Schreiner asked what was the legal status of the lot. Mrs. Davis noted a "Certificate of Compliance" would be required (condition #14). OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Peter Duxbury, 545 Byron Street, Palo Alto, architect, discussed the design difference of the second structure and the main house. They intended to have the garage building to look more rural and natural; more like a barn. They did not want to match the residence. He noted the accessory building was not connected to the house with a path of some type to keep the building remote. EJill Grunwald, 27040 Elena Road, applicant, discussed the trees and landscaping on fir' the plan. She noted there was natural landscaping on the Barchas' side of the property. She agreed with the conditions of approval and felt #2 would address screening concerns. Commissioner Gottlieb discussed the two entrances to the office and no direct route to the house. Mr. Duxbury explained they purposely left the area open and remote. According to the Health Department, they can only have two fixtures in this structure, a toilet and a sink. It cannot be converted into a secondary unit. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Gottlieb had concerns with this being converted into a secondary unit. She requested this return if the plans change. Commissioner Comiso noted that ordinance requires a change of use to return for review. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Stutz and seconded by Commissioner Comiso to approve the Site Development Permit, adding to condition 2, "Care shall be taken for screening for 27142 Elena Road". AYES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners Cheng, Comiso, McMahon & Stutz NOES: Commissioner Gottlieb kw ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 4W Page 7 This approval is subject to a 10 day appeal period. 5.4 LANDS OF MEDINA, 26501 Purissima Road (110 -94 -SD -VAR -MOD; A request for a modification to a Site Development Permit and Variance for a deck addition which will encroach into a required setback. Mrs. Davis introduced this item, providing the Commission with the original findings for the guest house dated December, 1992. After that date, plans were inadvertently approved for the deck in the setback and some of the work had already started. Commissioner Schreiner commented that there were some changes to the original plans; a window changed to a door which leads out to the deck. Mrs. Davis indicated that the foundation wall was part of the original plans. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Don Martin, Sausalito, applicant's representative, discussed the history of the project noting when it was discovered that the deck was in the setback, they applied for a variance as it was not intentional. He noted that the retaining wall was not designed to accommodate the deck. The wall was actually reduced in length. The trellis to be (16, constructed was to be six feet; the deck is nine feet. They are seeking approval for the r deck and the door. The door was originally shown to be on the side instead of the end of the building. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Stutz did not agree with Finding #1 as they do not need a deck to extend outdoor area. Ms. Niles was asked what would it entail if this application was not approved. She responded that they would have to change the structure to match what was originally approved. Commissioner Comiso felt this was not the making of the applicant. When submitting plans to the building department it was not noticed that the deck was in the setback. She would not like to see the door and deck removed. She felt it was truly a mistake. The applicants did receive permission to build the deck. It was noted that prior to construction, plans were approved. Commissioner Stutz noted that the Commission did give them permission originally. Commissioner McMahon noted that if the project came in normally, she could not make the variance findings. Further discussion ensued. Commissioner Schreiner was concerned with whether they could make the variance findings. She noted that the wording in finding #1 in the staff report should be changed to the original wording in the December, 1992 staff report. She had trouble with the original variance application and voted against it. She would `, also vote against this application. She also felt this would be more of a visual impact Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 t July 27, 1994 Page 8 on neighbors although Ms. Niles noted there were no neighbors who protested the plan. Commissioner Comiso noted that they had previously made the findings, that due to the unusual shape and location of development, the encroachment was approved. She did not have a problem with extending the findings to include the deck. She suggested going back to the old variance findings instead of using the new findings. Ms. Niles noted that the whole deck is not in the setback; a little of the landing and three feet of the deck are not in the setback. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso, seconded by Commissioner Cheng and failed by a 3/2 vote to approve all previous conditions and findings per original approval for a variance to allow a deck to encroach into the side setback (modification to previously approved Site Development Permit and Variance). AYES: Commissioners Comiso & Cheng NOES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners McMahon & Stutz ABSTAIN: Commissioner Gottlieb ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto This item is subject to a 10 day appeal period. V Five minute break. 5.5 LANDS OF KIM, 12005 Firm Lane (66-94-ZP-SD-GD-VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence & pool and a variance to grade over property lines (lots 5 and 6). This item was continued from July 13th. Ms. Niles introduced this item noting that Mr. Owen had provided an exhibit and letters to the Planning Commission. Mr. Peterson was asked if there were any restrictions for lot 5 coming off of La Loma. He responded no, not on the tract map although he did not check the conditions of approval. Drainage and swales were also discussed. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Bob Owen, 445 S. San Antonio Road, Los Altos, noted that the applicant did not know of the restrictions on the lot which included height restrictions and 40 foot setbacks. There will be massive amounts of grading needed. He further discussed drainage on lot 5 which flows half towards La Loma and half towards Finn Lane. He felt a simple solution would be to build a swale as he is not trying to re-route the drainage. The City Council knows there was going to be massive amounts of grading needed for both lots. He is trying to make the grading on lots 5 and 6 as natural as possible. The house on lot 6 will be lower on the lot. Because of the height restrictions, it will only be a one Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 t Page 9 story. Other items discussed: berm on La Loma for privacy; opposed to coming in from La Loma; the amount of hardscape going up to the garage; the questionable natural look of the berm; and clients wanting privacy from La Loma. He also did not feel there would be any problem with dirt removal. He commented that members of the City Council that he had spoken to did not have a problem with the grading. Mr. Peterson asked if the Giuliani & Kull plan showed sheet flow as he has concerns. The grading plan shows sheet flows in two directions. He would not be in favor of a berm. Commissioner Gottlieb was concerned with approving grading on lot 6 without a house design. She felt the house could be designed better so the garage is not visible from the street. There are other ways to design the house with less driveway. What the Commissioners are looking for is the best design with the least amount of grading. Commissioner McMahon was concerned with drainage across Prospect Avenue. She asked Mr. Owen to elaborate on why the applicants did not realize the restrictions on the property. Commissioner Comiso commented on the original subdivision approval and restrictions. The reason for 40 feet between lots 5 and 6 was so the houses were not lined up. Ken Olcott, 11710 Magdalena, representing Werner Goese, neighbor to the south, noted Mr. Geese did find the original condition of approval stating all lots must access on Finn Lane. Pam Schwartz, 24941 Prospect Avenue, downhill from the project, voiced her concerns with additional water coming downhill. TM 2-89, condition 14 noted a detention basin to be constructed. This has not been done as yet. She felt a new drainage study should be done. Mr. Peterson noted that he was aware of the Finn Subdivision conditions of approval. Any additional water may be a problem. She also noted the location of the drainage flow is now a ditch 2 1/2 feet wide and three feet deep. Terri Rose, 24931 Prospect, discussed drainage, noting that they have had a lake on their driveway this past rainy season. Gary Kohlsaat, 501 N. Santa Cruz Avenue, Los Gatos, representing the owners of lot 6 noting they are in favor of the grading plan presented by Bob Owen. Werner Goese, 24915 La Loma Court, is in full support of Bob Owen's plan. 8,000 or 6,000 c.y. will not make a difference. He likes the design and his privacy. He felt the design was best for everyone. 4 CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 { Page 10 Commissioner McMahon made the following comments: no problem with the scope of the house being 5,000 square feet; house looks like a flat house on an undulating hill; house should attempt to step to meet contours of land; pad is at least seven feet below natural grade cutting to fit flat pad house; 11,500 c.y. (lots 5 and 6) equals 963 trucks of export (24 trucks per hour for one week); and problem with drainage being a real concern. She suggested instead of raised wood floor with crawl space, use slab on grade with a floating floor; ceilings 10 feet high (reduce ceiling floors); introduce a few steps in the house; and William Cotton's report regarding cuts beyond four feet is bedrock. Bob Owen addressed the concerns. Gary Kohlsaat showed examples of grading on lot 6 and its transition. Commissioner Gottlieb was still concerned with the drive going from one side on the lot to the other; a flat land house; the driveway; and the driveway being reduced, not coming so close to La Loma and perhaps putting the garage in a different location or a detached garage. Commissioner Stutz commented that they should either allow the grading or lift the height restrictions. She did like the suggestion regarding slab floor on grade. Commissioner Comiso discussed height restrictions and the fact that the City Council was adamant regarding height. She agreed that they had created the problem. She would like to see grading across both F, lots for continuity and all properties to access on Finn Lane. Commissioner Cheng agreed. She had no problem with the house design. Chairman Schreiner noted this will be a very visible house from La Loma Drive and Prospect Avenue. She would like to see more work done on the house and to follow the natural contours better. She was concerned with the export noting a detailed plan would be needed so trucks will not impact the neighbors and traffic on La Loma. She asked Mr. Owen what else he could do. Mr. Owen noted that the visibility of the house was established when the Planning Commission set a height limitation. They are within the limitation. The house is a one story with hips on the roof. They are trying to bring down the impact of the house as much as possible. There is a possibility of lowering the house a few feet with Commissioner McMahon's suggestions. He was asked if he could lessen the impact of the driveway and the positioning of the garage. The way the lot narrows in the front, they are having to push the house back so they will not have a funnel effect out in front. He noted that they were trying to keep it away from Finn Lane. He also noted that there is decking proposed around the pool. Mr. Own agreed with the conditions of approval. MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED: Motion by Commissioner Comiso and seconded by Commissioner Cheng to approve the Site Development Permit and Variance with staff recommendations, adding the recommendations for drainage, if possible, with the City Engineer's approval; that half of the rain leaders go towards La Loma; the existing ditch is to be enlarged to the south of the property to the satisfaction of staff; erosion control in the storm drain easement to the Schwartz property; a detail Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 ( July 27, 1994 Page 11 plan for the schedule for the hours of operation and speed for trucks removing dirt (similar to the one required for the Quarry), set and approved by staff; condition #10, change "photographs" to "video of La Loma Drive, Finn Lane, Stonebrook Drive and Prospect Avenue'; the City Engineer to review and approve any trucking out from La Loma Drive; condition #7, delete "for the addition"; change condition #8 to standard wording for a new residence (paint colors shall be chosen by the applicant and approved by staff in conformance with the Town's adopted color board); a certified engineer verify the height of the structure at framing and the building foundation be certified by a certified engineer at foundation pour; and add the standard pool conditions. AYES: Commissioners Cheng, Comiso & Stutz NOES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners McMahon & Gottlieb ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner McMahon and seconded by Commissioner Gottlieb to continue the application for re -design. AYES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners Stutz, McMahon, Gottlieb & Cheng `�� NOES: Commissioner Comiso ABSENT: Commissioner Takamoto 5.6 LANDS OF FINN, 12001 Finn Lane (60 -94 -SD); A request for approval of a grading plan for Lot 6 of the Finn Subdivision. Ms. Niles introduced this item noting that the Commission had just denied the new residence and pool and the variance to grade across a property line between lots 5 & 6. The Commission needs to address whether or not they still want the transition from lot 5 to match lot 6 and back and forth or do they need to wait until they see the redesign of lot 5 grading in order to review lot 6 grading. The Commission was in agreement that the house and the grading on both lots 5 and 6 should be reviewed together. In order to coordinate the grading across property lines, the Commission would like to continue this item to allow both of the grading plans to come in. At that time they would like to see the house on lot 6 as well. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Pam Schwartz, 24941 Prospect Avenue, voiced concerns with additional grading and additional run-off from the property once building and hardscape has been established. She noted that the site map given on this property, at the intersection of Finn Lane and Prospect Avenue, the north east corner is incorrect. There is an existing (, 15 inch collection pipe to an existing distribution box. It also indicates there is one Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 046, Page 12 outlet parallel to Prospect Avenue which is incorrect. The primary outlet for that distribution box/drain is across Prospect Avenue into their property which is not shown on the site plan. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Gottlieb and seconded by Commissioner McMahon to continue the application to return with Lands of Kim (lot 5) application. AYES: Chairman Schreiner, Commissioners Stutz, McMahon, Gottlieb & Cheng NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Comiso & Takamoto 5.7 LANDS OF NGUYEN, 11632 Rebecca Lane (82-94-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for an addition and pool. Continued to September 14, 1994 at the applicant's request. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Procedures for enforcing the completion of landscape planting. Continued to the September 14th meeting at Staffs request to allow for City Attorney L input. 7. OLD BUSINESS 7.1 General Plan Elements -Schedule for work sessions (continued). The Planning Commission scheduled a work session for September 8th at 5:30 p.m. for Scenic Highways Element to the General Plan. Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED 9/14/94 July 27, 1994 4W Page 13 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 8.1 Approval of the July 13, 1994 Minutes. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the July 13th minutes with changes to pages 4, 12, and 13 with Commissioners Comiso and Takamoto absent. 9. REPORT FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF TULY 26. 1994 9.1 LANDS OF GROSSMAN, 26615 Anacapa Drive; A request for a Site Development Permit for a Pool and Decking Plan. Approved with conditions. 9.2 LANDS OF HART, 24001 Oak Knoll Circle; A request for a Site Development Permit fora Landscape Plan. Approved with conditions. 9.3 LANDS OF YELTON, 14100 Berry Hill Lane; A request for a Site Development Permit fora Pool and Fence Plan. Approved with conditions. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 12:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, LaniLonberger Planning Secretary