Laserfiche WebLink
` also referenced other lots in the area which were less than one acre and stated <br /> that he intended to apply for three lots in the County if the Town did not <br /> approve the subdivision. <br /> The Town Planner noted that the 2.116 figure was gross acreage which included <br /> the access. The Town did not include the access in their figures. <br /> Siegel discussed the annexation procedure and noted that the other lots in the <br /> particular County area under discussion were one acre. He believed to <br /> allow this lot to split would be an exception. Siegel did not believe the <br /> County should allow the subdivision of this lot and the Town should <br /> annex it. Tryon noted that there were standards of development which <br /> needed to be met. Casey inquired about the counting of access easements <br /> toward development area. <br /> MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard <br /> and passed unanimously by all members present to recommend that the <br /> property be annexed to the Town; that it be determined that the proposed <br /> subdivision within the Town's Urban Service Area was not in <br /> conformance with the Town of Los Altos Hills General Plan; and that the <br /> subdivision be denied and the property be required to develop in <br /> conformance with the Town's Subdivision, Zoning and Site Development <br /> Ordinances. <br /> 8.3 Ordinance # Amending Chapter 1 (Building Code), Title 8 <br /> (Building Regulations) To Require Fences Around Swimming Pools <br /> Hubbard reiterated his concerns about not requiring fencing around pools. He <br /> believed unprotected pools presented a real public hazard. Casey asked <br /> what notification had been given to the public regarding this proposed <br /> ordinance and she believed it was premature to discuss this at this time. <br /> Tryon supported the ordinance in principle but believed sections needed <br /> to be changed. Siegel suggested that during the site development process a <br /> fence could be required for pools in certain areas, such as near a path. <br /> Siegel also suggested that the ordinance include requiring the use of pool <br /> water for fighting fires. <br /> Elayne Dauber, 27930 Roble Alto, stated that she was not in support of the <br /> proposed fence ordinance. She did not believe it was in accordance with <br /> the philosophy of the Town (openness). <br /> Max Osborne, Jr., 26050 Torello Lane, stated that he was a pool owner and he <br /> had a pool cover which was strong enough for him and his grandchildren <br /> to stand on. <br /> February 5, 1992 <br /> 7 <br />