By Editorial

Congratulations should go to the town of Los Altos Hills and the city council for having the common sense to pull the brakes on a slope density ordinance revision that cleared the way for overdevelopment and an undermining of town support for a rural atmosphere and serene open space.

Whether all of the council members understood the technical complexities of what was before them or not, the most recent move to pull back on a revision that doubled development areas on some lots shows that they may have finally realized the potential problems.

The council had good intentions: revise an ordinance and its lot unit factor formula that was too restrictive for those trying to develop on many constrained or sloped lots. Council and planning commissioners acted on this because of a large number of variance requests.

As the proposed ordinance kept changing, with council members continuing to increase the proportion of town land for allowable development, the supportive council majority imagined little or no impact on the town’s environment. Supporters indicated that few applicants would develop the maximum amount of land allowed by the revised ordinance.

But then, why enact such an extreme ordinance at all? Why allow for the possibility that more than a few would develop the maximum amount? Who would it really serve beyond a few hillside property owners who wanted larger homes and bigger driveways?

Some town residents who are geologic experts, including the man who originally created the lot-unit formula, warned the council about a proposed formula that went too far, allowing development area to increase as lots got steeper, but allowing less development area on level lots.

In addition, officials from Palo Alto, the likely recipient of runoff and creek erosion (along with Los Altos) resulting from any increased development, sent the town a letter of concern.

It appears the council will revisit an earlier version of their constrained lot ordinance revision, one that is more liberal than the present rules, but doesn’t go overboard. We hope they continue on this path.

The town needs to allow residents to pursue reasonable development of their properties. But good government ensures that residents don’t adversely affect the natural beauty of the area, which is what attracted them in the first place.