Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/23/2005Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 7/14/05 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2005, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes ( 1 ) #6-05 ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Kems, Commissioners Collins, Carey, Cottrell & Clow Staff: Carl Cahill, Planning Director; Brian Froelich. Assistant Planner; Lani Smith, Planning Secretary PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR -none 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF WESSBECHER, 11021 Magdalena Road (18-05-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Grading Policy exception where the applicant proposes cuts that exceed the Town standard of four feet (4'). (CEQA Status: exempt per 15304) (staff -Brian Froelich). Staff introduced this item by displaying an aerial photo of the site, indicating the area of the proposed grading. The grading plan shown in red was a proposal to grade that portion of the hillside flat in the effort to reduce potential slope failure of the Quarry rim and potential loss of yard area. A geotechnical report was submitted to the Town which concludes that the proposal would not have an adverse impact to the stability of the Quarry wall and there is potential for instability in this area even if grading improvements were performed. They also concur with the geotechnical report submitted when the new residence was proposed in 2002 and the conclusion that the building site is not at significant risk with respect to rim instability. If there is a benefit of the proposal, it is the reduced load on the rim and a reduction in the degree of a potential slide. In review of this project, it became clear that views from the Wessbecher property would be enhanced if the project were approved. Conversely, the residence would become more visible from the Quarry subdivision and the surrounding hillside developments. Final points made: (1) Landscape screening plan for the new residence is required to be reviewed at a Site Development hearing; the plan has not been submitted to date. (2) General Plan discourages grading of hillsides and requires applicants to work with the natural terrain features. This area is unique and clearly has been disturbed in the past and it is inconclusive as to whether the area proposed for grading is entirely natural. (3) The Geotechnical reports prepared for this project do not quantify the degree and potential for a "rim" failure although they conclude the proposal will not Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/14/05 June 23, 2005 Page 2 have a negative impact with respect to stability. The immediate benefit to the applicant would be an enhanced view. Chairman Kerns noted that the grading actually crosses property lines. Staff clarified that there are actually three applicants; Mr. Wessbecher is the led applicant. The other two applicants have actually signed an application. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Uwe Wessbecher, applicant, provided a history of the property which they purchased seven years ago. He referred to conversations with Mr. Neilson, soils engineer, who told him that the continued erosion was a given on the entire Quarry rim, not just his area, but everywhere. They discussed mitigation measures at that time. He provided photos of the proposed area which had been directed to the Quarry Lake Estates Homeowners Association along with a letter indicating what he was proposing. This was several months ago. He also had a letter from Jo Crosby regarding the erosion control issues. He indicated that there had been four independent studies made of the area over the years with recommendations for correction. They were looking for the least amount of impact. He discussed the amount of cut and indicated that there was no issue with water run-off as it will all go back onto his property. He indicated that this was a man made slope (quarry). He would now like to take cue of the problem before something happens. This is an unique situation. Also of interest, they have actually lowered the home site two feet to provide more feeling of stability, giving up some view in the process. He understands that the house is not at risk of falling off of the cliff but he believed there is clearly a risk of part of their property going off the cliff. He indicated that they are trying to take care of a problem that was created 15-20 years ago. Commissioner Carey felt it was a beautiful lot asking why the applicant did not address this issue when the house application was submitted. He referred to the engineer's report which indicates the work "might help' or "maybe will help". Mr. Wessbecher stated that they now have a construction driveway and they have the ability to haul dirt so it is the most cost effective time to do the corrective grading. It was always his intention to correct/enhance the stability of the hillside. We know there is a problem and they want to address it rather than ignoring it, waiting for the worst scenario. The goal is to remove pressure from the worst possible part. The wise thing to do is to take the 11 feet (not 4 feet to stay within policy). Commissioner Clow stated one of the reasons they have a grading ordinance is concern about people creating geometric steps in hillsides. The topo and diagram show this as an absolute flat pad and then a geometric slope upward which looks like your classic step in the hillside that they are trying to avoid. He suggested rounding this off, making it look more natural (yellow and red sections). Mr. Wessbecher had no issue with the suggestion of rounding, making it look more natural. For clarification, Commissioner Clow stated rather than things going at angles, they ` round off. The intent is that it looks round, looks quasi natural at the top, particularly the profile `, as you look up from down below. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/14/05 June 23, 2005 Page 3 Planning Director Cahill felt, as a part of the landscape screening plan for the new residence, they could address this area as well. This would allow one more opportunity to look at the finished grading project and if it is not quite to your satisfaction, it could require a little more modification prior to installation of the plants. Mr. Wessbecher discussed their landscape and erosion control plans and their efforts to be careful not to put water on the other side of the Quarry. They will not be irrigating on the other side of the fence, where they could cause themselves a problem. Discussion ensued regarding the preliminary landscaping plan the was submitted with the new residence. Mr. Wessbecher would like to create natural landscaping. Chairman Kerns felt the landscaping plan should be reviewed after the grading has been completed. This could be added to the conditions of approval. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Lydia Vidovich, living at 12260 Kate Drive for 5 years with her husband and children. Prior to that, Mr. Vidovich spent 15 years working on the development of an active rock quarry into the Quarry Hill subdivision. One of the most challenging task left was the open spaces left from overly active pit mining. The face behind their house is deeper than it should be. The result is millions of pounds of pressure, and due to the steepness, potential land sliding. At their homeowners association meeting, all of the residents agreed on the issue of reducing the Wessbecher's hill slope. The Quarry is not natural and cutting greater then the protective rule is justified along the over steep cliff to restore natural stability. To reduce the height of the over burdened area, the Wessbechers will be making a great contribution toward restoring the quarry to a more natural state. In the long term, the risk of sliding will be lessened and they would prefer that the Wessbechers cut the hill even more than planned but they realize that the cutting of hills is very expensive. She voiced support of the project. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Carey felt this application was difficult with important issues on both sides. He would prefer an engineering report that indicates this will improve the stability of the hillside and drainage, not "maybe". There is a benefit of a better view and a flat play area for the applicants. If we do allow the proposed grading it will produce a more visible house which is actually the opposite reason why they usually allow grading exceptions. The approval may set a precedent for future applicants. He felt the area could be graded within the ordinance and achieve some of the benefits in terms of better stability of the hillside. The Quarry is different than any other area in Town. He would suggest grading within the ordinance; not granting an exception to the grading policy. Commissioner Clow voiced support of the project. He felt this was a good idea, done right. He would ask staff to make sure there is a curb look to the grading which should not be hard to accomplish. Landscaping will help. The concern with instability of the hillside is a real one. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/14/05 June 23, 2005 Page 4 With the condition that they make sure that there is a rounded look to the excavation so it will not look like a step in the hillside, he can support the project. Commissioner Cottrell also had mixed feelings about the project. The hill was there when the Wessbechers bought the property. He felt the prime reason for asking for this is to improve the view. On the other hand, he felt the request is not unreasonable that not only will their view be improved but also for the people below. He noted that every house in the Quarry is visible, whether up high or below. With mixed feelings, he would come down on the side of approval. Commissioner Collins also had concerns. She also felt the primary benefit was the view. She also had a concern with setting precedent of making exceptions to the grading policy for grading that is not a specific hardship of a specific problem identified in the geotechnical report. However, she understood how it would give the applicants peace of mind having the hill stabilized. This is a man-made slope and will not come up before them again. So why not allow them to re -grade it in a nice way and landscape which will be an improvement. Chairman Kerns voiced support of the project as the applicants are trying to remove an area that has potential safety issues. It is also true that the applicants will benefit with a better view. He agreed with the suggestion regarding smoothing the contours which the contractor can accomplish as they grade. He would add to the conditions that this come back to the Planning Commission for the review of the landscape screening plan. At that point, they can review how the grading is progressing and if there are any slight modifications prior to doing the landscaping it can be done at that time. Since the entire Quarry is unique, he did not feel they were setting a precedent as the whole area was cut at one time because of the quarry. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Motion by Commissioner Clow and seconded by Chairman Kerns to approve the request for a Site Development Permit for slope alteration and a grading policy exception; Lands of Wessbecher, 11021 Magdalena Road, with the following additions/changes to the conditions of approval: add a condition that the contours be somewhat rounded with staff review; and the landscape screening plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission sometime after the grading has been completed. AYES: Chairman Kerns, Commissioners Collins, Cottrell & Clow NOES: Commissioner Carey This approval is subject to a 23 day appeal period 3.2 PROPOSED POLICY APPLICABLE TO ALL RESIDENTIAL ANNEXATION APPLICATIONS. SPECIFICALLY, THE POLICY PERTAINS TO LAND USE AND PLANNING, PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (staff -Carl Cahill). Planning Director Cahill introduced this item by reviewing the staff report and the LAFCO Urban Pockets 2005 maps, indicating that the Town has the potential to annex over 300 additional properties in the coming years. The City Council authorized the staff to develop an annexation policy that will facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of future annexations and an Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/14/05 June 23, 2005 Page 5 equitable incorporation strategy that does not negatively impact the Town's finances. Currently, annexation requests are on hold until the Town can secure a new sewer agreement with the City of Los Altos. The proposed policy does not compel the Town to accept annexation applications. He felt that the Town will reach an agreement with the City of Los Altos with additional capacity rights that can be administered and sold. The policy gives a frame work for what they look for and how they analyze an annexation request. The Planning Commission should focus its review of the policy as it relates to the General Plan, Zoning and Land Use issues (Section B). He further discussed the wording in Section B, second paragraph: "All existing or proposed lots within the territory proposed for annexation shall substantially comply with the minimum lot size standards and slope density requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance or provisions shall have been made to achieve compliance." The proposed policy will give staff guidelines for processing annexations. Discussion ensued regarding annexations being a logical, contiguous extension of the Town's boundaries, past procedures for annexations, and State annexations laws. Cahill stated that the review of an annexation, in terms of staff review, is very similar to a subdivision in terms of review. They also look at the fiscal impact of the annexation. He further discussed the process for the Ravensbury annexation. Any property annexed are subject to the Los Altos Hills rules. The wording for Sanitary Sewer Facilities were discussed suggesting wording "can be" or "capable of being" connected to the Town's sewer systems, etc. Currently, there are no sewer connections available. They should cover the current Town residents then see what is needed for any potential annexed properties when negotiating an agreement. Chairman Kerns suggested wording stating "no annexation shall occur until additional sewer capacity rights have been received'; something to that effect Commissioner Clow felt there were people in the potential annexation category that have working septic systems that would be cost prohibited to connect to sewer and making it a requirement that they hook up to City sewer is just the reason they never annexed. He does not agree with the requirement. Cahill noted that all of the past annexations have been "sewer" driven. Commissioner Carey felt the Town's goal was to connect properties to sewer and they would be taking a step backwards if they annexed parcels that could not be connected to sewer. Commissioner Carey, in terms of annexing properties, they do not want to annex, in general, substandard lots. Regarding the affordable housing issue, maybe there should be a section on affordable housing so if there is substandard lots there may be some exceptions. Chairman Kerns noted that this will become a policy much like a guideline. It was noted that "exceptions" should be clarified. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Brief discussion ensued. Commissioners Collins and Cottrell supported the policy as amended. Commissioner Clow also supported the policy but would not want to give the impression that you have to hook up to sewer in order to be annexed. He suggested a change in wording for "Sanitary Sewer Facilities, to "or ean-be capable of connection to the Town's sewer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." Planning Commission Minutes June 23, 2005 Page 6 Commissioner Carey supports the document as amended. Approved 7/14/05 Chairman Kerns also supports the document as amended requesting a statement regarding the sewer capacity rights. Commissioner Carey suggested the following wording: The Town will not initiate annexations unless the Town has a sufficient number of sewer capacity rights under its control to first serve existing residents and then all parcels proposed for annexation. Further discussion ensued regarding the paragraph regarding 'Pathways" with the recommendation to add to the paragraph as follows: Open space easements, pathway easements and/ or in -lieu fees may be required as conditions of annexation. MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Motion by Carey, seconded by Commissioner Clow and passed by consensus to forward to the City Council the proposed Annexation Policy with the following additions/changes: (1) Section B, second paragraph: All eXiStifig 8f ' sed lots __ i4iia the territories proposed for annexation shall substantially comply with the minimum lot size standards and slope density requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance or provisions shall have been made to achieve compliance. (2) "Sanitary Sewer Facilities, to "or ear -be capable of connection to the Town's sewer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (3) The Town will not initiate annexations unless the Town has a sufficient number of sewer capacity rights under its control to first serve existing residents and then all parcels proposed for annexation. and (4) Open space easements, pathway easements and/ or in -lieu fees kaw may be required as conditions of annexation. This item will appear on a future City Council agenda. 4. OLD BUSINESS -none NEW BUSINESS 5.1 Attendance -City Council Meeting Schedule Handout- 2005/2006 6. REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for June 16s', Commissioner Kerns, reported on the following: dedication of the new Town Hall; request for approval of Town of Los Altos Hills Draft Pathway CIP; and brief discussion regarding the proposed future signal on Arastradero Road. 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for July 7" -Commissioner Clow 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for July 21" Commissioner Cottrell 6.4 Planning Commission Representative for August 4's -Commissioner Carey APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of May 12, 2005 minutes Planning Commission Minutes Approved 7/14/05 June 23, 2005 Page 7 4 PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To approve the May 112005 minutes. 8. REPORT FROM FAST TRACK MEETING -JUNE 14 & 21, 2005 8.1 LANDS OF PADMANABHAN, 13114 Maple Leaf Court (23-05-ZP-SD-GD); CEQA Status: exempt 15303 (a). A request for a Site Development Permit for a 5,745 square -foot new residence (maximum height 27') (staff -Brian Froelich). Approved with conditions. 8.2 LANDS OF JARVIS, 23923 Jabil Lane (243-04-ZP-SD-GD); CEQA Status: exempt 15303 (a). A request for a Site Development Permit for a 6,714 square foot new residence (maximum height 30') (staff -Brian Froelich). Approved with conditions. 9. REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETING -MAY 25 & 31, 2005 9.1 LANDS OF BOWES, 12850 Normandy Lane (69-05-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening, hardscape and a 900 square foot swimming pool and spa (staff -Debbie Pedro). Approved with conditions. 9.2 LANDS OF FANG, 27053 Taaffe Road (36-05-ZP-SD); A request for a Site Development Permit for an 807 square foot first and second story addition and remodel (maximum height 27') (staff -Debbie Pedro). Approved with conditions. 9.3 LANDS OF CHEN, 27460 Altamont Road (41-05-ZP-SD); CEQA Status: exempt 15301. To consider a request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening of the major addition. (staff -Brian Froelich). Approved with conditions. 9.4 LANDS OF JOFFE, 14790 Manuella Road (122-04-ZP-SD); CEQA Status: exempt 15301. To consider a request for a Site Development Permit for landscape screening of the new residence. (staff -Brian Froelich). Approved with conditions. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lam Smith Planning Secretary