By Elizabeth Cloutman

Courtesy of Matt Weintraub, Assistant Planner for Los Altos Hills

Town survey results may factor in decision

Los Altos Hills

The Los Altos Hills City Council will hold a public hearing on two proposed zoning ordinance revisions during its regularly scheduled meeting 6 p.m., Thursday, at Bullis School. Council members are seeking citizen input concerning two alternative proposed revisions for increasing allowable floor and development areas of residential lots.

Thursday’s city council meeting is the first since the results of a communitywide opinion survey were made public. A significant proportion of the survey questions applied to land development standards. Over one-third of Los Altos Hills households completed the survey.

The council first began considering an increase in allowable floor and development area over a year ago to provide relief to property owners with constrained lots, those with a lot unit factor greater than .5 but less than 1. A flat, one-acre lot has a lot unit factor of 1. Constrained lot owners were often required to obtain variances to develop their properties in a manner consistent with that of other Los Altos Hills home sites.

One potential revision, if adopted, would increase minimum floor area to 5,000 square feet and minimum development area to 7,500 square feet for lots with a lot unit factor between .5 and 1. This revision was first suggested by councilwoman Toni Casey.

The second proposed revision involves a proportional lot unit factor formula, prepared by Councilman Bob Fenwick in mid-March. This revision, if adopted, would compute maximum floor and development areas on all lots. The formula proportionally increases the minimum floor area, starting from 4,000 square feet on all lots with a lot unit factor greater than .5. Calculations done by John Harpootlian, a member of the LUF committee, show the Fenwick formula could double the development on residential lots.

There is also a possibility the city council could suggest another alternative and direct staff to study the third alternative to determine if any changes to the negative environmental declaration and initial study done on Casey’s proposal would be necessary.

Some statistics revealed by the survey could prove helpful to the city council as they consider increasing the limits of floor and development areas. Both City Manager Maureen Cassingham and Planning Director Carl Cahill said they were pleased by residents’ outstanding response - 1,145 of the city’s 3,000 households completed the survey.

The survey was initially developed by a land use commission appointed by the city council. The commission used a professional consultant. The planning commission and city council members provided additional input.

Survey results revealed that 98.5 percent of responding residents owned their homes. A large majority, about 87 percent, said they support maintaining the one-acre minimum for new lots. There are some existing lots, sometimes called constrained lots, which are less than one acre.

These lots were delineated before the city’s incorporation in 1956, when the one-acre minimum was established.

A majority of survey respondents said they support the current city standards for allowable floor and development areas for flat one-acre lots. About 62.7 percent of the respondents said the 6,000 square feet of floor area currently allowed was “about right.” Approximately 17.9 percent found the standard “too restrictive” while 16.6 percent viewed it as “too permissive.”

The remaining respondents either had no opinion (2 percent) or replied they “don’t know” (.7 percent).

A little over half, or 55.3 percent, of responding residents said they believed the 15,000 square feet of development area for a flat, one-acre lot currently allowed was “about right.”

Approximately 22.4 percent replied they found the currently allowed development area “too restrictive,” while 18.5 percent believed the current standard to be “too permissive.”

A little under half the respondents, about 49.3 percent, said the city required them to take their architectural plans through the site development review process, first developed in the 1970s.

Even so, 51.4 percent said they thought the planning commission and/or town staff should continue the current policy of conducting such reviews, to determine compliance with development policies and standards, as well as providing for public input.