City Council Approves Three Story Project

After the fact? Yes. But it should not be the end of the fight—that is if any of us are interested in preserving and maintaining the small town character of our Los Altos neighborhoods (LANN’s mission statement). What I’m referring to is the recent, August 23, 2005, City Council decision, that most of us have already heard and read about: the approval of a project for a three story building/condominium structure on El Camino Real and Distel Avenue now referred to as 5100 El Camino. We knew this edition of our newsletter would not be printed or mailed before the outcome of that meeting. However, we felt we needed to give the neighborhood a voice (Shankar Narayanaswamy article), mention LANN’s "early warning" on the Commercial thoroughfare zone (Kathy Putman), hear from one member of the Planning Commission (Bruce Skov), include LANN’s statement before Council (Leslie Lodestro), and reiterate the updated zoning regulations (James Walgren’s article).

Our first article discusses the neighborhood concerns regarding this project. We support their issues regarding building size, setbacks, traffic and safety and offered space in this newsletter. In addition, a LANN Board member spoke on their behalf at the August 23^rd meeting (see exerpt from Leslie Lodestro’s public comments below). We also felt it was extremely important to include comments from at least one member of the planning commission to better understand the zoning regulation update. Last, did LANN have a crystal ball in January of 2004 when we ran a full article on the proposed zoning changes and titled the article "A Three Story Project in MY Neighborhood?" Kathy Putman recalls that article. At the time, we encouraged members to give comments BEFORE these changes took place. How many concerned citizens are now in an uproar over this project and most likely future projects?

So while this newsletter is devoted primarily specifically to one project that has already been approved, it doesn’t have to be after the fight for future projects. GET INVOLVED NOW. Find out what future development projects are in the pipeline, get your voice heard, understand the "legal speak" in these new zoning regulations, organize your neighborhood BEFORE approvals are granted. In other words, get in there with FACTS rather than a fight.

The city of Los Altos is one of the most desirable places to live in California, boasting a spacious, rural atmosphere and a small yet vibrant downtown. This presents a great financial opportunity for developers, who can earn a very large return on investment by building here. However some developments are not in the best interests of Los Altos, and this project is one of them. This article describes the project and the neighborhood’s objections.

The proposal to build a 29-unit 3-story condominium on Distel Drive at El Camino has been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and city staff over the neighborhood’s strong objections. It is on the City Council’s agenda for August 23, 2005. The project’s 34,800 square-foot lot was formed by merging two parcels on Distel Drive, one on the corner with El Camino Real. The frontage and the entrance are along Distel Drive, although the official address is 5100 El Camino Real.

A storm of controversy erupted when it was discovered that a Planning Commissioner, Penny Lave, is an investor in the project. She recused herself from Planning Commission discussions regarding this development, but the neighborhood is uncomfortable with her influence and with city officials investing in such real estate development in Los Altos.

The building is 35 feet high and will be the largest building in the area. In fact, it will be one of the largest buildings in Los Altos. It will be an observation tower violating the privacy of a large swath of the neighborhood around it, including the Casita cul-de-sac. Its sightlines and noise from an outdoor patio will impact many neighbors. It has very small setbacks (12 ft and 7 ft) even though it abuts an R1 area at one corner. This is a violation of the rules. In addition, the front setback should be along Distel Drive, not El Camino.

The city’s R3.1 rules govern high-density residential developments near single-family homes. These rules protect new residents and their neighbors. It is reasonable and proper that R3.1 rules be followed if this conditional use is granted, given its location and intended use. This would reduce lot coverage from its current 69% and greatly reduce the bulk, height and visual impact of the building,

Distel Drive is a residential street and a major entry point for vehicular and foot traffic into the neighborhood, so Distel and other neighborhood streets have a pre-existing traffic problem. Cut-through traffic, school traffic and street parking from this project would worsen this situation. The city did a traffic study over a three day holiday during a school break; it is no wonder that the neighborhood rejects the resulting traffic report.

Many school children from nearby Mountain View walk, bike or drive from El Camino into Distel to the schools in the area. A large residential building here poses a major traffic safety hazard for these children. In addition, nighttime parking along the street could invite street crime.

City staff says these issues are insignificant and do not warrant an Environmental Impact Report. The neighborhood disagrees and has asked for such a report.

This project sets a precedent for high-density, high-impact buildings with small setbacks in Los Altos. It opens the way for such buildings along El Camino from Rengstorff to Los Altos Avenue, as well as in and near downtown.

If the City Council approves this project, we can expect more buildings like this. Los Altos will lose one of its most unique qualities – a spacious, open, rural atmosphere.

If the proposal is rejected or significantly modified to meet the interests of Los Altos and its residents, it would be a triumph of common sense and a re-affirmation of the participatory democratic process.

In either case, the Council member’s and Commissioner’s votes are on the public record for the voters to consider in this November’s election.

So, what's the point?  I guess it’s a reminder to all of us to become part of the process, to work to make things happen, rather than having to ask with alarm and dismay, what happened…in this case, sadly, after the fact!

Los Altos responded to this requirement in the mid 90’s by adding content to the General Plan specifying the down town area and the El Camino corridor as appropriate for development of multi-family housing. This was done as part of a major update of the General Plan and was a major factor in gaining approval of the new plan by the state. The update process included public hearings and workshops that gave ample opportunity for public input. The general consensus was that if we had to designate part of town for high density housing that down town and El Camino were the least abhorrent.

The role of the Planning Commission as quoted from the City’s web site:

The goal of the Community Development Department’s recently completed single

family zoning regulations update was to simplify existing regulations that were

unnecessarily complex – without achieving noticeable benefits – and to create more flexibility in certain situations where currently a variance to the zoning regulations may be necessary. The structure of the zoning regulations was also reorganized in a manner that staff finds to be easier to use and understand. Current practices such as having new two story homes go through the Architecture and Site Review Committee approval process, with neighbor notification, remain in place and were written into the zoning regulations. Single story homes also require design review approval, but this continues to be performed by staff with no public hearings. Many of these practices evolved over time by policy of the City Council, but had not been written into the zoning regulations. The following specific changes were also made:

The maximum floor area allowed for a new single family home is approximately 35 percent of the lot area. This is referred to as the Floor Area Ratio, and it adjusts downward as the lot size increases. Elements of a home that were not useable habitable space were previously included in the maximum allowed FAR, such as inaccessible attics and double-counted volumes when one has a tall ceiling. This was difficult to administer and didn’t provide much benefit. Exterior porches were also included, which tended to discourage new homes from having this traditional element since it could count hundreds of square feet against one’s allowed home size. Inaccessible attics, porches and tall room volumes are no longer counted against one’s FAR.

The flag lot regulations were modified to increase the area requirements from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet. Building heights have also been restricted to single story and not to exceed 20 feet in height. This last change reflects the intent of the previous regulations, which limited homes to 22 feet in height – just enough height to design a severely compressed two story home.

These changes included authorization for the Community Development Director to approve certain minor deviations from setback requirements. Specifically, to allow additions to maintain existing nonconforming setbacks so long as the addition does not exceed 20% of the length of that particular elevation.

The average height rule was a relatively complex regulation that was intended to regulate the height of walls. Since this is a criterion of design review and building compatibility already, staff did not find the additional ordinance to be useful. The "double daylight" plane requirement was also a highly subjective and confusing regulation that was eliminated.

It’s the time of year that is the busiest for all of us. Summer is winding down, school is starting up and amidst all that a good chunk of our LANN members will need to renew their annual membership. Your dues pay for the printing and mailing of our monthly newsletter. All of our Board members are volunteers.

Member’s subscription dates are reflected on the newsletter mailing label. Every label has a date (ie: 8/05) in the lower right hand corner. The date marks the end of a paid subscription period. LANN allows two months for members to renew. One reminder, courtesy phone call may be made, but the organization will not hound members to renew.

When your subscription end date comes up, a stamp which reads "Keep LANN strong, renew today" is applied to the front of the newsletter and a return envelope is slipped inside the newsletter. The following month, if the subscription is not renewed a final stamp is applied to front of your newsletter which reads "Last Issue" and another response envelope is placed inside the newsletter. Another newsletter will not be mailed until the subscription is restarted by returning the $15.00 subscription fee.

If the subscription lapses and is not renewed, dropped members may re-subscribe by mailing $15.00 to the LANN PO box 576, Los Altos, CA 94023. Thank You.