Minutes of a Special Meeting Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION

Transcription

1 Minutes of a Special Meeting Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Attachment 8 Thursday,, 7:00 PM Council Chambers, Fremont Road L ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Absent: Staff: Commissioner Basiji, Commissioner Mandie, Commissioner Tankha, Commissioner Couperus, Chair Partridge None Planning Director Suzanne Avila, Assistant City Attorney Claire Liu, Planning Technician Cody Einfalt 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR Chair Partridge opened presentations from the floor. Seeing that no one wished to speak, presentations from the floor were closed. ~ PUBLIC HEARINGS Ex Parte: Commissioner Couperus spoke with Rosy Ko, Jeff Peterson, Susan Welch, Kit Gordon, and Nancy Couperus. Commissioner Tan.ka spoke with Rosy Ko, Jeff Peterson, Susan Welch, and Kit Gordon. Commissioner Mandie spoke with Rosy Ko, Jeff Peterson, Kelly Hardwicke, Brian Wines, Kit Gordon, Susan Welch, Alice Sakamoto, and Nancy Couperus. Commissioner Basiji spoke with Kit Gordon, Rosy Ko, and Alice Sakamoto. Chair Partridge spoke with Rosy Ko, Jeff Peterson, Kit Gordon, Susan Welch, and Alice Sakamoto. li LANDS OF TOP ELEGANT INVESTMENT, LLC (FORMER LANDS OF STIRLING); Natoma Road: File # TM and # MISC; A request for approval of a Tentative Map to subdivide an acre property into nine lots. CEQA review: An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for this project (staff-suzanne Avila). 1

2 The Commission discussed how they would evaluate the items being considered that evening. Chair Partridge suggested they make a list of items and follow the direction given by the City Council including lot 7, conditions of approval, and Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). The Commission agreed. Planning Director Suzanne Avila presented the staff report. Commissioner Tankha asked questions of staff regarding how the Town analyzes new subdivision maps. She asked what metrics are used to ensure that the property conforms to Town standards. She pointed out that many projects that come before the Planning Commission arise from problems that can be traced to the creation of the lot itself. In an effort to prevent future problems with these lots, she asked staff if this new subdivision would be held to a higher standard than other subdivisions. Director Avila explained that this subdivision would not be held to a higher standard other than having additional restrictions on fencing and landscaping. Commissioner Couperus asked a clarification question on how the table of Attachment 12 was constructed. Director Avila explained Attachment 12 and said that it shows that the Town regularly approves projects with 3000 cubic yards of grading. Commissioner Mandie asked to be walked through the imagined process of how the Town would respond to a neighborhood complaint about the adherence to the Master Plan once the CC&Rs are in place and the developer no longer owns the property. Director Avila explained that the Town would handle the situation through code enforcement. Commissioner Mandie asked the Assistant City Attorney to confirm the sufficiency of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) given that the willows and the currently proposed distributed drainage system weren't included. The Assistant City Attorney confirmed. Commissioner Basiji asked how to interpret the findings presented by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and received a response from staff. Chair Partridge asked questions regarding the open space easement and what land owners are permitted to do regarding making a path in easements. Staff responded that pathways are constructed and handled in the building phase of the project. Chair Partridge opened the PUBLIC HEARING. 2 May 10,2018

3 Rosy Ko, project applicant, summarized the history of the project, its involvement with the Planning Commission and City Council, and the scope of work for the subdivision. She spoke about the existing features on the site and how much land the project will preserve with open space easements. She provided an overview of the presentation for the evening and introduced the people that would be speaking. Dr. Hardwicke, project biologist, explained that she was the individual who submitted for a preliminary jurisdictional determination from the Anny Corps of Engineers. She explained the difference between a preliminary and regular determination for jurisdictions, the definition of a wetland and how the Army Corps handle wetlands that are not attached to any other navigable waters of the bay, why the project request a preliminary determination and, that the preliminary approval can be used for future permit purposes with the Army Corps. Commissioner Basiji asked Dr. Hardwicke regarding the preliminary determination and how the approval would relate to each individual lot and the subdivision as a whole. Dr. Hardwicke explained that each lot would have to address any changes that occur in the future. Preliminary determinations are good for five years. She talked about monitoring wells on the property and how the biologist team checked the water level of the wells throughout the year to measure soil saturation across the seasons. Commissioner Basiji asked questions regarding the presence of swales on the land and how the hydrology would interact with the swale. Dr. Hardwicke explained how the biologist team used historic maps of the area to determine the topography of the land. She stated that by using these maps, her team could identify where water was flowing in the past, and predict where it will be in the future. Commissioner Tankha asked the difference between a swale and colluvial bowl. Dr. Hardwicke explained that a swale is a land feature that may support wetland vegetation but it does not have incision, or in other words sharp banks that indicate that regular flows are occurring to cut a stream bed. A colluvial bowl is much broader determination where loose soils can collect over time. Commissioner Couperus asked questions regarding the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and how the study analyzes past, current, and future conditions. 3 May 10,2018

4 Tim Tosta, attorney for applicant, explained that CEQA is only concerned with how the land is in its present state and the impacts the study finds has to do with the current conditions. Chair Partridge asked about the water tanks on the property and different types of vegetation around the tanks. He was interested in what different vegetation told the biologist about the land. Dr. Hardwicke spoke of the conditions on the site and how certain areas of the land are more susceptible to specific plant species. Commissioner Mandie had questions regarding the expanded willow-zone open space easement. She asked if the easement will protect all of the stems of the trees growing in this area. Ms. Ko spoke about protecting the trees in the willow zone easement, and explained the extent to which the overhanging tree branches outside the easement will be impacted. Commissioner Mandie asked about the bridge over Matadeo Creek. Dr. Hardwicke explained that the team found the exact placement for the bridge that would satisfy their engineering concerns, and not affect the surrounding riparian area. Jeff Peterson, project engineer, spoke about lot 7 and the issues of wetlands and open space. He stated that lot 7 is buildable without having to get into extensive grading measures. He explained that lot 7 will have a restriction on building size as well as no basement. He spoke regarding the General Plan Policy 2.5 (which covers slopes in excess of 30%) and how lot 7 will comply with this regulation. Commissioner Basiji asked a question regarding the intent behind limiting the size of the house. Ms. Ko explained that the design team responding to the comments made by the reviewing committees and preserving open space. Chair Partridge asked the Town's Geotechnical Consultant Ted Sayre asked about the projects applicability to the General Plan Policy 2.5 for geologic hazard areas. Mr Sayre spoke about lot 7 and the issues that are associated with the site. He said that there is no geologic hazards that are dangerous to life. He explained 4

5 that building on top of this land will compress the soil and will create a stable foundation. Ms. Ko spoke regarding the City Council concerns from the January 2018 meeting. She spoke regarding how the CC&Rs would be applied to the land and how the Town would be involved. She explained that the proposed CC&Rs would not affect the proposed easements. Commissioner Basiji asked a question regarding how the CC&Rs would be applied before residents buy the land. Mr. Tosta explained that the document is essentially a contract with the Town that grants the Town certain rights that go beyond police rights. Chair Partridge asked the Town's attorney about liability concerns associated withcc&rs. Claire Lai, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the Town is not legally obligated to withhold the CC&Rs. It is up to the association itself to handle specific conditions in the CC&Rs not covered in the Municipal Code. Commissioner Mandie asked if there are going to be any added costs of policing the extra requirements of the subdivision. Director Avila responded that if there is a violation with any of the easements or conditions of approval, staff can enforce those aspects using the Town's code enforcement process. She added that staff responds to issues on a complaint basis rather than driving around Town looking for noncompliance issues. Ms. Lai clarified that due to the way the CC&Rs are written, there 1s no additional required action from staff needed for this subdivision. Chair Partridge asked a question regarding the proposed easements and open space plan as they relate to the landscape maintenance plan. He questioned whether the required mowing and tilling to remove invasive species would be in conflict with the regulations of these conservation areas. Ms. Ko explained the landscape maintenance guidelines and how the easements would affect the maintenance of the landscape. Director Avila spoke about landscape maintenance that typically occurs in open spaces easements and how the Town prefers the open space to remain in its natural state. She explained that in certain situations, for example dead vegetation, there is specific language in the maintenance plan to allow landowners to tend to the land. 5

6 Commission discussion ensued about how to control the landscaping in the open space easements. Steve Atkinson, Arent Fox, spoke regarding the language of the landscape maintenance plan. He said that all the concerns of the Commission were covered in the easement's language. He explained that the intent of the plan would be to allow landowners into certain sections of the open space to conduct maintenance in accordance with the plan. Commissioner Couperus spoke of the Landscape Master Plan and how the document talks about the maintenance of the area. He stated that there needs to be an expansion of the Master Landscape Plan to describe what specifically will be growing in the 30-foot strip ofland. Mr. Atkinson explained that there is specific language in the landscape maintenance plan to address the eastern boundaries of the proposed lots which are intended for wildlife passage. He read the section of the plan which specifies this maintenance requirement. Director Avila stated that there is a specific plant list included as a part of the project that specifies what plants could be planted within the different landscape zones. Commissioner Couperus said there should be a change to the conditions of the Landscape Maintenance Plan to address fire hazard concerns. He explained that maintenance of the vegetation is an ongoing concern that must be considered for this development. Commissioner Tankha explained that there are three concerns that need to be addressed in the Landscape Maintenance Pian: wildlife preservation, fire safety concerns with the density of the plants, and controlling grading. Commissioner Mandie asked a question to clarify that each of the lots will go through the normal site development process when they are developed. Staff confirmed the process. Commissioner Basiji said there should be a specific public hearing just for the landscaping of the common area in the subdivision. Chair Partridge asked a question regarding the maintenance of the meadow area in the subdivision. He asked if the meadow is going to maintained to address fire concerns. Mr. Atkinson responded by explaining that the meadow will grow naturally during the spring and summer time, but there is an added condition in the 6

7 maintenance plan that specifies annual maintenance to the vegetation m the meadow for fire code compliance. Ms. Ko finished the presentation by explaining that her team is looking for approval of the subdivision that evening. She spoke of the outreach process and planning that went into this project, and stated that her team is committed to continuously working with the neighbors to address any future concerns. Chair Partridge invited the public to comment Carol Gottlieb, Environmental Design & Protection Committee, spoke about the open space easements between the lots. She reminded the Commission to take the residents behind the subdivision into consideration when discussing the vegetation that will be planted in the open space. She stated that the committee is interested in protecting the views for these residents. Sharen Schoendorf, Los Altos Hills, said she likes the 30 foot easement on the eastern side of the property and wants it to be kept in its natural state. Commissioner Basiji stated that many neighbors have mentioned their concerns about the landscape maintenance and that the applicant should pay attention to all of the incoming comments. Ann Duwe, Pathways Committee, explained that a recommendation from the Pathway Committee is that the pathways apart of this subdivision should be staked and reviewed by the Committee before it is built. She said that the path is intended to be curved with switchbacks that are not abrupt. Sue Welch, Los Altos Hills, said that lot 7 is inconsistent with the General Plan. She stated that lot 7 has very steep slopes and this might be an issue with the landscaping in the future. She referred the Commission back to the General Plan policy 2.5 and spoke of past documentation on the property to show that geologists opinions of the land have changed over time. Ms. Ko responded to the statements made by the public. She explained that the project has had multiple reviews by the Town's committees and the applicant team has tried their best to attend to all of their concerns. She stated that there will be ongoing teamwork with the Town committees and neighbors throughout the duration of the project. Chair Partridge asked Ms. Ko if she is okay with the Pathways Committee's request to stake the path before it is installed. Ms. Ko, responded that her team had already agreed to this request. She continued to explain the conceptual landscape plan and how it will have to follow the design standards in the conditions of approval and CC&Rs. She 7 May 10,2018

8 explained that the design team took special care to protect the views for the neighbors with the placements of the chaparral and trees. Commissioner Couperus stated that the landscape maintenance plan should be updated to describe what will be included in the 30 foot strip along the east property line. Ms. Ko said that exact details about the placement of individual plants would be too specific for this subdivision meeting. She explained that the landscape plan before the Commission this evening is more of a guideline that will be used to create individual landscaping plans for each lot when the time comes for them to be developed. Commission discussion ensued regarding view corridors and chaparral vegetation placement. Mr. Atkinson explained the conceptual landscape plan to the Commission. He spoke about the specific conditions that would control the chaparral and protect neighbors' views. Ms.. Ko suggested a condition be added that the landscaping not limit the movement of wildlife throughout the chaparral. Commissioner Basiji requested that Ms. Ko respond to all the questions from Ms. Welch brought up in her presentation. Ms. Ko addressed the concerns raised by Ms. Welch. Davis Hoexter, Romig Engineers, spoke to the Commissioners concerns regarding landslides in Los Altos Hills and that lot 7 does not have any concerns with landslides. Chair Partridge closed the PUBLIC HEARING. The Commission spoke regarding how to discus item 3.1. and determined they should stick to the five items suggested by the City Council Commissioner Basiji talked about the importance of the General Plan Policy 2.5. He spoke about that the site conditions of the subdivision and said that he does not believe Policy 2.5 applies from a geologic point of view. He said that lot 7 is buildable. Commissioner Mandie explained that it is the Planning Commission's job to interpret and implement Town policy, not to create policy. She stated that Policy 2.5 does apply to lot 7 due to the fact that the land contains a drainage swale. She pointed out that additional General Plan policies apply to the subdivision such as 8

9 Open Space Policy 1.2 and Conservation Element Policy Using these as her basis, she thinks that the Commission needs to protect the drainage swales, and lot 7 should not be developed. Commissioner Tankha stated that there is a disagreement between what is said in the General Plan and what the experts say about the applicability of the policies. She said that she is comfortable taking the determination of the experts, and that lot 7 is in fact buildable. She stated that she does not want to build on the drainage swale on the property, and moving the house could be a possibility. Commissioner Couperus stated that one cannot build on a geologic hazard. He explained how the Town defines a hazard and showed the Town's geologic hazard map. He stated that just because a site in not classified as a geologic hazard zone, hazards can still happen. He stated that he came up with an idea to mediate any potential geologic hazard by moving the house within the lot but his idea would not comply with Town rules for subdivisions needing an interior clearing of a 160-foot circle. He said that the Commission could grant a variance for this property but granting such a variance would set precedents for the future. He stated that he is not sure if the Planning Commission would want to make this determination. Commissioner Partridge explained that Los Altos Hills has many geologic issues throughout the Town and staff has always put faith in their consultants' interpretation of the land. For this reason, he explained that he does not believe lot 7 is a geologic hazard. He explained that the real question is if this lot 7 contain a swale or not. He explained that his idea of a swale is where water is channeled, but he acknowledged that the consultants says this is not the case. He stated that the proposed footprint of the house on lot 7 has the same characteristic of lot eight. He spoke about options of moving the house or repositioning the driveway to be able to find a solution to accommodate the concerns of lot 7. Commissioner Basiji said he has visited the lot many times and he has trouble envisioning the houses on the lots. He spoke about grading issues and soil stability and brought up the question of how the soils would interact with Matadero Creek. Commissioner Mandie stated that the geologic hazard is not the only metric for determining stability. She explained that unstable terrain is covered in the Town's Safety Element policy which would restrict development on this site. She acknowledged that at the time that the policy was written there may have had different metrics in use to determine instability, but she does not feel that she can make that call. She explained that she will follow the policies of the General Plan the way they are written. Commissioner Tanka stated again that she is conflicted with the applicability of the General Plan Policies. She explained that she does believe the lot is buildable, 9 May 10,2018

10 and suggested that the applicant try to design the house on lot 7 to comply with the Town's policies. Commissioner Couperus stated he was curious about what the applicant thought of his idea to shift the house on lot 7. Chair Partridge explained that he disagrees with Commissioner Mandie and he believes that there is no waterways on lot 7. Commissioner Mandie brought up the Bassett Lane subdivision and stated that the Commission did get a professional opinion on this property which stated that there was no creek on the property. She pointed out that now there is a creek. She said that she uses this example when considering any professional opinions. She also added that the Romig Engineers report stated that the colluvial bowls exhibited "soil creep". Chair Partridge said that they should give the City Council something to work with by the end of the meeting that evening. Commissioner Basiji explained that some of the policies being debated do not apply to the project. He acknowledged the expert opinion that there is not a hazard on lot 7 and that the lot is buildable. Commissioner Tankka questioned if the General Plan policy is outdated and if the Commission should ask the City Council to take a look at updating their land use policies. Ms. Lai explained to the Commission that they just need to make a decision that can be supported with solid evidence. Commissioner Basiji explained that building on 30% slopes is possible and that he is okay with this development. Chair Partridge reminded the Commission of the experts' opinion that the soil is stable and future development of a house is not going to slip down the hill. Commission discussion ensued about slopes and potential geologic hazards. Commissioner Couperus stated that the applicant should be given a chance to look at the idea he proposed for moving lot 7. Mr. Atkinson asked if the Commission could finish their discussion about the subdivision so that the applicant team can understand all the issues that need to be addressed, rather than just addressing lot 7. 10

11 Commissioner Couperus explained that this project has changed significantly over time. He said that the subdivision has done a good job protecting the open space. One of his biggest issues was figuring out how to enforce and control the conditions regarding the open space easements and maintenance in the landscape plan. Commissioner Tanka complimented the applicant on the process that was taken in addressing all the key issues. She likes the free-flowing nature of the homes. She stated that she is only concerned with the location of the home on lot 7. Commissioner Mandie thinks that the combination of the CC&Rs and conditions of approval will work for this development. She explained she had changes to the conditions to insure that the Planning Commission will be given a chance to review all development that will take place within this subdivision. Commission discussion ensued regarding the landscape maintenance plan. The Commission decided that the Master Landscape Plan must be revised before it goes to the City Council. Commissioner Basiji thanked the applicant for including the provision of restricting fencing on the property. Chair Partridge agreed with his fellow Commissioners that the applicant had done a great job working with all of the Town committees and responding to the concerns from the neighbors. Commissioner Mandie requested that the open space easement on lot 4 have no fencing that would stop wildlife passage. Director Avila stated that there are some neighbors surrounding the subdivision with existing fencing. Discussion ensued regarding how to handle the existing fencing around the subdivision and if it should be removed. Director Avila pointed out that there is already language in the conditions that handles this issue. The applicant team requested a five-minute break to consider Commissioner Couperus's recommendation for moving the house on lot 7. The Planning Commission meeting took a five-minute recess. Jeff Peterson spoke about Commissioner Couperus's recommendation to adjust lot 7. He explained that he believes his design team can improve the situation if given more time, and issues with moving the house will need to be addressed along the way. He indicated that the home could be shifted about 20 feet to the north with changes to the lot lines. 11 May 10,2018

12 Commission discussion ensued about the proposed idea and if the situation can be improved in any way. Commissioner Couperus stated that he understands the proposal to be to forward the discussion of lot 7 to the City Council with the flexibility that if any improvements can be made they should be taken. Commission discussion ensued to confirm that they covered the five issues that the City Council recommended to be addressed by the Planning Commission that evening. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Commissioner Couperus moved to forward a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Tentative Map ( TM), inclusive of the Subdivision Map Act findings in Attachment 1, conditions of approval in Attachment 2, Landscape Master Plan maps in Attachment 3, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Attachment 4 (based on prior Planning Commission recommendation to approve the MND and Tentative Map plan set (Attachment 16), with the added conditions that condition Number 32 be modified as recommended by staff, and that the applicant shall investigate shifting the house on lot 7 to optimize its location respective of its grading, and that the landscape plan sheet 1 be refined. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mandie. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 AYES: Commissioner Basiji, Commissioner Mandle, Commissioner Tankha, Commissioner Couperus, Chair Partridge NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 4. ADJOURNMENT Respectfully Submitted, Cody Einfalt Planning Technician The Meeting adjured at 12:01 AM The minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting were approved as corrected at the June 7, 2018 Regular Planning Commission Meeting. 12