By Theater a chance for a real village
OK, so the Town Crier is opposed to the hotel and theater plans for First and Main? It’s going to wipe out the landmark tree. Its films would promote sex and violence. It’s going to lead to traffic congestion. It’s going to crowd University Avenue with more traffic. It’s going to destroy our precious “village.”
You’ve made your point. Even though the town’s survey found that the largest contingent - 44 percent of polled residents - favor the theater idea, you know better than the people. You know better than the Youth Commission which favored the theater idea.
Your article about the residents of University Avenue opposing the project gave the impression that a majority of them signed the petition. I doubt it. I live within 1,000 feet of the proposed site on University Avenue and I support the theater project idea. And so do many others along our street.
Why? Because a used furniture store in a flat brick building is not the right gateway to our town. Because not many Los Altans young or old get value from the consignment store. Because the building is not remotely “village-like” in its first impression to those entering the town. Because the majority polled favored the theater and so does my family. Because you can have a theater and make it historically consistent with the village.
Despite your query about whether the film industry or the art film industry was fading, you couldn’t be more wrong. The film industry is growing enormously. Have you been to the Shoreline Theaters or Palo Alto Square on a weekend night? That’s where our kids are going. And so are our families. Why not keep them here? Why not keep that income in town?
What this project offers up is a vision of our seniors, working adults and families enjoying the village after 5 p.m. This theater would be the closest thing we have to a community magnet for local families to enjoy themselves and see their neighbors in the neighborhood. Imagine going to dinner downtown and then walking to a movie.
We can bring back something that will allow Los Altans - from the youngest to the oldest - to actually “live the village.” That would be a real village.
Chris NordlingerLos Altos
Get real: no room for movie theater
I’m amused at the total lack of common sense surrounding the movie theater proposal at First and Main. Even with underground parking, the traffic egress after a movie would be a nightmare. The downtown streets and intersections are simply too narrow and close together to allow for any free flow of traffic. Since there could be no egress directly onto Foothill Expressway, First Street would bear the brunt. All it currently takes to cause a backup on first between State and Main is about 10 cars. That’s nothing compared to how many cars would be leaving the movies every evening of every week.
Downtown is too small and too confined to accommodate a high traffic and high pedestrian usage venue such as a movie theater. Just look at how jammed up things get at Palo Alto Square or Mountain View Century after a movie. And these are places with tons of parking bordering four-lane egress routes.
Get real, folks. The downtown movie theater idea is just plain stupid.
John HubicsakLos Altos
No LAH mandate for rules tinkering
During the 1998 election campaign for the Los Altos Hills City Council, some candidates promoted the idea that changing demographics had produced a voter majority that was hopping mad about town restrictions on the building of homes and the subjective way the planning commission and town staff were applying those restrictions.
In January 1999, there were public inputs at a very well attended council meeting at Bullis-Purissima School, and a council majority determined that some definitive actions were needed to deal with perceived subjectivity and inequities in the development process.
Over the next few months, an ordinance was thoughtfully crafted and passed into law, which established the so-called “Fast Track” application process (no Planning Commission review needed), and revised Planning Commission procedures to remove most of the subjectivity from Planning Commission deliberations.
Time has shown Fast Track is a resounding success (the majority of new homes are quickly approved through it) and the Planning Commission shows appropriate restraint and wisdom in its recommendations to council.
Despite these measures, the current council majority still deludes itself that it has a mandate to emasculate, for example, the slope density rules, which require that homes proposed for steeper lots be smaller than homes of the same acreage on flat lots.
The recent town survey must surely awaken them from these delusions. To the question on slope density, a convincing 60.9 percent of the respondents agree to slope density control, with only 22.6 percent opposed.
To the question on whether the height of new homes should be restricted to preserve the views of neighbors, 77.7 percent said yes and a paltry 11.8 percent disagreed.
The survey goes on and on to show that a substantial majority of residents are content with current development procedures.
There will be a council meeting at Bullis-Purissima School on May 17. I hope that the council majority will use that opportunity to acknowledge that the majority of residents do not want further tinkering with the rules that keep our town such a beautiful place to live in.
Bob Johnson
Former council member,
Los Altos Hills
