Browse archives: 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995

Published on 07/27/1998 All articles from this issue

Let's bring closure to Sunkist issue

printer friendly version

Editorial

This is an editorial we hoped we wouldn't have to write. But the Los Altos City Council and a few residents apparently won't let it go.

We're talking about an issue spanning almost two years now involving a second unit facing Sunkist Lane on a property with the main house fronting Avalon Drive.

In 1997, Gary Greenberg's attempt at a variance to allow the front of his second unit to face Sunkist drew vehement opposition from neighbors, prompting the council to deny the variance. Greenberg then built his second unit to comply with city codes.

Still, one next-door neighbor was far from pleased. He kept appearing before council in the weeks after the unit was built, complaining the structure didn't meet code. There was the question of whether the tenant of the second unit could enter the cottage from the rear of the property, off Sunkist. Such an entry would violate the code, although another code says it is legal to cross a rear property line with the owner's permission.

But Bill Zaner, serving as interim city manager and a respected authority on city issues, repeatedly said there was no code violation, once the driveway was completed from Avalon to the second unit. And it is.

Rather than following Zaner's direction, council members sent the issue to the planning commission for review. The commission hearing is set for Thursday, with another public hearing before the city council on Aug. 18. Please!

This is the Sunkist issue as we see it now: What's done, is done, as far as the city's concerned. The work ahead has to do with neighbors getting along with neighbors. Avalon resident Marcy McLaughlin said in a letter to the city: "We should embrace new neighbors rather than persecute them. It seems to me that some squeaky wheel is getting the grease. The actions of the city reflect on all of us. It is reflecting badly."

What is the ultimate goal of the city's re-examination of the Sunkist issue? Surely, revoking Greenberg's building permit could get the city in legal hot water.

The city can ask the applicant to plant trees to screen the second unit from Sunkist. And they can ask that the gates from Sunkist be bolted. But hearings are not needed to accomplish this. To review over and over for the sake of showing responsiveness to one vocal opponent is not right.

What's left are personal relations issues - a job for the Los Altos Mediation Program, not city hall.

Our advice to the city council and planning commission: if any future complaints come up about the Sunkist Lane project, "just say no."

The second unit isn't going to go away, and life goes on. Those on opposite sides of the fence now need to break down their own personal barriers and become good neighbors.

Enough is enough.