The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.2 Supplement SUPPLEMENT June 18, 2015 AGENDA ITEM# 5.2. Distributed:(.47' I C1 L. Ms.Susan Mandle,Chair jsmandle@hotmail.com Mr.Jitze Couperus,Vice Chair jitze@couperus.org Ms. Kavita Tankha kavitat@comcast.net Mr.James Abraham jima.pc@gmail.com Mr. Richard Partridge Richard.partridge@comcast.net Dear Commissioners, Thank you for your service to the community of Los Altos Hills and the time you have spent on this proposed project at 25608 Deerfield Drive. Many factors have been presented on this project,both pro and con, and you have had to consider all perspectives. In the near future you will have the opportunity to consider the adjacent project at the end of Deerfield Dr. on Burke. Issues brought to light by this project and the Mora Drive project have prompted some of the City Council members, Planning Commission members, and Los Altos Hills neighbors to ask that all construction be halted until the Town addresses updates to the ordinances that apply to substandard lots. Unfortunately,the moratorium was not approved, so you are tasked with reviewing this project and future projects without a more objective and simplified ordinance based on the ratio of structure to lot size on substandard lots. If the commissioners vote for more than the minimum allowable square footage under current ordinances on this small lot, the future Los Altos Hills looks more like a place we do not want to live. This will set a precedent for the adjacent lot, and any substandard lot on Deerfield Drive. We have already seen the subdivision of 2.67 acres on Burke and maximum development on other lots in our neighborhood, along with the accompanying removal of trees, more noise and more traffic. It seems that the implications of this project on the future of the neighborhood has not been adequately considered. The architect for the project referred to our neighborhood as follows: "In general, this part of the Town is a transition area between the higher density of adjacent Los Altos and the heart of Los Altos Hills. Many homes in this area are of similar smaller scale and appearance, compared to lots deeper within the Town. This reinforces a gradual and graceful transition experience when driving up Burke Road deeper into the Town." Without the experience of living here,I doubt the architect truly knows what he is talking about. We live here because we do not want to live in Los Altos, Mt.View, or Sunnyvale. We live here because we like the open space,pathways,views, and overall rural feel. What the architect is proposing is an extension to Los Altos. Please do not make this neighborhood just an extension of Los Altos. These lots sit at one of the most travelled intersections in Los Altos Hills. If every home on Deerfield Drive were removed and given approval for maximum development, our neighborhood would become like a street in any town. The vision of the original residents who rallied for Incorporation is important and was presented in the Green Sheets by City Councilmember Rich Larsen at the City Council Meeting on April 20, 2015. In her oral history to the Los Altos Historical Society, 60 year resident, Ruth McMahon,the previous owner of the Deerfield lots, spoke of the reason for the creation of the town. She recounted, "They were putting 2 houses on an acre and they are covering every inch of the acre so there is nothing left. People were worried". We ask that you please consider the future of our neighborhood and do not open the floodgates to high-density development in our neighborhood. We also ask that the current owner put into writing as a condition of any approval that the construction entrance will be on Burke,that there will be no parking on Deerfield Drive, and the driveway for the adjacent property will also be on Burke. Our experience with the Fast Track development on Burke Lane has been that residents have no recourse to enforce any agreement that may be broken in the future unless the agreement is formalized. Respectfully, Alice and Doug Rimer 2. SUPPLEMENT Jaime McAvoy AGENDA ITEM# �2 Distributed: (pi 2.5/1 r gym: Deborah Padovan giant: Thursday, June 25, 2015 3:11 PM To: Jaime McAvoy; Steve Padovan; Suzanne Avila Subject: FW: supplement item 3.2 Planning Commission meeting 6/25/2015 Attachments: pc 06252015.pdf Original Message From: Jim Abraham [mailto:iimOlimabraham.com] Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 3:10 PM To: Deborah Padovan Subject: supplement item 3.2 Planning Commission meeting 6/25/2015 Hi Deborah, Please send the attached file to the Planning Commission members and attach it as a supplement to agenda item 3.2 for the PC meeting tonight. Thanks, Jim Abraham 1 '-` ( } . NET AREA CALCULATED FROM SCC ASSESSOR BOOK 175 PAGE 36 INFORMATION USING CALCULATOR AT • ALL OTHER INFORMATION FROM LAH PLANNING STAFF REPORTS , . r- NET AREA IS GROSS AREA MINUS 20 FT ROW LOTS 1,2,3,4,9,10,11,43,44. MINUS 12.5 FT ROW LOTS 6,8. • LOT STAFF STAFF NET i STREET FLOOR OPED ;ADDITIONAL iNET :RATIO NUM AREA AREA AREA ,NUMBER AREA ,AREA NOTATION 'AREA 1ORDER 11 0.54 23522.4 17133 25531 23241 1 0.135645 4 2! 0.4 17424, 17305 25561! 3917' 5979 0.226351 111 31 0.881 38332.8' 38566 256211 45241 9318 ' 0.117305 31 41 0.3811 16596.361 17503 25701 3267 5356 0.186654 9 51 0.4951 21562.21 21358 25711 3036 7039 0.142148 5 6 0.4781 20821.68 20602r 25731 3172 6167 0.153966 7 7 0.641 27921.96 26516 25740 2620 0.0988081 1 . ,°". 2.2.^,2 2006125710 2954 0.1472511/ .`,�^./ 6 / ) -----� �--9 0.43 18730.8 17793j25700 5919 0.220311101 `--^� 10 0.44 19166.4 - 19217 25620 3271-| -�DOU3�71�O4O 0.170214 81 - ---' 11 0.828 36067.68 34236 25610 34041 0I09428 21 | | _ �� L i | TOTAL 25O20O| 36409 | U.145407 / ---- -r- | | / -- -- 43 L 141751 | | | ---' 44 13782 LOT 44 IS 15102 BUT SHOU D BE REQUIRED TO GIVE A 10R�VVALONGBURKEREDUO|NQNEfBY-132O ' --- -- / - . R/�l�FLOO�AREANETAREA LOT MFA - � �� 1417S 2�2��----- OJ473 14175 ----�� K82188.62 - ' - EAN --'---� � ]544i | 14175 �� -- �-' / _'• UN T.Y• ASSESSOR SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA BOOK PAGE 2s • 175 26 , • TRACT N2 3239 I R.QS.5B549 R.O,S.608/23 . 172r—. 110.90 15047 123.90 411.21 159.331 00. (I) ••7 59.12 X14 1 ^ 0.39 AC. .t� • 21: A . 5 4 3 e 32 'a 0.478 AC. „ 100.41 51.34 25731 d P�7// 57 S nn n7 e . _ �O P37W • 2562/ 2556/ r446. APT ti )25731 1 174 ' DEERFIELD OR" 2553/ 25740 ___.2.;.7,70.::.--- 25700 55620 25610 -. , l 7 8 9 /0 // • 43 o 1pe Q '/ _: LILAC ,z /41 OSNERS REO 0 �>REO 1990-91 sw�v- 15440 175 1 % 135 240.43 107 120.97 350.14 241.26 210.13 112.16 ,' 1.718 At. 1.24 0.952 AC. GR.. 1.01 AC. • r • N M 42 ° 4/ a 46 pp`° L N N 4. .11 N •1 l2562I 2561/ BURKE 2• o955i LANE/ ---- /' �� - H/ �_ ...::_-_____3a4.0_,..____ _• _____________L..J 241.05 30'25620 25600 7b3/021e /3160 R40/i46 1.00 AC. 1.093 AC. 1.0 AC. . 1.00 AC. 0.99 AC.N ET. • 35 37 A p • g 45 • '' t ,g N N I 49 fJ /w r