HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/12/1971w
PLANNING COMMISSION
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
May 12, 1971
0-0 /
g= -_V - SIDE 2, TRACK 2 -- FOOTAGE 40 - END
Chairman McReynolds called this special meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Tow of Los Altos Hills to order at 7:46 P.M. at the Tow Hall, 26379 Fremont Road,
Los Altos Hills, California. The following members answered roll call: Present:
Commissioners Magruder, McReynolds, Moeller, Perkins, Spencer, Weisbart, Absent:
Commissioner Lachenbruch. (Commissioner Lachenbruch arrived at 8:05 P.M.)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None
Staff stated that this special meeting had been called to review the Joint Cities -
County Homing Element: 1971, and to submit comments on the study's contents
recommendations to the Council in time for their May 17, 1971 meeting.
The Tow Planner explained the background of this study, endorsed and adopted by the
Housing Advisory Committee, to the Planning Policy Committee. This report updated
certain data presented in The Housing Situation: 1969 which provided an overview and
documentation of housing problems and the obstacles to their solution. In addition
the 1971 study presents the context of the findings and recommendations of the
various topic area studies, i.e., Cost to Occupy Housing. Tenant -Landlord Problems,
__s o_. -a-.. TI,. Saint cities -
Chapter I - Housing Problem$ and Housing Needs
Chapter II - Government 6 Housing: Some Problems, Obstacles and Needed Changes
Chapter III- Housing Actions for Local Government in Santa Clara County
This study, funded by HUD, was prepared by the County staff for the Planning Policy
Committee which had assumed this responsibility, recognizing the need for an area -
wide approach to housing issues. Adoption of the set of policies and programa
recommended in Chapter III is intended to meet the requirements of a Housing Element
for 1971, as mandated by State and Federal authorities, for each of the fifteen
cities (Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas,
Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara,
Saratoga, Sunnyvale) and the County of Santa Clara.
Mr. Mader commented upon those areas of the Tow Housing Element that were not
consistent with the Joint Cities Element and suggested the Commission might wish to
address those specifically.
Chairman McReynolds noted that it was unrealistic for them to be expected to
publicly evaluate the entire report that evening and proposed Commission discussion
be restricted to the Housing Goals for Santa Clara County recommended for adoption
on Page III -2 of Chapter III. Commission concurred.
-1-
The following is an excerpt of the housing goals for Santa Clara County being
recommended for adoption.
"The three following goals for housing should be declared as a matter of
public policy:
1. To insure the provision ofdecent
hhousing
nic backgroall
personal
regardless of age, income, race,
2. To insure the provision of a variety of individual choice of
tenure, housing type, and location.
3. To establish, maintain, and enhance the character, quality,
and livability of residential areas. (p. 11 -8)
The following subgoals are related to the major goals, and also constitute
matters of official policy:
1. To encourage balanced housing construction adequate for future
populations and for replacement needs.
2. To eliminate housing deficiencies and prevent future blight through
conservation, construction, rehabilitation, and removal.
3. To increase the ability of persons and families to meet their
far housing needs in the housing market.
4. To facilitate the operation of the housing market so that suppliers
and consumers can function more effectively.
5. To facilitate the provision of safe, sanitary, standard housing
to accommodate persons and families disadvantaged in the housing market.
6. To encourage a full range of housing and employment opportunities,
open space, and adequate transportation and community facilitlas
throughout all communities in the urban area of the County. (p.Il-q)"
Floor participation was expressed on the question of zoning and specifically where
the study recommended:
1. Policies on zoning and housing:
A. The use of zoning in ways which exclude persons on the basis of
racial, economic, ethnic or age characteristics is nacceptable in the
cities and unincorporated areae of Santa Clara County;
B. Zoning is to be need in ways which will encourage variety and
te sites for
al incomes
levels in each pjurisdiction rovide aand generally hhousing
prin houing types and oportion to
the array of income levels provided by employment opportunities in
each jurisdiction.
beehhalf offtheeMid-P ninsualaudience aking were: Urban Coalition andnasua residentlOf5E.
theTowwnn;et, on
-2-
Mr. John Roth, a Stanford student, representing the Mid -Peninsula Community House;
Mrs. June McIlwraith, 13431 Wildcrest Drive; Mr. A. M. Laws, 11210 Hooper Lane;
%W Mr. William C. Fawkes, Jr., 13070 Cumbra Vista Court; Mrs. Dolly Sacks, 12682 Roble
Veneno; and Councilman Mary C. Davey. In general, their comments were to urge the
Town to consider revising the Zoning Ordinance to provide for multiple family
zoning, so that people who work in the Town have an opportunity to live in the
Town. These would be school teachers, Town employees, gardeners, and domestic help.
The Planning Commission concurred that it be recommended to the City Council that
the goals on Page III -2 be approved, with the following exceptions:
(a) The three goals, which will be a matter of public policy, should be approved
in principle.
(b) The sub -goals relating to the major goals carry the following recommendations:
1. Change the wording to read "to encourage balanced housing construction,
adequate for future populations and for replacement needs within the
limits of holding capacity of the County, with consideration given
to environmental factors."
2. Approve as presented.
3. Approve as presented.
4. Change the word "function" to "interact".
OAF
5. Approve as presented.
6. Substitute for this goal -the following excerpt from the Town's adopted
Housing Element:"Each community should meet the segment or segmenta
of the housing demand it can most suitably provide; that is, housing
provided by a local communityshould
in the County
topography,
and Bay Area and be governedb Y factors such as location,
access to improvement and service centers, and existing development
patterns."
MOTION, SECONDED AND CARRIED: Commissioner Spencer moved, seconded by Lachenbruch
and carried unanimously that it be recommended to the Council that specific
clarification be provided from PPC of Zoning Policies 1A and B on Page III -3.
MOTION, SECONDED AND CARRIED: Commissioner Perkins moved, seconded by Weisbart
and carried unanimously that the Element's detailed recommendations on Pages II1-3
through III -15 warranted additional study due to their broad implications as
applied to this community.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, Chairman McReynolds adjourned the meeting at
10:45 P.M. to: NEXT REGULAR MEETING: Monday, May 24, 1971 at 7:45 P.M. at Town
Hall.
jW Respectfully submitted,
TED J. RLUZER, City Clerk
Town of Los Altos Hills
TJR/jp -}
5-24-71