Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/06/2009Minutes of a Regular Meeting Approved 10/01/2009 Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, August 6, 2009, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road 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 Clow and Commissioners: Collins, Partridge, Harpoothan, and Abraham Absent: None Staff: Debbie Pedro, Planning Director; David Keyon, Associate Planner; Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner; and Victoria Ortland, Planning Secretary 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR - none 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS Planning Commission Ex Parte Contacts Policy Disclosure: Commissioners: Collins, Harpoothan, and Partridge had spoken to neighbors, Bob and Melinda Rowe (Item 3.3; Lands of Malavalli). Commissioner Abraham had spoken to neighbors Bob and Melinda Rowe and another neighbor (Item 3.3; Lands of Malavalli). Chairman Clow had spoken to Landscape Architect, Patrick Whisler (Item 3.1; Lands of JJP Realty Enterprises, LLC). 3.1 LANDS OF JJP REALTY ENTERPRISES, LLC, 11481 Magdalena Road; File #60-09-ZP-SD-GD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a 7,037 square foot tennis court and a 6,395 square foot bunker garage. The applicant is also requesting a Grading Policy exception for up to 16' of cut for the bunker garage, 14' of cut and 7' of 511 for the tennis court, and the removal of two (2) heritage oak trees. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (e) (Staff - Nicole Horvitz) (CONTINUED FROM THE JULY 2, 2009, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING). Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report for the application continued from the July 2, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant had been directed to relocate the tennis court and bunker garage to an alternative location on the property, due to noise concerns Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 2 kfrom the neighbor immediately to the west of the tennis court. The alternative location would require a Grading Policy exception for 7 feet of 511 and 16 feet of cut for the tennis court. In addition, another 16 feet of cut was needed for access into the bunker garage. Three heritage oak trees would need to be removed. Staff's recommendation was for denial of the alternative location because the original location would require less grading and the heritage oaks would be preserved. The applicant had submitted a sound study with proposed mitigation measures for the original location. The sound mitigation recommendations included a six foot tall solid fence along the western property line and a five foot tall solid fence along the south side of the tennis court. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Patrick Whisler, Landscape Architect, presented plans for the alternative location. Terraced retaining walls would surround the tennis court and the removed heritage oak trees would be replaced at a three to one ratio. The applicant preferred the alternative location. Neighbor support had been received for the new plan. Ken Greer, Magdalena Road, supported the alternative location because the tennis court would be less visible and the noise level would be reduced. Carmen Colet, Jessica Lane, stated that all of the bedrooms in her house, including the master bedroom, would face the tennis court in the alternative location. The noise and the lights, from the tennis court, would be problematic. She felt that the applicant had other locations, on the large property, to place the tennis court and she thought it unfair to put it in front of her house. Ralph Colet, Jessica Lane, understood why the applicants did not want the tennis court near their own front door, but the altemative location put it at his front door. He felt the tennis court, in the alternative location, would adversely affect his property value. Jim Crowther, Magdalena Road, was pleased that the noise from the tennis court would be reduced. Ginger Summit, Lennox Way, asked where the dirt (that was removed for construction of the bunker garage) would go. Staff replied that the dirt was planned to be hauled off site. Patrick Whisler said that as much soil as possible, from the construction of the bunker, would be used on the site. Sound mitigation was investigated for the alternative location, but due to the elevation change there were no effective means for mitigating the sound. A fence around the tennis court along with landscape screening would be provided. A wind screen could be added to the fence for more privacy. Randy Waldeck, sound consultant, said the tennis court in the north location would increase the noise level (4dB) for the neighbors to the north (Colet) and reduce the noise level (8dB) for the neighbors to the west (Greer). The difference in the noise level for the neighbors to the south (Crowther) would not be discernable. The sound level from the tennis court in the north location, Planning Convrussion Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 3 4W with no mitigation, would be at the same sound level as the west location with a fence at the property line. The geography of the north portion of the site prevents a sound mitigating fence to be effective. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Abraham felt that although it was a large piece of property, the site was heavily constrained by easements. The Greer's house and outdoor living area was relatively close to the property line. The problems created by the tennis court in the original location were too great for the Greers. The original location also would create problems for the downhill neighbor (Crowther). The alternative location only created a very small incremental increase in noise for the Colets and a very substantial decrease in the noise level for the other two adjacent property owners. The alternative location was a better location for the good of the community. There would be very substantial grading, cutting, and large retaining walls; but the walls would be terraced and well landscaped, so no one offsite will see them. He supported the alternative location for the tennis court and thought it was the right and proper thing to do. Commissioner Collins said if it had not been for the Grading Policy exception, the project would not have come before the Planning Commission. There was very little good mitigation for the noise from tennis courts. She had trouble agreeing with the alternative location; which needed more of a Grading Policy exception than the original location. The original location, with mitigating walls, seemed fair to all of the residents. Commissioner Partridge stated that the original location, with the addition of the mitigating fence, reduced the noise level for the neighbor to the west. The neighbor to the north would receive about the same amount of noise. The original location required less cut and fill and seemed fair to all the neighbors. Commissioner Harpoothan suggested sloped retaining walls (that would tend to deflect the sound up) as a mitigating measure for the north location. He could support either the alternative location or the original location with the sound mitigating walls. Chairman Clow said that the Open Space easement prevented the tennis court from being placed near Magdalena Road (south). The tennis court in a north or west location would affect either the Colets or Greets. The Greer's house would be right next to the tennis court in the original location. The Colet's house would be farther away from the tennis court in the alternative location. He could support either location, but leaned toward the alternative location because the applicant preferred it and he felt it had less of an overall impact. MOTION MADE, AMENDED, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Abraham, and seconded by Commissioner Harpootlian to approve the requested Site Development Permit in the alternative location; that the applicant work with staff and engineering experts to further reduce the anticipated sound levels for the Colet property, either by sloping retaining walls, a masonry wall around the edge of the tennis court or whatever means can be done to reduce the noise level in a practical manner. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 4 6W Commissioner Partridge felt that because the north property was at a higher elevation, sloping retaining walls would focus the sound toward the Colet's house. He questioned the validity of the noise survey's proposed sound level estimates after the retaining walls were installed. He felt the noise level of reflected sound that the Colet property would experience was vastly underestimated. He suggested further study of the reflected sound off the retaining walls before approval of the alternative location. MOTION MADE TO AMEND THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AMENDED, ACCEPTED, AND FAILED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Partridge to amend the motion on the floor, and accepted by Commissioner Abraham to conduct an analysis of the noise impact including the effect of the retaining walls and to verify that the noise impact on the Colet property would be no worse than the noise impact on the Greer property. (Amended by Commissioner Abraham to read: "that the noise impact will be no worse than is represented"). AYES: Commissioners Collins and Partridge NOES: Commissioner Harpoothan and Chairman Clow ABSTAIN: Commissioner Abraham ROLL CALL VOTE FOR THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR: AYES: Commissioners Harpootlian, Abraham and Chairman Clow 6 NOES: Commissioners Collins and Partridge This item is subject to a 22 day appeal period and will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. 3.2 LANDS OF HOUSTON AND HENSLEY, 27575 Purissima Road; File #216 -08 - IS -TM -ND -GD; A request for a three lot subdivision of an existing 3.26 acre parcel. The property is zoned R -A (Residential -Agricultural). CEQA Review: Mitigated Negative Declaration (Staff -David Keyon). David Keyon, Associate Planner, presented the staff report for the three lot subdivision. An Open Space Easement was proposed over Deer Creek and the southwest portion of the property. A plan for a Fire Department approved fire truck turn around was proposed in -lieu of a 50 foot diameter cul de sac. Proposed for parcels two and three was a shared driveway within a 25 foot wide ingress/egress easement instead of the standard 35 foot wide easement. If the 25 foot wide easement was not approved, an alternative design with two parallel driveways would be installed. To meet setback requirements, removal of a small area of the existing house, a portion the eaves, some driveway paving, and the garage were necessary. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Terry Szewczyk, Civil Engineer, said the application for the subdivision was the result of much effort to create the most efficient plan. The design kept the paved area to a minimum, and ` preserved maximum open space and trees. It made sense to combine the two parallel driveways to reduce paving, but with a 35 foot width, the single driveway would prohibit dividing the property into three lots. The existing house would be preserved for a few years. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 5 Dan Rasmussen, Samuel Lane, stated that he lived down the creek from the proposed subdivision. He had concerns about the effect to his home from the increased drainage from the new development. Jerry Houston, applicant, explained that preserving the existing house for a short duration would be helpful in securing loans for development of the property. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Partridge supported the project. His initial concern regarding restricted floor and development area for parcel one had been addressed. The lot line complications make the 35 foot easement impossible. Commissioner Abraham said that it would be tough to build a good-sized house on parcel one but it was the property owner's choice to create a parcel with such a small buildable area. He would not cut up the existing house. Commissioner Harpootlian felt that allowing an exception for the 25 foot ingress/egress easement would override Town policy for a 35 foot wide ingress/egress easement for two properties. He supported approving the two driveway plan for the project because it met Town policy. Commissioner Collins was concerned that in the future, variances may be requested for parcel one. She supported the one driveway design with a 25 foot wide easement because the additional paving required for two driveways would increase water run off to the creek. Chairman Clow supported the project with the single driveway plan. He would not require the removal of the eaves on the existing house. MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Partridge and seconded by Commissioner Abraham to forward the recommend to City Council to approve the subdivision plan with one driveway in a 25 foot ingress/egress easement for parcels two and three; allow the eaves of the existing house to remain until demolition for site development; and approval of the tentative map, and mitigated negative declaration. AYES: Commissioners Partridge, Collins, Abraham, and Chairman Clow NOES: Commissioner Harpootlian This item will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. 3.3 LANDS OF MALAVALLI, 12840 La Vida Real; File #46-09-ZP-SD; A request ( for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a new two story residence with a basement and accessory structures approved on December 8, 2005. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15304 (b) (Staff -Nicole Horvitz). Planning Cormnlssion Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 6 Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report for a landscape screening plan for the new residence and accessory structures approved in 2005. A 4.75 acre Open Space Easement encompasses the northern portion of the property. The applicant had worked with the surrounding neighbors to resolve their concerns. To accommodate the neighbors on Loreto Lane concerned about the height of the trees blocking the view to the bay, changes were made to relocate certain trees to a lower elevation, and some trees had been replaced with shrubs. Mitigation had been added along the eastern part of the property to block the view of the accessory structures for neighbors on Foothill Lane. The lighting plan consisted of shielded down lights to hang in the trees along the driveway (two per tree), and down shielded lights along the path around the house. The sets of down tree lights would be approximately 20 feet apart. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Jarrod Bauman, Landscape Architect, explained the down lights in the multi -trunked trees would hang at a height of approximately 12 feet, cast shadows through the branches, and deliver soft, diffused light on the driveway. A color rendering of the landscape plan had been sent to the neighbors along with an invitation to ask questions. He had worked to achieve a balance between the neighbor's concerns for screening the structures while not blocking any of their views. Kartik Patel, Architect, commented that he was available to answer questions regarding the buildings, driveway or other aspects of the overall project. He stated that there were a large number of mature oaks on the property. when removing the old fill and restoring natural grade, many trees had been preserved by boxing and relocating them on the site. The health of the oak trees had improved with the care and protection given them during the construction. Discussion ensued regarding the mature height of the proposed trees, the relocation of the beech trees, the elimination of the birch trees, and the selection of the Japanese pagoda trees. Commissioner Abraham asked if the applicant would grant a view easement to the neighbors to guarantee that the view would not be blocked by any trees. Kartik Patel replied that he did not think a view easement was necessary. Every effort had been made to protect the views and much time had been spent with the neighbors making changes to the design in response to their concerns. Ann Degheest, Foothill Lane, said that she bad spoken to Jarrod Bauman and had requested shrubs and trees be planted to block the view of the structures from her property. She wanted to review the location of any solar panels before approval and was concerned that the buried irrigation retention tanks and the water release would destabilize the canyon walls. Bob Rowe, Lucero Lane, had met with Town staff and Jarrod Bauman to discuss issues regarding the screening plan. He was concerned about the height of the birch trees (which had AW been removed from the plan); the beech trees, and the Japanese Pagoda trees because he did not want to lose the view from his residence. He requested that the mature height of the trees be limited to 35 feet and a formal view easement be granted to confirm that his views would be Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 7 preserved. He felt that a balance was needed between safety issues and the look of a theme park with the number of down lights in the trees. Melinda Rowe, Lucero Lane, explained that the view from her home was very important both for her enjoyment and the increased property value. She wanted shorter trees substituted for the tall trees on the plan and felt that the number of down lights in the trees would adversely affect the nighttime view. Sarala Rao, Lucero Lane, said that she enjoyed the fantastic view from her home every day. She had discussed the landscape plan with Jarrod Bauman and felt that the height of some of the proposed trees, when mature, would ruin her view. She requested revision of the selection for the very tall trees, including the Japanese Pagoda trees, the bald cypress trees, and the beech trees. April Mair, Environmental Design and Protection Committee, was concerned by the wattage and number of light fixtures shown on the plan. Jarrod Bauman explained that the design of the garden was not intended to impact any neighbor's views, but to feature contrast in the texture, foliage, and shape of the vegetation for the owner's enjoyment of their property. The Japanese pagoda trees would be kept pruned and not allowed to reach a height that would impede views. 4 Chairman Clow asked if view easement could be granted to preserve the Rowe's view. Kartik Patel said that the decision regarding a view easement could not be made without the homeowner's input. He felt that the owners had gone out of their way to accommodate the neighbor's concerns. The view the neighbors currently enjoy was partially created when the owners removed a number of mature trees (including the coast redwoods) at the neighbor's request. Commissioner Harpoothan asked if the amount of light from the tree down lights would affect the view of the night sky. Jarrod Bauman replied that the tree down light fixtures were 2 inches by 4 inches in size. The distance between the ground lights along the walkways around the house were proposed at approximately 20 feet apart. Commissioner Harpootlian commented on the likely high water usage for the landscape plan. Kartik Patel said that it had been very important to the owner that the entire project be constructed using sustainable architectural practices. That initiative would be continued in the landscape design with the installation of a satellite irrigation system. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Harpootlian supported the proposed lighting plan. He suggested establishing a view corridor for the neighbors and restricting the trees planted in the corridor to under 40 feet in mature height. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 10/01/2009 August 6, 2009 Page 8 Commissioner Collins supported the lighting plan. She did not support a view easement but would limit the height of the trees in front of the house to 40 feet. Commissioner Partridge felt that light fixtures would indirectly illuminate much more of an area than just the driveway. He understood the aesthetic reasons the applicants wanted the Japanese pagoda trees new the house. He suggested allowing the two trees and let implementation of the view ordinance enforce preservation of the neighbor's view. Commissioner Abraham supported the lighting plan and did not think the lighting would have any negative impact on the surrounding properties. He favored granting a view easement to the neighbors. The proposed trees should be a limited to 35 feet in height at maturity. Chairman Clow thought the lighting plan would not impact the neighbors. If no view easement would be granted, then the trees should be limited at mature height to 35 feet maximum. Kartik Patel said the Japanese pagoda trees and the beech trees would be replaced by trees that would not grow over 35 feet in height at maturity. MOTION MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Collins and seconded by Commissioner Partridge to approve the requested Site Development Permit for the landscape screening plan subject to the conditions of approval in attachment one, with the exception that the Japanese pagoda trees and the beech trees shown on the plan shall be replaced with trees with a maximum mature height of 35 feet. AiW AYES: Commissioners Partridge, Abraham, Harpootlian, Collins, and Chairman Clow NOES: None This item is subject to a 22 day appeal period and will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. 3.4 LANDS OF EPISCOPAL LAYMENS GROUP OF LOS ALTOS, (APPLICANT: T -MOBILE WIRELESS), 26410 Duval Way; File #98 -09 -CUP; A request for a Conditional Use Permit renewal for an existing wireless communications facility consisting of an antenna in the church steeple and ground equipment. A new wood fence is proposed to enclose the existing ground equipment cabinet. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15301 (a) (Staff -Nicole Horvitz). Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report for the CUP renewal of the existing wireless communication facility. A new fence is proposed to conceal the view of the ground equipment cabinet from Duval Way. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Tony Kim, representative for T -Mobile, requested renewal of the Conditional Use Permit for the wireless facility that had been in operation since 1997. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING L" Planning Commission Minutes August 6, 2009 Page 9 Approved 10/01/2009 MOTION MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY VOICE VOTE: Motion made by Commissioner Abraham and seconded by Commissioner Harpootlian to recommend to the City Council to renew the Conditional Use Permit and extend the renewal period for 10 years subject to the amended conditions. AYES: Commissioners Partridge, Abraham, Harpootlian, Collins, and Chairman Clow NOES: None This item will be forwarded to a future meeting of the City Council. 4. OLD BUSINESS - none 5. NEW BUSINESS—none 6. REPORTS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS 6.1 Planning Commission Representative for July 9 — Commissioner Harpoothan 6.2 Planning Commission Representative for July 23 — Commissioner Collins 6.3 Planning Commission Representative for August 13 - Cancelled 6.4 Planning Commission Representative for August 27 — Cancelled 4 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of July 2, 2009 minutes MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED BY VOICE VOTE: Motion by Commissioner Collins and seconded by Commissioner Abraham to approve the July 2, 2009 minutes as presented. AYES: Commissioners Partridge, Collins, Harpootlian, Abraham and Chairman Clow NOES: None REPORT FROM FAST TRACK MEETING — JULY 21 2009 8.1 LANDS OF KOONG, 23690 RAVENSBURY AVENUE; File 9313-08-ZP-SD- GD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a new 4,415 square foot, two- story residence (maximum height 26') with a 1,794 square foot basement. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) (Staff -David Keyon) (Approved with conditions). REPORT FROM SITE DEVELOPMENT MEETING — AUGUST 4, 2009 9.1 LANDS OF WOOD, 27133 Byrne Park Lane; File 9116-09-ZP-SD; A request for a Site Development Permit for a landscape screening plan for a pool and pool house approved on April 3, 2007. CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per A, Section 15304 (b) (Staff -Nicole Horvitz) (Approved with conditions). Planning Connnission Minutes August 6, 2009 Page 10 4w 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Victoria Ortland Planning Secretary 4 LJ Approved 10/01/2009