HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 Supplement #2 ITEM 3.1
From: Suzanne Avila SUPPLMENTAL 2
To: Jaime McAvov
Subject: FW:5/5/2016 Planning Commission meeting and 13531 Burke Road applications
Date: Wednesday,May 04,2016 4:26:25 PM
From: David Kehlet[mailto:dkehlet@gmail.com]
Sent:Wednesday, May 04, 2016 9:13 AM
To:jima.pc@gmail.com;Jitze Couperus<jitze.Couperus@gmail.com>;jsmandle@Hotmail.com;
richard.partridge@comcast.net; kavitat@comcast.net
Cc:Suzanne Avila<savila@losaltoshills.ca.gov>
Subject:5/5/2016 Planning Commission meeting and 13531 Burke Road applications
Dear Members of the Los Altos Hills Planning Commission:
With regard to the applications for the Lands of Kabali at 13531 Burke Road,the applicant is notably not seeking a
building variance for the new home. Rather the new home fits within the buildable area. I appreciate that the
applicant is,with respect to the new building,complying with our zoning ordinances. I suggest that the Planning
Commission approve the applications.
The variance findings in the Planning Department staff report(attachment 2)however has some unfortunate
language. In particular:
The proposed dwelling is located on a substandard lot of.347 net acres which is substantially less than the
one acre minimum in Town. Therefore, the imposition of the same setbacks and zoning standards that
apply to a one acre lot deprives the property owner of certain privileges...
Our setback requirements apply to all lots,not only one acre lots. A substandard lot,just by the nature of being
small,does not itself deprive an owner of certain privileges. This continues in the justification for variances(page
7):
A project with a substandard lot size and a Lot Unit Factor(LUF)of.5 or less would generally qual as
meeting the criteria in Findings#1 and#2 based on the fact that the lot area is substantially less than the
one acre minimum.
This theory that a substandard lot because of its size is an"exceptional or extraordinary circumstance"is not
supported by Planning Commission or City Council decisions. Furthermore the number of recent CDP applications
for small lots is evidence that development on small lots is neither exceptional nor extraordinary. A more rational
approach to the variance findings is presented in the staff report in Table 8,which shows that granting of parking
variances is a common practice.
Fortunately the Planning Department staff report does not echo the baseless"proportionate"theory of the
applicant's architect(attachment 7 pages 3 and 4). The Los Altos Hills zoning ordinances do not contain setback
regulations based on proportion. The Planning Commission and City Council have supported the principle of rural
character,which can be characterized by open space,not by proportionate setbacks.
Sincerely,
David Kehlet
Los Altos Hills