At least downsize project to two stories
Jeane Kluga
The 5100 El Camino planned three-story condominium on three-quarters of an acre fronting on Distel Drive is unsightly, not in keeping with the quarter-acre single-story homes surrounding it, and is a serious traffic hazard to the already dangerous intersection at Distel and El Camino.
The increasing amount of cut-through traffic from San Antonio to Distel created by the slowing of El Monte and Springer traffic is already in evidence and, with the Whole Foods store coming soon to the Showers Drive intersection, the situation will only get worse as drivers avoid six traffic lights and the buildup of cars on El Camino. Mountain View students walk or ride bikes from across El Camino to the high school and Almond School via Distel, Marich, and Casita, an increasingly dangerous commute through an area of Los Altos for which Distel Drive is the only direct entrance from San Antonio to Mountain View.
An ordinance allows residential neighborhoods to veto two-story homes on their street for aesthetic and privacy reasons. And yet a three-story, 29-unit condominium abutting single family homes and affecting an area over one mile square has been approved. Yes, this is zoned commercial-multifamily, but must it be three story?
No other part of Los Altos has allowed this large a complex on such small acreage on a residential street with such an adverse impact on such a large area. Why here? Will Distel have the only three story “wall-to-wall” housing development impacting so many or is “Let the residents be damned - full speed ahead” the ugly precedent being set that we can expect for the future?
This is not just about housing, with a paltry three low-income units, (700-square-foot one bedroom for which our entry level teachers can’t qualify). It’s about maximizing profit on 3/4 acre while the Red Lobster 1.9-acre property stands wanting and the three-story approved housing at the El Torito property is replaced with a one-story pharmacy. The pharmacy will produce less traffic, and both have El Camino access.
Several of the council and planning commission members stated this was too large a project on this residential street and yet voted for it or were absent when voting took place. At one council meeting, several living in the downtown condos praised the joy and convenience of living there. I applaud that. But enjoy a stroll along El Camino? Not likely. Others speaking for the development were either investors or lived elsewhere and were delighted to see development far from their homes and not affecting their children.
It’s not too late to downsize the 5100 El Camino project which was passed with “contingencies.” It abuts residential property and sets an uncaring precedent that for years to come will shame the council that voted for it. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Let’s at least downsize this project to two stories. This can be done.
Motives should not be questioned
Bruce Skov
The Los Altos city attorney owes a public apology to a citizen who was speaking at the city council meeting last week. As Chris Croudace, a candidate for city council, came to the podium, she, without recognition by the mayor, questioned his motivations before he had a chance to begin.
This is totally unprecedented and wrong. I have never before seen a city attorney or council person question a speaker’s motives.
Chris is a resident of Los Altos and was clearly going to voice his personal opinions on the issue at hand. The suggestion by the City attorney that he was somehow representing Oracle is ludicrous since they would have no interest in Los Altos neighborhood issues. Clearly, she is smarting from Chris’ criticisms of her legal opinions concerning the 5100 El Camino project and his presentation of credentials for making them.
Council meetings should not be used by city employees to act on petty grievances. It is especially bad because it appears political in light of Chris’ candidacy.
Correcting facts on Rosslyn Chapel
W. Bruce Pruitt
I enjoyed the article about Rosslyn Chapel in the Sept. 14 Town Crier, having visited it myself on two occasions. However, a serious mistake must be corrected.
Rosslyn Chapel was not “built in 1446 by the Knights Templar.” It was started about 1446, but by William St. Clair, Earl of Rosslyn and Prince of Orkney. (See book “Rosslyn Chapel, by the current Earl of Rosslyn, 1997). The Knights Templar did not exist in 1446. It was suppressed and outlawed, with trumped-up charges, in 1312 by Pope Clement V.
The last Grand Master, Jaque DeMolay, was burned at the stake in 1314. The order was re-instituted in the mid-1600s as a part of the family of Freemasons. There are symbols at Rosslyn that look like those of the order, which has created much speculation. However, there is no real evidence that the K.T. existed in Scotland at that time.
Having said all this, I support Maureen Jones’ recommendation that the chapel is a worthwhile stop during any trip to Scotland.
Thanks for remembering the non-profits
Monique Kane
It is wonderful that the outpouring of generosity has gone out to those who are suffering so because of the hideous recent natural disaster. I thank you too for remembering our local non-profits. Many of our local non-profits did get fewer donations after 9-11. And yet the work that we all do continues at an ever increasing pace as societal stresses and problems continue to mount.
I hope you will remember to save a little to donate to the non-profits in our community that help those in need.
