04/07/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

%, 4.5 Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Sewer Maintenance between the City of Los Altos and the Town of Los Altos Hills -- Reso # Hubbard asked for clarification of the following sentence: "Furthermore, nothing in this agreement obligates Town to provide sewer connections to those who have acquired capacity rights or to those who have not." The City Attorney explained that people purchased capacity rights but it did not give them the connector rights. Dauber had some concerns about the formula on page 5 and suggested some wording to clarify it. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously by all members present to adopt Resolution #26-93 approving and authorizing execution of amendment No. 1 to the agreement for sewer maintenance between Los Altos and Los Altos Hills, as amended by the City Council by making the following changes to the formula on page 5: all references to Pine Lane should be changed to Pine Lane Lift Station; references to O'Keefe should be changed to O'Keefe Lift Station; reference to the district should be changed to Los Altos Basin and 'Town units in Pine Lane Lift Station' should be changed to 'Town units using Pine Lane Lift Station'. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 Clarification of Council Direction Regarding Hall Project, 26070 Newbridge Council had before them the Town Planner's staff report which asked for clarification regarding the Hall project and whether or not the previous or the current floor area calculation interpretation should be used on their application. The question also included those applications that had not yet been scheduled for hearing before the Planning Commission and for those applications that were already in process and scheduled for Planning Commission. Council discussed the Hall application and believed they had proceeded in good faith. Hubbard believed that applicants who had drawn up plans and submitted their project should be grandfathered in under the old interpretation for basements. The Town Planner, in response to an inquiry from Council, stated that only two projects were affected by this decision (one of them being the Hall's and one which had already been heard by the Planning Commission). All other applications would be required to follow the new interpretation as they had not been before the Planning Commission as of the March 3, 1993 Council decision on basement interpretation. Council also discussed whether the Hall application should come directly to them for public hearing in an effort to shorten the application process for the Halls since they had been delayed in the process. �r April 7, 1993