After the Winbigler fiasco in the Hills and the bulldozing of the old adobe on Springer, it is nice to know that Los Altos values and can manage to retain some of our old brick and mortar matriarchs.

Anyone attending the January meeting of our Los Altos Historical Commission would have gotten a lesson on how really effective individual residents can be if they appear and speak up at public meetings. The result was one of our all-too-rare victories of conservation over development.

An old farmhouse and its acre of land, complete with tank tower, was put up for sale on West Portola Avenue. The house had never been entered in our town’s Historical Resources Inventory, probably because of an oversight. However even if it had been considered for the inventory, its historic "score" wouldn't have put it in a high enough category to trigger automatic review. This is primarily due to architectural changes over the years. Fortunately, our city Engineering Department did refer the property for review by our Historical Commission. The staff knew that it probably could be developed legally into at least three lots. But presumably they also realized that from a historical point of view, it was one of the last vestiges of orchard life in Los Altos.

At the Historical Commission's January 27th meeting, the property's possible sale was considered. On the development side was a real estate agent, Paul Eckert, who claimed to have a signed contract. When asked what his client planned to do with the property, the agent claimed that his client hadn't yet decided. He said they were attuned to historical factors, but that in this case, he presumed the property lacked any historical value, since it wasn't listed on our Historical Resources Inventory. The Historical Commission responded by stating that a number of properties hadn't yet been entered, because the procedures for amending the scoring document had only recently been formulated.

A potential buyer from Palo Alto then spoke. She said she had tried to enter a bid, but had been told she was too late. She said her offer was for more money than the agent's client offered, and moreover her plan was to keep the place as it was, because she loved its rural atmosphere. At this point, three neighbors took turns to speak, and each strongly supported saving the original house, pointing out how important this old farmhouse was to their neighborhood's ambience.

The Historical Commission decided that in passing the matter to the Planning Commission, they couldn't make a strong case to preserve the property purely on architectural grounds. However, they would recommend that the City Council take into consideration its historical ambience, noting the sad fact that a subdivision would destroy one of the last remaining vestiges of our rural past.

A day or so later, the real estate agent withdrew his client's bid. Perhaps the Historical Commission meetings made him realize that he was in for a fight. Perhaps the realtor realized that even a victory would result in inevitable delays.

No one will ever know for sure whether the testimony from the three neighbors opposing the demolition of a neighborhood landmark helped save the house, but it is a fact that a process worked to the advantage of a grand old clapboard farmhouse on Portola Avenue.

This month there are three applications for two-story structures: one for a new two-story home; one for a new two-story pool cabana with living unit; and the last for a two-story addition to an existing home, which will require a daylight plane variance. The fourth application requests a construction variance which will allow a 15 foot encroachment into the required 25 foot rear yard setback.

The last item is a discussion about tree planting requirements in new project developments. This subject will be of interest to residents who would like to see more planting required by the City and is tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission in early March. Let us know if you would like ongoing information on this topic and we will attempt to notify you of future meetings when it will be discussed. You may call the Planning Department at 948-2790 for further details.

1. 03-SC-03--P. and L. Tsao--1816  Alford Avenue: Consideration of design review for a new 3,323 square foot two-story home. Project Planner: Kornfield

2. 03-UP-01 and 03-SC-04--W. Matson Architect & Assoc. / J. and L. Panfil--965 Echo Drive: Consideration of a new 800 square foot two-story pool cabana and second living unit with a basement.

3. 03-V-05 and 03-SC-05--J. and S. Reitmeir--1657 Parkhills  Avenue: Consideration of a daylight plane variance and two-story design review for a 682 square foot addition to the first story and a 584 square foot addition to the second story of an existing two-story home.

4. 03-V-03--D. and K. Refaee--1610 El Sereno Court: Consideration of a rear yard setback variance to encroach 15-feet  onto the required 25-foot setback for an 874 square foot addition to an existing one-story home.  Project Planner: Connolly

5. Front yard street tree planting: Discussion of requirements for front yard trees in new project developments, including the minimum distance required between a tree and the center-line of the street (as outlined on the shoulder paving policy adopted by the City Council on November 13,  2001.)

LANN and LAMP (The Los Altos Mediation Program) will work together to help our readers find resolution to their problems. LANN fields many calls regarding our areas of focus; housing, schools and traffic. Part of our mission is to help neighbors navigate city hall. We are excited that we will be able to refer our callers to LAMP when we think they can have an impact on a situation. But don’t wait for a LANN referral to take advantage of LAMP! Call them today if you are having a dispute with a neighbor or planning a meeting where you think you might benefit from some professional mediation or guidance. LAMP is free to Los Altos and Los Altos Hills residents. LAMP can be reached 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Their phone number is 949-LAMP.

Household waste is categorized as any household product that is labeled as flammable, toxic, corrosive, or reactive. Some examples are: aerosols, battery fluids, fertilizers, flammable liquids, helium, cleaners, latex paint and stain, mercury thermometers, oil-based paints

and stains, pesticides, pool chemicals, propane tanks, used needles, used motor oil and oil filters. It is unsafe to