[0:03] Are you in Mexico?

[0:04] >> Yeah. No, no, no. Mexico is next week.

[0:06] Oh,

[0:07] >> said this week is LA.

[0:08] >> Oh, that's right.

[0:09] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[0:12] >> Actually, he is now. Yeah. He I at first

[0:14] he said he wasn't going to be, but Yeah.

[0:17] So, Mark Fritz is going to be here. The

[0:20] only one that's not going to be Sutro.

[0:24] » Sutro is not going to be I I put his

[0:26] down.

[0:32] » [laughter]

[0:33] >> You were that busy, huh?

[0:43] » Great.

[0:47] » Hello. Uh, I am Mark Kuchnet um of the

[0:51] Ross ADR. We're going to start the June

[0:53] 16, 2026 meeting. Um, the first thing we

[0:58] always do, well, you can read our name

[1:00] tags. We don't need to introduce

[1:01] ourselves. Um, the first thing we always

[1:03] do is open it up for public comments. If

[1:06] anybody has anything they want to speak

[1:08] about that's not on the agenda tonight

[1:09] for up to three minutes, now is your

[1:11] time.

[1:14] Okay. And the second order of business

[1:17] is the approval of the minutes of the

[1:19] May 19th, 2026 ADR meeting. of two

[1:23] people who were here should approve or

[1:26] offer.

[1:27] >> I have an adjustment I'd like to make.

[1:29] There was um the project

[1:32] on the hillside with the spiral stair.

[1:34] It's the last one on the three Willow.

[1:36] Thank you. Um there was a comment in

[1:38] there that we recommended that the uh

[1:41] parking pad that they were creating on

[1:43] the upper side of the home be expanded

[1:46] to two cars. I guess I was looking at it

[1:48] as they could if they wanted to, but I

[1:51] didn't want that to hinge on approval

[1:53] that they expanded that to two cars. I

[1:55] don't know how you guys felt. I just

[1:57] thought it was an opportunity for them

[1:58] if they wanted to, but I didn't want

[1:59] that to to say that they had to do that.

[2:03] >> Yes, I agree.

[2:04] >> Okay. So,

[2:05] >> condition of approval.

[2:06] >> There you go. That that's the right way

[2:07] to put it. I think they should do it,

[2:08] but it's not a condition of approval in

[2:10] my mind.

[2:12] >> Exactly. I didn't

[2:14] >> That's That's correct.

[2:15] >> Okay. So is that uh an okay adjustment

[2:17] to make on those ones? Okay, thank you.

[2:21] >> Other with that I can approve them as no

[2:23] as amended. How about that?

[2:25] >> Okay, great.

[2:26] >> Thank you. And now um just for those who

[2:29] might not have been here before, but the

[2:31] way this works is that for each project

[2:33] we have and there are two tonight. The

[2:35] town makes a short presentation about

[2:37] the project. Then the owner and/or their

[2:39] design team makes a longer presentation

[2:43] during which the ADR members may or may

[2:45] not ask questions and after that we open

[2:48] it up to the audience for comments and

[2:51] after that we bring it back to the ADR

[2:53] for our recommendation of the town

[2:54] council. Um the first project is 186

[2:58] Prospect Drive.

[3:00] >> Yes. Uh good evening ADR members. Uh

[3:02] tonight, the applicant at 186 Prospect

[3:04] Avenue is proposing a recommendation to

[3:07] the town council for design review, a

[3:08] non-conformity permit, and a variance.

[3:11] This is the uh existing site right here.

[3:16] And uh the applicant is proposing to

[3:18] construct new landscape improvements to

[3:20] the rear yard. Uh these include a pool

[3:23] and spa, a pool equipment, patio, a

[3:26] fireplace, an outdoor kitchen, retaining

[3:28] walls, and to repair existing decks. So

[3:32] this is this is one section of the uh

[3:34] the rear yard, sideyard, and then this

[3:36] is the uh the other side. Uh in addition

[3:40] the proposed the project includes

[3:42] winding the driveway with permovable

[3:44] pavers and uh this is the elevation of

[3:47] that fireplace and outdoor kitchen as

[3:50] well as the uh retaining wall. Uh

[3:53] variance is required to allow the

[3:54] proposed improvements within the

[3:56] required side and rear yard setbacks and

[3:58] to construct retaining walls in the

[4:00] fireplace over 6 feet in height. Staff

[4:02] request that the ADR group uh provide a

[4:06] formal recommendation to the town

[4:08] council. Thank you.

[4:11] >> Thank you. Would Brad or the owner want

[4:14] to come up and make a presentation?

[4:17] >> Hi.

[4:18] >> Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, please go up there to

[4:20] the microphone because they record these

[4:22] and there could always be someone on

[4:24] Zoom.

[4:27] » Okay. Hi, I'm Michael Sherman, the owner

[4:31] with my wife of 186 Prospect and

[4:36] um let's see, discuss the merits of the

[4:38] project and uh happy to answer any

[4:41] questions that uh you have. We're

[4:44] excited. We love living here and my

[4:47] brother lived here has lived here for I

[4:49] don't know over 40 years. So, it was

[4:51] natural for us to move in here a few

[4:53] years ago.

[4:55] Well, actually, this would be a good

[4:56] time if you want to actually present the

[4:58] project and talk about it at all. Or

[5:00] maybe you don't want.

[5:02] >> I mean, I defer to I defer to Brad on

[5:04] that.

[5:04] >> So, usually, yeah, the way it works is

[5:05] someone like Brad will make a

[5:07] presentation and if we have any

[5:08] questions, we can ask him.

[5:10] >> Sure. I mean, I clearly let

[5:12] >> we like getting to know you introduce

[5:16] yourself.

[5:17] >> Thank you very much.

[5:18] >> Hi everybody. Brad XY imprints landscape

[5:21] architecture. I just wanted Michael to

[5:22] introduce himself and just he's never

[5:24] been to this before and never been

[5:26] through this process and I thought it'd

[5:28] be good to have a face with the uh with

[5:31] the project. Um hopefully you've been

[5:33] out there and have seen the staking that

[5:35] we did. Um you know, we explored other

[5:39] options for the pool. We had it at one

[5:41] point parallel to the house and it

[5:42] really did not work. It got very close

[5:44] to that property line. So, when we

[5:47] designed this or when I designed this

[5:49] the pool, I was using that 10-ft setback

[5:52] that we've been talking about quite a

[5:54] lot over the last 6 months to to make

[5:58] sure all aspects of the pool are 10 ft

[6:00] from the property line. And um so that

[6:04] was a guiding factor with the pool. I

[6:07] did speak with the neighbors today at 19

[6:09] Wellington, the Reeds, and they're fully

[6:11] supportive about the project. They've

[6:13] been busy and out of town and haven't

[6:16] didn't write a letter and were not

[6:18] planning to attend tonight, but they're

[6:20] fully supportive of this project. The

[6:23] other the other um features of the

[6:26] project include an outdoor fireplace and

[6:28] a barbecue.

[6:30] And part of the goal of the fireplace

[6:32] and the barbecue is to provide

[6:34] additional um screening and privacy

[6:37] between the two neighbors. The Reeds at

[6:40] 19 Wellington have a pool immediately on

[6:42] the other side of the fence and they

[6:44] have some screening that's going to be

[6:46] maintained and the oak trees are going

[6:47] to be maintained and we're going to add

[6:50] in um some additional English laurels.

[6:52] But [snorts]

[6:54] uh part of the goal was to use the

[6:55] fireplace and the barbecue as additional

[6:59] separation between the properties. Um,

[7:03] the other improvements in just include

[7:06] real minor adjustments to an upper deck

[7:09] that's currently split in half and not

[7:12] functional and adding a fire pit in the

[7:15] lawn space. Um, and that is in that

[7:19] space right there and a vegetable garden

[7:21] up in that area. [snorts] We do want to

[7:23] expand the driveway, make it permeable

[7:26] pavers. the current conditions very hard

[7:29] to back out and challenging to use. So,

[7:34] um the owners would like to just make

[7:36] that driveway a little bit larger and

[7:38] use permeable paving material.

[7:41] Um happy to answer any questions that

[7:44] you might have and um hear any feedback.

[7:48] [snorts]

[7:50] >> Sorry, how tall is the proposed

[7:53] fireplace?

[7:55] >> Yeah. Can you

[7:56] >> Yeah, it's uh 10 ft.

[7:58] >> 10

[7:59] >> um

[8:00] >> from uh

[8:02] >> from the back.

[8:02] >> The back is 12'6.

[8:04] >> Yeah.

[8:05] 12 ft

[8:06] >> from here to here is 10 ft.

[8:10] >> And I looked at that and I think that we

[8:11] could lower that if you thought that was

[8:14] a good idea. It was uh it could easily

[8:17] go down to nine and it could even go

[8:19] down to eight from the grade of the

[8:22] patio. But part of it is like that fire

[8:25] place is viewed from a deck that's up

[8:29] about 3 feet at the house.

[8:32] So it's it's definitely has a little

[8:35] that deck right there is about 3 ft

[8:37] taller than that patio. And [snorts]

[8:39] that room looks out. So I didn't want to

[8:41] be too low because then you'd be looking

[8:43] at the top of the fireplace. And I

[8:47] thought the fireplace would provide some

[8:50] um privacy

[8:52] as well. And Alex, is that also need to

[8:58] be a variance?

[8:59] >> Uh correct.

[9:00] >> So under the current regulations, not

[9:02] the discussed ones that might be in

[9:05] place in a month or two, but under the

[9:07] current ones, what would be allowed

[9:10] there? Is it just something up to 3 ft

[9:13] or

[9:14] >> u? So, [clears throat] anything over 48

[9:16] in of a retaining wall uh requires

[9:19] designer view um if it's 6 feet or over

[9:23] a variance.

[9:25] >> So, up to six feet.

[9:26] >> Up to six feet

[9:26] >> without a variance.

[9:27] >> Yeah.

[9:28] >> And how far from the property line would

[9:30] it have to be to not require a variance?

[9:33] >> Uh for for walls, it's they have to meet

[9:37] the current setbacks, which is 40 ft.

[9:38] For retinium walls, it's not considered

[9:40] a structure. So, um, so it's if it's not

[9:44] considered a structure, then

[9:46] >> what about the fireplace?

[9:47] >> Fireplace is considered a structure, so

[9:49] it would have to be 40 ft. Correct.

[9:52] >> Okay. Um, okay. Those are my questions.

[9:55] >> I think we we dashed in the 40t which

[9:57] goes to the corner of the house

[10:01] >> right here.

[10:01] >> Yeah.

[10:02] >> And it kind of Yeah. Right there. It

[10:03] goes through that deck. And basically

[10:05] the house was built at that 40 foot

[10:08] setback line.

[10:10] Any

[10:12] questions?

[10:12] >> Brad, you talked a little bit. You

[10:14] mentioned you have some English laurel

[10:15] plantings along the back side of uh

[10:18] between the in the 10- foot buffer.

[10:20] >> I see I think I see three. Is that

[10:23] right?

[10:24] >> Well, this is this is what we're allowed

[10:26] to do at the fire department.

[10:28] >> Like we would love to plant more and I

[10:30] might be able to politic through that

[10:32] because Ross Valley Fire does like

[10:34] English laurels.

[10:36] But in order to kind of get through this

[10:38] process, I have to be 100% in

[10:41] conformance. And so

[10:43] >> is is there a center on center spacing

[10:44] that they require?

[10:46] >> Well, they have, you know, you have to

[10:48] have certain spacing between each plant.

[10:51] >> And um you're supposed to have equal

[10:55] spacing between each plant as each plant

[10:57] is. And then they have some pretty

[11:00] strict codes. If you have certain amount

[11:01] of plants in a row, you have to have a

[11:03] big break in the plants.

[11:05] So, but they do like English laurel, but

[11:09] they at this stage they don't

[11:11] distinguish between if it's English

[11:13] laurel or a pitisporum or any other. I

[11:18] mean, every everything I use is

[11:19] non-pyrofitic for sure, but

[11:23] and then a follow-up question just on

[11:25] the location of the pool. You said you

[11:26] looked at different locations. was

[11:28] parallel to the northern neighbor mostly

[11:32] in that existing

[11:34] flat area. Uh an option where where you

[11:37] rotate the pool 90° and get it mostly

[11:39] out of the rear and sideyard setbacks.

[11:42] Is that was that

[11:44] >> Yeah, it pushed it right under that

[11:45] really huge oak tree and it pushed it

[11:48] into the shade and that oak tree is a a

[11:50] major mess and drops non-stop acorns and

[11:54] leaves and and then there's a catch

[11:56] basin in that space

[11:59] that um

[12:01] there's a large catch basin on the other

[12:03] side of that pool that we are trying not

[12:05] to disrupt.

[12:08] >> Okay. So, yeah, we looked at that and it

[12:10] was really tight. It was because the

[12:12] angles are such that it was hard to fit

[12:15] the pool with a patio space and and to

[12:18] fit it within that space and it slopes.

[12:21] So there's a cross slope in that area of

[12:23] about

[12:24] um 4T 3 to 4 feet.

[12:28] >> Okay. And my last question would be

[12:30] around the driveway expansion along the

[12:33] fence line. Is there I apologize I don't

[12:36] remember. Is there existing hedging that

[12:37] you're removing along that southern

[12:40] fence line that

[12:42] >> No, there's just a there's just a random

[12:46] group of plants.

[12:47] >> Okay.

[12:47] >> Yeah, it's not a hedge.

[12:50] And the neighbor's house is pretty far

[12:52] away over there. There's an oak tree on

[12:53] the other side of the on the other side

[12:56] of the driveway.

[12:57] >> Okay. Thank you.

[13:02] » Um the I have one question for you. the

[13:05] um non-conforming existing deck that's

[13:08] in the front yard setback. You said it's

[13:11] just getting modified slightly. Could

[13:13] you just kind of show us what's changing

[13:16] there?

[13:16] >> Well, basically right now that deck is

[13:18] there's a there's a step right in the

[13:20] middle of it.

[13:22] >> It's not equal. It's not even. So,

[13:26] we're basically

[13:27] going to get rid of that step so that

[13:30] the deck actually functions as one

[13:33] continuous space. And then we're going

[13:35] to there's a really large set of wood

[13:39] stairs that goes down to that patio

[13:41] that's really bulky and awkward to use.

[13:44] And we're going to put in a oversized um

[13:47] metal step uh oversized spiral is what

[13:51] we're showing.

[13:52] >> Okay. And so the basically that front

[13:56] portion of the the patio or porch face

[13:59] is going to come up seven inches or

[14:02] something. Is that

[14:03] >> I think it goes down.

[14:07] >> Oh, the back part of it is going to

[14:09] >> The back the back part is correct. It's

[14:10] at the door level, but then it steps up

[14:12] and then it steps back down to the front

[14:14] yard. I'm not really sure why they did

[14:17] that,

[14:19] >> but we're just want to get it all one

[14:21] level.

[14:21] >> Okay.

[14:24] All right. Thank you.

[14:26] >> Along that same lines, you have the pool

[14:27] equipment underneath that

[14:30] >> slab. It says it's a slab on it's on a

[14:32] concrete slab. Is there are you doing

[14:35] some sort of vault for the pool

[14:36] equipment or what it's called?

[14:38] >> No, there's a bunch of utility space

[14:39] under the existing deck now.

[14:42] >> Ah, got it.

[14:42] >> And we're just going to put it within

[14:44] that. There's a couple AC units and

[14:47] there's a storage there's a storage um

[14:50] shelf and there's a a hot tub over there

[14:52] and all that's going to go away.

[14:56] >> Got it. Thank you.

[14:59] [snorts]

[15:00] >> Joey, did you have any questions?

[15:03] >> Oh yeah,

[15:04] >> I have one question for um the planning

[15:07] department. is the um

[15:11] well actually it's for the next project

[15:13] so never mind.

[15:15] >> All right. Thanks Brad.

[15:17] >> Um is there anybody in the audience

[15:19] either here or at home that has any

[15:21] questions or comments?

[15:23] >> There's no one online.

[15:25] >> Okay. Um so when the three of you

[15:29] comment on this, I think it might be

[15:30] helpful for the town council for you to

[15:32] sort of divide up your recommendation.

[15:34] One is just the overall project and then

[15:37] specifically mentioning the variance for

[15:39] the pool and the variance for the

[15:41] fireplace

[15:42] because those are sort of the three

[15:44] separate things and it would be just

[15:46] helpful to so they could get your

[15:47] [clears throat] opinions on each.

[15:50] >> Oh, who would like to go first?

[15:53] >> Thank you.

[15:54] >> Okay. So, regarding the overall project,

[15:58] sorry, regarding the overall project, I

[16:01] think it's really successful and I I uh

[16:04] I had I've seen that house before the back landscape and it definitely

[16:09] needs a reorg reorganization.

[16:13] So, I think it that's very successful.

[16:15] uh regarding the pool variance, the pool

[16:18] location variance, I can support that

[16:20] specifically in the light of the new the

[16:25] new uh regulations we are discussing

[16:29] that it would fall in the 10-ft setback

[16:33] and it seems to be kind of the most

[16:34] obvious place for that pool on the the

[16:38] land. Um it can't be pushed any closer

[16:40] to the house because of that corner of

[16:42] the house. Uh, the last thing I would

[16:45] address would be the fireplace. And I

[16:48] cannot support that variance. It's just

[16:51] too tall and too close to the property

[16:54] line. And it wouldn't even conform even

[16:56] with the new It's too tall. Uh, so I

[17:02] think it would be great to find another

[17:04] place to put that if you want it that

[17:05] tall.

[17:07] uh or lower it quite a lot so that it's

[17:12] maybe just the same level as the the

[17:14] barbecue.

[17:19] » Um I can I'll go ahead. Uh yeah,

[17:22] generally in support of most of the

[17:25] changes in this project. Um but I agree

[17:29] with the town planning recommendation to

[17:32] lower the barbecue. Um, and even, you

[17:37] know, we're designing based on a change

[17:40] to the code that hasn't actually

[17:42] happened yet, but hopefully we'll be

[17:44] moving forward. But even with that new

[17:47] change of the 10-ft setback rule, um,

[17:52] technically for something up to 48 in.

[17:55] So,

[17:58] you you guys are I mean, this is above

[18:01] that already because it drops two and a

[18:02] half feet in the back. Um, but I I could

[18:05] see allowing it for the countertop

[18:08] height. Um, but I think the chimney

[18:12] height

[18:14] um

[18:16] would would not be something that should

[18:18] be approved based on the code.

[18:22] >> Thanks.

[18:23] >> Thank you.

[18:24] >> Yeah, I don't have any additional

[18:25] comments. I agree with both my

[18:26] colleagues here on those two comments.

[18:29] >> Okay. And I agree uh on all three

[18:31] things. overall project. Great. Uh the

[18:34] pool, yes, because of what Joey said.

[18:36] And the fireplace, no, because of what

[18:38] Joey said.

[18:41] >> Right. Um great. Uh thank you.

[18:45] >> Question.

[18:46] >> Sure.

[18:47] >> If

[18:49] we had like a fire wall feature that's

[18:51] the same elevation, same height as the

[18:53] barbecue, could that be a possibility?

[18:56] Yeah, I think it's just the height is

[18:58] the issue because even with the new

[19:00] recommendations, I think things are

[19:02] allowed to be up to 48 will be hopefully

[19:06] >> uh up to 48 in. Is that correct, Alex?

[19:09] >> Or is it 36?

[19:12] >> Guess it's 36, but we'll review that

[19:14] later.

[19:14] >> So, whatever those new

[19:17] uh

[19:18] >> Okay.

[19:20] >> Yeah. It's not that you can't have a

[19:22] fireplace there.

[19:24] >> [snorts]

[19:24] >> So, if I made it the height of the

[19:26] backsplash of the barbecue, which is

[19:28] about 40, 46, 47,

[19:33] I'm trying to figure out if I could do

[19:34] just like a firewall with a seat in

[19:37] front of it.

[19:37] >> Yeah, it should be whatever the height

[19:39] is of the because they're not even

[19:41] passed yet. So, the town council might

[19:43] actually in the end of the day say, "You

[19:45] need to come back a month later once

[19:46] we've approved this." But it should be

[19:49] in line with whatever that height is for

[19:52] the proposal.

[19:54] >> Yeah. I started working on this about

[19:55] six months ago when all this talk was

[19:57] happening and immediately changed all

[20:00] the design to meet the 10-ft setback and

[20:05] I'm still not 100% clear about the what

[20:08] is allowed within the 10 feet and not

[20:10] allowed within the 10 ft.

[20:11] >> It hasn't been.

[20:13] >> Yeah.

[20:14] Sorry. It hasn't been passed yet, but it

[20:17] is under deep discussion and hopefully

[20:20] should be

[20:21] >> should be moving forward to the town

[20:23] council.

[20:24] >> Okay.

[20:24] >> So, I think we'd all be comfortable with

[20:28] >> it being whatever height ends up being

[20:31] passed. So, if the town council passes

[20:32] something that says it can be 36 or 40

[20:35] or 48, whatever they end up passing,

[20:37] then we're all fine with the fireplace

[20:39] in that location at that height.

[20:41] >> Okay. So for for the ADR, just as a

[20:45] clarification, this project would

[20:48] probably go to the July council before

[20:52] the passing of the pool exception

[20:55] ordinance. Um, [clears throat] for

[20:57] ordinances, it takes a first reading, a

[21:00] second reading, and then it's not

[21:01] effective um for 30 days.

[21:03] >> Right. And and that's what I was saying.

[21:05] They might need to tell you to wait

[21:09] until they might just grant the variance

[21:12] or they might say you need to wait until

[21:14] the thing has actually passed and then

[21:16] your plan would be in accordance with

[21:19] >> Okay. So, can we go to town council if

[21:23] we make those changes? Yeah.

[21:25] >> Yes. And in terms of the variance, just

[21:28] to clarify,

[21:30] um what would what

[21:33] reason why the fireplace would require a

[21:36] variance is because the structure is

[21:38] more than six feet.

[21:41] So in this case, if he did do it, the

[21:44] height of the barbecue or that would

[21:47] just require design review.

[21:48] >> That doesn't

[21:49] >> Yeah. And we're all fine with it as long

[21:51] as it's not a

[21:52] >> a variance. Variance.

[21:54] >> Okay. Got it. Thank you.

[21:56] >> Six feet.

[21:56] >> So then six feet.

[21:58] >> Okay.

[21:59] >> But with

[22:00] >> from grade with a two foot retaining

[22:03] wall,

[22:04] >> what you're saying?

[22:05] >> Oh yeah. So then it ends up being four

[22:07] because of because it's already elevated

[22:08] by two feet. Yeah.

[22:09] >> Yeah. I got it. Yeah.

[22:10] >> Yeah.

[22:10] >> Yep.

[22:11] >> So it's four from the patio, but it has

[22:14] >> So I guess 48 inches from the patio.

[22:16] >> Yeah. Got it.

[22:16] >> Yeah.

[22:17] >> Okay.

[22:17] >> So make that clear recommendation for

[22:19] this one. 48 inches from the patio side.

[22:22] >> Yes. Yes.

[22:23] >> Okay. I got it. Okay. Okay. Thanks,

[22:26] Brad.

[22:26] >> Thank you.

[22:29] >> Okay. And the next item is 18, Sir

[22:32] Francis Drake.

[22:41] » Okay. [clears throat]

[22:43] Good evening, ADR members. Uh tonight

[22:45] the applicant at 18 Sir Frances Drake

[22:47] Boulevard is requesting a recommendation

[22:49] to the town council for design review, a

[22:51] demolition permit, an ADU exception

[22:54] permit, a non-conformity permit, and a

[22:56] variance.

[22:58] This is the existing site here.

[23:05] Okay. Uh the project is proposing

[23:07] renovations to the existing multi-unit

[23:10] residence which includes two units, one

[23:12] on the main floor and the second on the second unit on the second floor. The

[23:17] project proposing is an interior and

[23:20] exterior remodel to include replacing of

[23:22] the existing sighting to horizontal red

[23:25] cedar sighting. They also proposed to

[23:28] convert the existing 600 ft attached

[23:31] garage

[23:33] uh to an ADU and transfer that square

[23:35] footage to the existing lower level

[23:37] storage area to ma to maintain that

[23:39] existing second unit.

[23:42] Additional site improvements include

[23:44] reconfiguration and reduction of the

[23:46] existing swimming pool as you can see

[23:47] here. Uh also um a pool equipment and

[23:52] construction of a new patio which is

[23:55] located right here.

[23:58] And these are the elevations of the the

[24:01] proposed house

[24:06] elevation,

[24:07] north elevation,

[24:09] rear elevation

[24:12] and uh variance is required to allow the

[24:14] pool equipment encroach further into the

[24:16] front yard setback and to construct a

[24:20] patio within the within the sideyard

[24:22] setback. uh non-conformity permit is

[24:24] required to construct the to reconstruct

[24:26] the pool which is currently

[24:26] non-conforming with respect to the

[24:29] setback

[24:30] and staff requests that the ID group

[24:32] discussed the merits of the project and um provide a formal recommendation

[24:36] to the town council. Thank you.

[24:40] >> I'm sorry the second there was the pool

[24:42] equipment and what was the other

[24:43] variance?

[24:44] >> Uh patio.

[24:45] >> Patio. Yeah.

[24:49] And would either of those fit our new

[24:54] proposed definitions? It looks

[24:58] >> No.

[24:58] So even even under the more

[25:01] accommodative suggestions, they would

[25:03] still require variances.

[25:04] >> Correct.

[25:05] >> Okay.

[25:08] Would the owner andor their design team

[25:11] like to come up and present?

[25:20] Oh, let me uh provide the plans real

[25:22] quick.

[25:45] It's a little slow. Okay.

[25:52] » Where do you want me to go? Which page

[25:53] do you want me to?

[25:54] >> Um,

[25:56] let's go down to a site plan. Yeah,

[25:58] let's go down a little bit more. Uh,

[26:00] keep going.

[26:06] » Yep. Maybe we can minimize it a little

[26:09] just to see both.

[26:14] » No worries.

[26:17] Um, I'll introduce myself while we're

[26:19] dialing that in a little bit.

[26:21] [clears throat]

[26:21] I'm Jay Sherlock. This is Richard Mack.

[26:24] We're architects uh representing the

[26:26] owners.

[26:27] And um, want to thank you guys for

[26:30] coming tonight, of course, and

[26:32] dedicating your time to this. And

[26:33] definitely want to uh thank Alex and

[26:35] Roberta. They uh work with us pretty

[26:39] much every turn of the way.

[26:41] [clears throat] Some of these properties

[26:42] can be a little bit difficult. What this

[26:44] one they can be a little bit difficult

[26:46] and this one has proven to be a bit

[26:47] challenging. Um maybe just a a quick

[26:51] little introduction and then Richard can

[26:53] talk about some of the variances or

[26:54] other characteristics of the property.

[26:57] But uh essentially we're just trying to

[26:59] clean up the property. if you guys

[27:00] didn't see it before. Um, it's pretty

[27:02] beat up. Um, it's in a really dark

[27:05] corner. I would say it's kind of I feel

[27:07] like it's almost tucked in with a wave

[27:10] of green kind of crashing on it. So,

[27:12] it's a a dark kind of little uh danky

[27:15] spot. Um, so we're just trying to clean

[27:18] it up for the homeowners. Uh, make it

[27:21] something that could look really nice in

[27:22] the neighborhood. And it's keeping its

[27:24] same shape. Um, we've taken like a

[27:28] mixture of the materials and kind of

[27:29] just brought it to a couple clean uh

[27:31] pieces instead of just having a bunch of

[27:33] stuff randomly all over the building.

[27:36] Um,

[27:38] let's see here. And and I think the main

[27:40] part that we're doing is we're just

[27:42] always, you know, as the job of the

[27:44] architect, you know, uh, we're the

[27:47] middle men here and we're just trying to

[27:49] work it out between everybody. And that

[27:50] that's why we appreciate working with

[27:52] Alex and Roberta. Um it's it's been a

[27:54] little tough as you know

[27:57] there's a kind of makeshift unit at the

[27:59] top of this and towards the end of the

[28:01] project you know just doing whatever we

[28:03] could to to help out um the town uh and

[28:07] hopefully the clients a bit but um let's

[28:10] see here. Essentially, we're just, you

[28:12] know, again, removing some miscellaneous

[28:14] walls that look like additions on

[28:16] additions uh that, you know, probably

[28:18] weren't permitted at all and a a

[28:20] makeshift kitchen up at the top and, you

[28:23] know, uh creating a real unit um instead

[28:26] of the the rigged unit that was up

[28:28] there. We've added an ADU down at the

[28:30] bottom, you know, to help everybody, you

[28:33] know, we'll just leave it there. Uh

[28:36] reducing the pool. I think we're trying

[28:38] to add a little bit of green space in

[28:40] there. and um uh you know tucking the pool equipment away a bit, but uh in

[28:47] general just you know trying to clean up

[28:49] the property in the neighborhood and

[28:50] then I'll let Richard maybe talk a

[28:52] little bit about a couple parts.

[28:55] >> Uh yeah. Hi. Um

[28:59] you know, maybe I'll start with the

[29:00] variance uh for the pool equipment. Um

[29:02] just because the 25 foot setbacks

[29:06] would force the pool equipment into the

[29:08] center of the property. uh just makes it

[29:10] a little bit kind of breaks up a

[29:13] significant portion of the usable space.

[29:16] Um and we're also trying to get the

[29:19] whatever noise comes from the pool

[29:20] equipment to uh to the towards the

[29:23] street and further away from the homes.

[29:26] Um

[29:29] uh decreasing the size of the pool and

[29:32] kind of pushing it um to where the steps

[29:35] were uh towards the front of the

[29:37] property is also again about trying to

[29:40] maximize the usable ground space um for

[29:44] the kids for you know just for daily

[29:47] enjoyment um and also not to waste space

[29:50] at the front of that at the front corner

[29:52] of the property.

[29:54] um moving the driveway and um and maybe

[30:00] uh as far as a variance goes for the

[30:01] patio, you know, we're really just doing

[30:04] we there was a deck there above a

[30:06] carport. Um so we're we're taking that

[30:09] bulk away. Um and uh and just putting

[30:13] down permeable pavers and uh or uh maybe

[30:17] actually the pavers themselves. Uh I

[30:20] can't remember if we're doing permeable

[30:21] or not, but we're doing gaps in between.

[30:25] >> Um so again, just trying to clean up the

[30:28] house, trying to decrease and and cut

[30:31] some of the excess mass um and make it

[30:34] more usable. There will be two units on

[30:36] that ground floor. Um it allows for

[30:39] gathering space um you know, usable

[30:43] potential barbecue space or or or just

[30:46] um you know, gathering space. Uh and

[30:48] then you know we did lose two garage

[30:51] spaces. So we we uh expanded the

[30:54] driveway just a touch on the right hand

[30:56] side just trying to again use the space

[30:59] wisely. Um the driveway coming in um and

[31:03] providing three parking spaces all on

[31:06] one side. So again we can maximize the

[31:08] usable ground space um for the families.

[31:12] Um

[31:14] then

[31:18] maybe maybe that's about that's about

[31:20] it. Uh maybe going to the siding and the house itself. We are excavating and

[31:26] lowering the house about uh 16 in or 18

[31:30] in to get those the ADU and the second

[31:33] unit on the ground floor. Uh but that

[31:35] we're not raising the height of the

[31:36] building. Um it was kind of a mix of

[31:39] shingles, dark wood [clears throat]

[31:41] shingles and si and horizontal siding.

[31:45] Um and then on the ground floor. Yeah,

[31:47] maybe Alex if you could go to a 3.0.

[31:50] Um we'll start by looking at the

[31:53] elevation.

[31:56] Um

[31:58] yeah, so that's and so the existing that

[32:01] back left bottom wall was all concrete

[32:04] anyway. And we we're kind of of the

[32:07] architectural and structural belief that

[32:10] everything kind of needs a grounding, a

[32:12] solid base. And so when we um you know

[32:16] think about the base of this building,

[32:18] it's a big building. We want it to feel

[32:20] secure. We want it to feel structurally

[32:22] sound. And so we saw that opportunity to

[32:25] continue the concrete look uh band

[32:28] across the bottom and and give this

[32:31] thing stability uh and then lighten up

[32:33] as we as we go up into the sky. Um so

[32:38] we're using stucco to do that uh rather

[32:41] than uh and keeping the color of the

[32:43] stucco light um in a pearl color. So

[32:47] again, just trying to uh connect connect

[32:50] it to the earth um and the the physics

[32:54] that that come with it. So then we um

[32:58] you know, we kind of had to choose

[32:59] between the shingles and the horizontal

[33:01] siding that was there. We chose the

[33:04] horizontal siding. Um lower maintenance,

[33:07] better fireproofing,

[33:09] uh again the color, lower maintenance.

[33:12] um feels feels warmer and actually

[33:16] expands the gives you a feeling of

[33:18] expanding the outdoor space. Um and

[33:22] again just kind of trying to bring life

[33:24] to this this home. It's uh it was

[33:27] feeling dilapidated and and dark and

[33:30] wet. And so we're we're just trying to

[33:33] bring some some life to it. And maybe

[33:38] that's about it for now. Happy to take

[33:41] any questions or comments.

[33:46] » Does anyone have questions?

[33:49] >> Yes, [clears throat] I do. Uh, it was

[33:51] hard to tell what was there before

[33:53] because when I went today, I mean, it's

[33:55] clearly sort of already been a lot of

[33:58] demos been done, but

[34:01] >> as far as the landscaping.

[34:02] >> Yes.

[34:03] >> Uh, was there a patio where the pool is

[34:07] before? We there was a previous permit

[34:10] where they they removed the patio um

[34:13] that was connected to a stair. Um and

[34:18] we have pictures. Yeah.

[34:20] >> So what I'm I'm trying to figure out

[34:22] you're asking for a variance for the

[34:24] patio.

[34:24] >> No figure out if a patio was there.

[34:27] >> We actually didn't file a variance for

[34:29] the patio. Um we just filed a variance

[34:32] for the pool equipment. Alex, is that

[34:38] » parking spot?

[34:40] >> It was a carport with a deck on top.

[34:44] >> Yes. This was all concrete.

[34:58] » Got it.

[35:00] So again, just cleaning it up.

[35:08] » So instead of concrete, we'll just have

[35:10] the pavers and turf.

[35:16] » Got it.

[35:18] >> Along those lines, what are we talking

[35:20] about? And this is to the planning. What

[35:23] are we talking about necessity for

[35:25] covered parking here on this site?

[35:28] Can you repeat that?

[35:29] >> A covered parking.

[35:30] >> Yeah.

[35:31] >> Requirements here.

[35:33] >> Uh for this one, it's a one covered

[35:35] parking, but since they're converting

[35:37] the ADU, they don't have to meet.

[35:39] >> So, no covered parking at all for the

[35:42] entire project.

[35:44] >> Correct.

[35:47] >> Yeah. Now, maybe I could um This all

[35:51] kind of came about late not having a

[35:53] parking space in the garage uh with the county pushing for the second

[35:58] unit. Um so, we've worked with Alex and

[36:01] Robera and the client to to keep the

[36:03] second unit on the ground floor by

[36:05] converting the garage to an ADU. Um so,

[36:08] we did lose that covered parking. the

[36:10] client would like covered parking, but

[36:12] there's no way to do that because we

[36:15] we'd have to build additional space. So,

[36:18] if there's ever a future um lightweight

[36:22] carport uh that would be approved, we

[36:25] would the client would would explore

[36:27] that.

[36:28] >> If it's not required, that's I was just

[36:30] looking for what are the typically we

[36:31] see some level of requirement for cover

[36:34] party.

[36:38] Laura, Joey, do you have any questions?

[36:43] » Well, just that same future patio space

[36:47] um to the north of the building that we

[36:50] were just talking about. So, that was

[36:53] paved to get to that illegal garage

[36:57] space, right?

[36:58] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it was like it was a

[36:59] covered carport kind of illegal roof

[37:02] deck

[37:03] >> and uh

[37:04] >> and so took away the asphalt or they

[37:08] want to take away the asphalt and the carport.

[37:11] >> Okay. So, the covered carport's gone and

[37:13] it's

[37:14] >> there's a retaining wall like further

[37:16] back basically.

[37:18] >> Yes. Yeah.

[37:18] >> Yeah. It's been there the whole time.

[37:20] >> The retaining wall has been there the

[37:21] whole time and then we're just

[37:22] >> Okay.

[37:23] >> stepping the patio a few feet away from

[37:26] that retaining wall. Okay. So, all of

[37:28] these like elevated surfaces that

[37:31] usually are not really encouraged or

[37:33] existing, right? Like that balconies and

[37:36] that terrace yard space. Okay.

[37:38] >> Yes.

[37:42] » Yeah. If any space has been taken at all

[37:49] here

[37:57] is

[38:01] might see it better in the middle

[38:02] picture. Yeah. Mark, do you have any

[38:05] additional questions?

[38:06] >> I don't think so. No.

[38:10] >> Okay. Uh, thank you. Okay. Thank you.

[38:12] Um, I'd like to open it up to the

[38:14] audience. Would anyone in the audience

[38:15] like to make a comment?

[38:20] » There's no one online.

[38:22] >> Right. We have we have an actual

[38:24] in-person comment.

[38:26] >> Hi. Hi, everybody. Um, my name is

[38:29] Beverly Domet

[38:31] and I am the owner. That's my husband of

[38:35] uh 20 what was 20 Sir Francis Drake. to

[38:37] the north side lion neighbor for this

[38:39] project and it has definitely expanded

[38:43] since we first talked to the owner. Um,

[38:46] so I guess I'm understanding now there's

[38:47] three units here,

[38:51] >> right? Okay. And there's three parking

[38:54] spots. And I just also want to mention

[38:56] that, you know, there is not a lot of

[38:59] parking on Sir Francis Drake. When

[39:01] people park in front of his property, in

[39:04] front of mine, it makes it impossible to

[39:05] get in and out of our driveway. We

[39:07] cannot see teen drivers. Recipe for

[39:10] disaster. So, I just would like to lodge

[39:12] my concern that there's not enough

[39:15] parking on the property for three units

[39:17] and that third unit was pretty recently

[39:20] added. So, I hadn't I wasn't aware of

[39:22] that. But, I'm grateful this project is

[39:25] happening and that this is getting loved

[39:27] back to life. It was 100% an eyesore and

[39:30] it's great. Um, I do have concerns that

[39:34] I have uh raised with the homeowner over

[39:37] these last weeks about what looks like a

[39:40] deck

[39:42] um coming over the at the uh lot line

[39:47] and which is about 12 to 15 ft above the

[39:51] ground. Um, and I'm mentioned to him I'm

[39:54] nervous this is going to turn into a

[39:56] deck and I want to lodge my concern here

[39:59] because it would literally just be

[40:01] looking directly over into our property.

[40:04] Um, and I don't think that it's in

[40:06] keeping with town standards to have uh

[40:10] second story decks uh overlooking town

[40:13] property. So, the plans show an existing

[40:16] condition of a flat roof with a door

[40:21] coming out

[40:23] to what was the second unit, which is

[40:26] the very upstairs. So, the very tiptop

[40:29] was its own unit. There was a door for

[40:31] egress. That makes sense. Now, it's the

[40:33] master bathroom. And that whole section

[40:37] of roof

[40:39] that comes off of that door used to be

[40:43] sloped. It was a sloped roof that had

[40:46] drain pipes and now it's flat. And so

[40:49] when I saw this, there's because there's

[40:51] a lot of construction been happening

[40:52] over the course of these weeks before

[40:54] any discussion really happened with us.

[40:57] So, we grabbed a picture of it from our

[40:59] property to demonstrate tonight and to

[41:02] send to Ross and just be like, I'm a

[41:04] little concerned that this is turning

[41:06] into a deck. And he said, don't worry, But we all know that if

[41:10] there's a beautiful flat space out with

[41:13] a door leading from the master bedroom,

[41:17] there's a lot of potential for a deck.

[41:20] And the existing condition was not a

[41:22] flat roof. the existing condition was a

[41:26] sloped roof. So, I just want to kind of

[41:29] understand

[41:31] what might be a concern of mine and see

[41:34] if it's a concern of anybody else's.

[41:38] >> Thank you.

[41:39] >> Yeah.

[41:41] >> Um, can I ask you a question? So, the

[41:43] existing flat roof that is called out as

[41:46] existing flat roof, it was not flat.

[41:48] >> It was not. And you can see in the

[41:50] pictures that it was um sloped for

[41:53] drainage. So sloped enough that you

[41:55] couldn't put furniture on it. If you

[41:57] want to pull up the photos.

[42:02] And then my husband emailed a picture of

[42:04] what it looks like now

[42:07] if you want to throw that up as well.

[42:11] » Oh, okay. Well, we can provide it. So,

[42:17] do you want to point out the spot on the

[42:19] photo?

[42:20] >> Oh, is that it there

[42:23] >> in the upper right? Is that what we're

[42:25] looking at?

[42:27] >> Oh, I saw it on the planning.

[42:36] This is

[42:38] when you look

[42:40] from the shingles

[42:42] on current

[42:47] it

[42:49] flat. So that's my concern. Um

[42:54] and I know how things happen once it's

[42:57] built. Really hard to undo

[43:01] um a condition.

[43:03] >> Okay. Uh thank you.

[43:05] >> Um so then actually I would like you to

[43:10] address this because the owner or the

[43:13] your team because uh if the existing

[43:17] condition

[43:19] was actually or the pre-existing

[43:21] condition was sloped and now it's flat.

[43:25] And Beverly is correct in that we always

[43:29] oppose second floor decks and yeah, we

[43:34] don't want a second floor deck there.

[43:37] Well, I don't mean to speak for

[43:38] everybody else, but knowing them, I'm

[43:41] pretty sure. Um,

[43:43] so has that condition changed and what

[43:47] could be done to prevent it from being a

[43:50] deck with a door leading out to it as it

[43:53] seems to be proposed?

[43:55] >> We can address all of that. Um, so first

[43:59] of all, the

[44:03] uh it's a walkway essentially. It's a

[44:04] egress walkway out of the top floor.

[44:07] there's um not enough egress out of the

[44:09] building, but there used to be what's

[44:11] called a butterfly roof, if you guys

[44:13] know. So, it doesn't look that steep

[44:15] there, but it was steeper um than this.

[44:17] So, they're correct. It was a It had a

[44:19] nice little pitch to it. Um and on a

[44:23] previous permit, that was changed. So,

[44:27] uh the uh height limit on the space, the

[44:31] butterfly roof that was there, the

[44:33] interior conditions, um that roof was

[44:36] just made one nice flat shed roof. And

[44:40] that is a walkway with guard rails on

[44:43] the side. So, you'd have to rip up the

[44:45] guard rails to make a deck to walk on

[44:48] the deck. But, it is a flat roof now.

[44:51] This currently it has been changed to a

[44:53] flat roof. That's for sure. And where is

[44:55] the walkway? If you go to the site plan.

[44:58] >> So, but it's now sorry inside just

[45:01] inside that door is the master bathroom

[45:04] proposed.

[45:05] >> Yes, the m master bathroom is right.

[45:07] >> It's like it's like

[45:15] it goes out to what?

[45:16] >> The backyard

[45:18] >> or the terraces. So if that was a

[45:21] >> little

[45:22] >> So if that was a window instead of a

[45:25] door, uh, and windows are most common

[45:30] way of egress out of a bedroom for fire

[45:33] hazards. Um, like my bedroom doesn't

[45:37] have a second doorway going to the

[45:39] outside, but it has windows and so the

[45:40] fire department thinks that's fine. So,

[45:42] it seems like if that proposed door, I'm

[45:45] just thinking out loud, was changed to a

[45:47] window that opened, then there would be

[45:51] egress satisfying the fire department,

[45:53] but someone wouldn't be using that as a

[45:56] walkway because we don't even like uh

[46:00] and you know the difference between a

[46:01] walkway and a deck, you got people on

[46:03] them. So, if we don't want a walkway on

[46:06] the second story, then that could just

[46:08] be changed to a window and it would

[46:10] still provide egress. And the rest of

[46:11] the plan would still be the same except

[46:13] you'd be looking at a window instead of

[46:14] a door. Uh if it had if the door even

[46:17] has glass on it.

[46:18] >> Yeah.

[46:19] >> So we'd have to go back and change

[46:20] another permit.

[46:22] >> It's already been permanent. The reason

[46:23] it's existing is because it was

[46:25] previously permitted as a walkway. There

[46:27] was an existing door there.

[46:29] >> So it's not just about egress. It's also

[46:31] about accessibility. If you're on that

[46:34] top floor, you'd have to go downstairs

[46:36] around the building to get to the

[46:38] backyard. And so we permit as a pathway

[46:41] to the to the open space. Uh and it was

[46:44] permitted um and there's a a steel or

[46:48] metal guard rail uh and a walkway. Um

[46:52] and no intention from the owner to to

[46:55] make a roof deck.

[46:57] >> And is that roof what is the material of

[46:59] the roof now? Or what is the proposed

[47:01] material of the roof if

[47:02] >> it's already it was uh proposed as

[47:04] asphalt? I believe it's all bitamine.

[47:07] bitchmen.

[47:09] >> Um,

[47:10] >> and but there is a railing at the front

[47:12] of the roof that is not a balcony. That

[47:16] is not a

[47:16] >> The roof has no railing. You would fall

[47:18] off. It's dangerous. Um, the deck the the Yeah, again the roof has nothing

[47:24] on it. That walkway has railings on it.

[47:27] >> And then just a a a little tip um as we

[47:30] see a lot of illegal builds and red

[47:32] tags. If we don't have the bridge on it,

[47:35] that's going to be a deck. By putting

[47:37] the bridge on it and putting the

[47:39] railings on it and committing to the

[47:40] construction and ripping up the roof and

[47:42] the waterproofing, it is going to be

[47:44] much harder to make that a deck than if

[47:46] there was a window and you just pop the

[47:48] door in and use it as a deck. This is

[47:50] typically what happens. So, just letting

[47:51] you know, we actually control that by

[47:53] putting in the structure. And this we've

[47:56] just seen over time. Um, but the like I

[47:59] said from the beginning, we are looking

[48:01] to make everybody happy. We can we can

[48:03] mitigate this even more. Can we put a

[48:05] green screen on that and it grows up

[48:07] nice and even on the little piece and

[48:09] then nobody can be seen walking by. You

[48:11] know, whatever we can do to help with

[48:13] that, put a tree between or some foliage

[48:16] or maybe planters on the edge of the

[48:18] roof. We would love to do that. We're

[48:20] not trying to encroach on privacy.

[48:23] >> Uh yeah. So, sorry, just thinking out

[48:26] loud. It's obviously it's an already

[48:28] permitted walkway on the roof. Yes.

[48:31] where if it came to us, we probably

[48:34] wouldn't want that, but it is there and

[48:37] it's permitted. So, I think putting a

[48:39] planting uh there to screen that would

[48:42] be a very nice gesture. Uh

[48:47] yeah. Yeah.

[48:49] >> And we'd be open to even more

[48:50] conversation about it, but I think that

[48:52] could be the first uh piece of the uh

[48:56] resolution or, you know, help making

[48:58] everybody comfortable.

[48:59] >> Okay. Um, sorry. Are there any questions

[49:02] on that from anyone?

[49:04] >> No, not on that. Not on that point.

[49:08] >> Okay.

[49:11] Thank you for clarifying that.

[49:14] >> You don't want to cause any feedback.

[49:16] So, I'm trying to

[49:17] >> questions of Alex.

[49:18] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[49:20] >> Um, so Joy has a question for you.

[49:22] >> Alex and Robera.

[49:23] >> For three units, how many parking spaces

[49:26] are required?

[49:28] So they had two units existing, one at

[49:31] the very top and then one on the main

[49:34] level. They need to maintain those two

[49:37] units. To do that, they're basically

[49:40] converting the garage

[49:42] to then be able to transfer that to

[49:46] create that second unit on the bottom.

[49:48] That way they're not losing the units

[49:51] that are existing and in a way they're

[49:53] also creating an ADU. So that's another

[49:56] unit. um the ADUs

[50:01] because it's a conversion of an existing

[50:03] space um there's no parking requirement.

[50:07] >> That's right.

[50:09] >> They're within a mile of public transit

[50:11] which they are.

[50:12] >> Yeah.

[50:12] >> So that's if they weren't then they

[50:14] >> good point need to provide

[50:16] >> parking in this case if they wanted no

[50:19] parking they could they wouldn't be

[50:22] required any parking spaces.

[50:25] >> Okay. Okay. Okay, good to know. Thank

[50:27] you.

[50:30] >> Okay. Um Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me.

[50:34] [clears throat]

[50:36] >> So, my name is Mark Converse and I live

[50:39] on the other side at 16 Sir Francis

[50:41] Drake and I've lived here for in Town

[50:44] Ross for 15 and a half years. Um, and I

[50:48] agree with Beverly that it's great to

[50:50] clean that uh property up. It was in bad

[50:52] shape. Hadn't been worked on since the

[50:53] 70s. lot of it's old and dilapidated,

[50:56] but um um it's and I've been in pre

[50:59] frequent contact with Ross since he

[51:02] bought the place, uh the owner. Um and

[51:05] I'm pretty surprised to find out tonight

[51:07] that they're planning on three units.

[51:10] Uh I'm really upset that's three units.

[51:13] I don't think that's right. Um that's a

[51:16] small lot. It was cut out of a lot in

[51:18] 1911. They built the house on it in

[51:20] 1912. It was subdivided from the lot

[51:22] behind it. and three units is it's a

[51:25] pretty small lot for three units

[51:26] especially given there's very little

[51:27] park on Surf Francis Drake. Um so I

[51:32] don't know what the whole process is the

[51:33] town. I'm sort of familiar with it but

[51:36] um I'm Is this the final approval for to

[51:39] go forward with all the construction?

[51:40] >> No, this is a recommendation to the town

[51:43] council. Okay.

[51:44] >> That we make whether or not a project be

[51:46] approved and then the town council uh

[51:49] which will then see the project one or

[51:51] two months from now. Then they vote on

[51:53] it and then if they approve something,

[51:56] construction goes forward.

[51:58] >> So if you tell if tonight you do give

[52:00] approval, it goes to the town council

[52:02] for approval. Is that correct?

[52:03] >> Yeah, we we recommend it either for

[52:05] approval or not for approval or

[52:08] sometimes as you saw previously, we

[52:10] might recommend part of the project for

[52:12] approval and not another part. Um so um

[52:17] but one thing that we do not have

[52:20] control over here and we don't even have

[52:24] the authority to recommend or not

[52:26] recommend is how many units are on a

[52:29] property. So there's a the state of

[52:32] California has ADU laws and we do not

[52:36] make recommendations on whether or not a

[52:39] lot can have uh ADUs or second

[52:43] structures. Second, um,

[52:47] inhabitations. So, uh, the architects

[52:49] said they want to make people happy. Uh,

[52:52] three units will not make the the

[52:53] neighbors happy. Um, you guys want to

[52:56] work with us, that's that'll not be

[52:58] that'll make us very very unhappy. Like

[53:00] on a scale of 1 to 10 be about 27.

[53:03] >> So, take the mic.

[53:05] >> What's that? I've got another question,

[53:06] too. When you guys did all the work in

[53:08] the back, did you get a hydraological

[53:09] report for all the uh before you built

[53:11] all those? And if so, where could I

[53:13] review those? I'm a civil engineer. My

[53:15] background is history. Do you guys do a

[53:17] hydraological report or just do a

[53:20] >> Okay. And can I see those or where could

[53:21] I review those?

[53:22] >> Uh you can talk to the town staff and

[53:24] you're available to see Okay.

[53:25] >> anything that they are allowed to give

[53:28] you.

[53:28] >> Okay. Well, I

[53:29] >> and all of those documents uh any civil

[53:33] engineering documents will be available

[53:36] to the public when a project goes up to

[53:39] the uh town council also. Okay. Um Okay.

[53:44] Um so, um yeah, I think there's I think

[53:48] there's a lot of issues here that uh I

[53:50] think I don't think it fits with the

[53:51] town of Ross, the nature of the town. I

[53:54] think it's going against the kind of

[53:55] nature of the town. Um so, yeah, you're

[53:58] Disney this name will not be happy. So,

[54:00] I'd like to see what you can do to

[54:02] >> you don't you don't need to answer his

[54:04] comments.

[54:05] >> Well, I could I could just give it a

[54:06] little try. Um

[54:08] uh one, I feel you. I really do. I'm

[54:11] part of the community and um you know

[54:14] there's not enough parking. There's not

[54:16] enough street width. Um luckily they are

[54:19] opening up the curb a little bit. Um

[54:21] that's looking really good right in

[54:22] front of the house. But um there's a lot

[54:25] of politics involved here. I would love

[54:26] to talk to you a little bit about it of

[54:28] course. Um, but you know, we're all

[54:30] working together and um, let's go ahead

[54:34] and meet and and try to, you know, talk

[54:37] about it as much as we can. You know,

[54:41] it's it's a state mandator state

[54:44] mandate. Um, uh, and there's just a lot

[54:47] going on with it. We're we're surprised,

[54:49] you know, these things.

[54:50] >> Okay. I know you two can take this

[54:53] offline because this is

[54:55] >> not the venue for neighbor conversations

[54:56] other than just the

[54:58] >> three minutes you can comment on a

[54:59] project.

[55:00] >> Thank you for your time.

[55:03] >> Is there anyone else in the audience who

[55:05] would like to speak?

[55:08] >> Okay.

[55:10] >> Someone online.

[55:11] >> No, there's online.

[55:12] >> Great. Okay. Uh who would like to go

[55:14] first on this? And once again, um, it

[55:16] would be great if you discuss both the

[55:19] pool equipment variance and the patio

[55:21] variance separately

[55:24] aside from just the overall project.

[55:28] » I'll make some comments. Um,

[55:31] >> I I like the idea of pulling the pool

[55:33] back. I think that's kind of fine. Um, I

[55:36] think there's probably an opportunity to

[55:38] pull that patio space that's was pri pre

[55:42] the carport to pull that away from the

[55:44] property line a little bit. I think, you

[55:46] know, there's there's an opportunity to

[55:47] pull that back, provide some some relief

[55:49] to that um neighbor on that side. Um, so

[55:53] I don't really I don't I know it's

[55:55] existing quote unquote, you know, as a

[55:57] parking pad prior to the carport, but I

[56:01] think if we're going to see it as a

[56:02] different use case, right, it's not

[56:04] parking anymore. Now it's gathering

[56:05] space. I think there's an opportunity to

[56:07] pull that back. So I would like to see

[56:08] that come back maybe be up five feet

[56:10] from the property line, put some

[56:12] planting there, provide some relief. Um

[56:17] I'm a little bit torn on the the

[56:18] location of the pool equipment. You

[56:20] know, generally I I don't think putting

[56:22] it towards a public sidewalk and a

[56:24] public street is a really um community

[56:27] solution, right? and instead of pushing

[56:29] it to the boundary of the property line

[56:30] and burdening others, bring that inbound

[56:33] into the property where it can be

[56:36] properly soundproofed. I don't exactly

[56:40] know where I would recommend that, but

[56:41] maybe associated with that with the

[56:43] building itself adjacent to that parking

[56:45] or the patio that is now a patio. So

[56:47] maybe there's something we could do to

[56:48] pull that away from the street front

[56:50] because there is a sidewalk right there

[56:51] and you know it's the the proposed

[56:53] location is probably about five to to 8

[56:55] feet from that sidewalk. So, I'd like to

[56:57] see that relocated away from the public

[57:00] sphere and into the um into the

[57:03] property. However, I do recognize it's

[57:04] Sir Francis Drake. It's a pretty loud

[57:06] street. So, I'd love to hear my

[57:08] colleagues opinion on the on the pool

[57:10] equipment.

[57:12] Uh I think I have some comments on

[57:14] [clears throat] the material choice. Um

[57:16] I recognize they're going for sort of a

[57:18] white and a black window scheme.

[57:22] Not a huge fan of the bright white. Uh,

[57:24] I'd love to see that brought down

[57:27] five shades. Not just a little bit, but

[57:29] actually bring it down. I recognize it's

[57:31] a dark home right now and it does need

[57:33] to be brightened up. But, uh, in

[57:35] general, we try to avoid putting white

[57:37] boxes on hills and, um, it, you know,

[57:40] everything being white, the stucco being

[57:42] white, the siding being white is a

[57:43] little much. Uh, I would also maybe

[57:46] recommend, I like the idea of the sort

[57:47] of two materials to have a base. Uh, the

[57:50] stucco I think could even go darker than

[57:52] the main house material. So provides

[57:54] something that not only looks a little

[57:56] different from a base but also is a

[57:58] different color.

[58:01] Uh and I think those we just check

[58:08] there also the black stained fence.

[58:11] I'm torn. I'm not sure that's in keeping

[58:13] with kind of that street front, but I'd

[58:16] also like to hear my colleagues opinion

[58:17] on that. Um I get it. it kind of it's

[58:20] trying to tie into this sort of call it

[58:23] lack for a lack of a better term

[58:24] farmhouse look um you know throughout

[58:27] the project but not sure how I feel

[58:30] about that. So those are my comments.

[58:32] >> Is there a particular shade or color you

[58:34] would

[58:35] >> I probably just you know look for it to

[58:37] be a a more natural color a brown

[58:39] something that just fades away versus

[58:41] painted black. That would be my problem

[58:43] probably my recommendation.

[58:45] >> Thank you.

[58:47] >> You want to go?

[58:48] >> Um sure.

[58:50] I

[58:52] for the uh pool equipment that is at the

[58:55] front yard set back five feet from the

[58:57] property line. Um normally that would

[59:01] not be allowed uh or encouraged, but I

[59:04] could see a variance for that in this

[59:07] situation because it's Sir Francis

[59:09] Drake. It's a six- foot tall fence. um

[59:14] is it and if it's enclosed in something

[59:17] that's soundproofing it some um I I

[59:21] could support a variance for that um

[59:24] based on the

[59:26] uh layout of the house and the

[59:28] topography and um the the shape of the

[59:32] lot and mostly just that it's on Sir

[59:35] Francis Drake uh for the

[59:40] Yeah, I looked through all the changes

[59:42] to the windows and

[59:45] seemed like most of the additional

[59:48] windows were down at the lowest level.

[59:50] So, not really a huge private privacy

[59:52] concern. Um, I saw on that third floor

[59:57] front balcony, you guys added a screen

[1:00:00] and the direction that's towards Bev's

[1:00:03] uh property. So, that's an improvement.

[1:00:08] Um, but I think the main Oh, and then

[1:00:11] the the patio at the lower lowest

[1:00:16] yard level. Um,

[1:00:21] yeah, I mean, even the new 10-ft rule

[1:00:23] that we're starting soon is 10 ft and

[1:00:26] that's like just all the way up to the

[1:00:28] property line. So, I guess I would agree

[1:00:30] with Mark that, you know, maybe consider

[1:00:32] pulling it pulling it back five feet um

[1:00:36] for those lower pavers.

[1:00:40] And

[1:00:42] uh the I think the the main thing that

[1:00:45] was concerning to me, I went to the site

[1:00:46] right before coming here and it was

[1:00:48] already locked. Um, so unfortunately I

[1:00:52] reviewed it by sticking my phone up over

[1:00:55] the fence and taking some photos and I

[1:00:58] didn't have time to kind of go up that

[1:01:00] road that goes up behind the property to

[1:01:03] see it from that perspective. But with

[1:01:06] what I saw, it's

[1:01:10] if I guess the the big concern would be

[1:01:14] if that

[1:01:15] roof spa or patio um

[1:01:19] if the roof space the flat roof the new

[1:01:21] flat roof that's under a different

[1:01:23] permit is occupiable that is like

[1:01:25] looming over the neighbor's yard right

[1:01:28] touching the property line that would

[1:01:29] never be allowed. So just to ensure

[1:01:32] there's a way that this can be

[1:01:34] controlled. So it is not occupiable

[1:01:36] space. Um that [clears throat] would be

[1:01:39] the main thing that I'm concerned with.

[1:01:42] Um in terms of the materials,

[1:01:48] the design guidelines do encourage more

[1:01:52] natural colored materials, but there's

[1:01:54] definitely white houses in town. So I

[1:01:57] mean,

[1:02:00] you know, it's a dark area. Uh I don't

[1:02:03] know how visible it is from the street.

[1:02:07] I don't feel strongly either way on

[1:02:09] that. So thanks.

[1:02:12] >> Okay. I'll try to address uh some of the

[1:02:15] comments my colleagues have already

[1:02:16] made. Um as far as the patio is

[1:02:19] concerned and that variance, I also

[1:02:21] agree that it should be pulled back. Uh

[1:02:24] it's existing but it's a new use. So, I

[1:02:27] would think pulling it back five feet

[1:02:29] and uh including some nice planting

[1:02:32] there, as Mark suggested, would be an

[1:02:33] excellent idea. Um, regarding the pool

[1:02:37] equipment, I I have one clarification

[1:02:39] question. How far is a proposed location

[1:02:42] from a neighbor's lot? Is it in the more

[1:02:46] in the center?

[1:02:57] Okay.

[1:03:01] » Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to make sure

[1:03:03] it wasn't like in the corner. Okay. Got

[1:03:04] it.

[1:03:05] >> Thank you. Um, yeah. So, I'm actually

[1:03:08] fine with it being close to the street

[1:03:10] only because it's Sir Francis Drake, but

[1:03:12] if it was literally any other street in

[1:03:14] town, I would say pull it next to the

[1:03:16] house. Um, I agree with Mark that I

[1:03:21] think the tone of the white should just

[1:03:23] be lowered. I think it would look nicer

[1:03:26] and I like his design suggestion of a

[1:03:29] somewhat darker base I think would be a

[1:03:31] good thing to explore. I think you'll be

[1:03:33] happier with the result because of it.

[1:03:36] Um, I also think the fence would be

[1:03:39] better a more natural color. Uh, even if

[1:03:43] it's painted brown or just actually

[1:03:45] natural wood, which will then just wear

[1:03:47] over time and it's easier to maintain

[1:03:49] because you don't have to repaint it

[1:03:50] after 3 to 10 years. Um, I also agree

[1:03:57] um that it's important that the potential deck never be a deck.

[1:04:04] And I understand that's not your

[1:04:05] intention. It's already permitted. It's

[1:04:08] already been built. So there's nothing

[1:04:10] the town can do about it. But it might

[1:04:11] be good to, as we discussed, put some

[1:04:14] kind of planting there. And then I don't

[1:04:17] know if the town council can even do

[1:04:18] this because it's already been permitted

[1:04:20] and exists. But maybe there could be

[1:04:22] something just spelled out that that is

[1:04:25] definitely not a deck as the project is

[1:04:28] approved and should never be used as a

[1:04:30] deck. And I don't mean the walkway part.

[1:04:32] I mean the part that they've said

[1:04:34] shouldn't be used as a deck because no

[1:04:36] one would want that looming over their

[1:04:37] house. And I know it's not your

[1:04:39] intention, but someday someone else

[1:04:41] might own it. So, it'd be great if the

[1:04:42] town council could uh somehow just call

[1:04:45] that out so everybody's their concerns

[1:04:48] are laid.

[1:04:49] And those are all of my comments. Oh, um

[1:04:53] I do like the overall project. I'm glad

[1:04:56] actually that Ross gets another ADU. And

[1:05:00] um yeah, that's it.

[1:05:02] >> Um just just to kind of show you the

[1:05:05] flat roof goes up to the property line.

[1:05:08] >> So that's why it's very important. I I

[1:05:09] agree. There should be something like

[1:05:11] called out that like

[1:05:12] >> Oh, planting to block it. Is that what

[1:05:14] you mean?

[1:05:14] >> Planting like next to the walkway like I

[1:05:16] thought on the roof

[1:05:17] >> like you know you could put like plant planters and get like you know

[1:05:21] >> Okay. Like if the planter is two feet

[1:05:24] tall, then you have like a four foot

[1:05:25] plant and then someone who's six feet is

[1:05:27] who's tall who's walking behind it

[1:05:29] doesn't look into their yard and they

[1:05:30] don't see the person walking on that

[1:05:32] walkway for the very few times that

[1:05:34] someone is walking there just no one

[1:05:36] sees it.

[1:05:37] >> Can can I just clarify that? Um, you

[1:05:39] were talking about like in San Francisco

[1:05:41] they call it like an AB005

[1:05:44] where you fill something out that says

[1:05:46] we will not build here or put a window

[1:05:49] here or you were just talking about the

[1:05:51] planters.

[1:05:52] >> Sorry, I was talking about two separate

[1:05:54] things. Yeah, exactly. One should be it

[1:05:56] would be great if the town council could

[1:05:57] figure something out or the town staff

[1:05:59] where it was just very clear that that

[1:06:01] was never going to be a deck.

[1:06:03] >> It would be a condition of approval.

[1:06:06] put in the conditions of

[1:06:07] >> the second thing that would be great

[1:06:08] that we talked about that's voluntary

[1:06:10] because it's already approved was if you

[1:06:12] just got some, you know, nice planters

[1:06:14] and put a little hedge so when someone's

[1:06:16] walking there's planting here and then

[1:06:18] nobody looks out into their house as

[1:06:20] they're using that walkway to access the

[1:06:22] backyard.

[1:06:23] >> Clear? Yep.

[1:06:24] >> Thanks.

[1:06:26] >> Okay, Joey, your turn. Okay. So, I'll

[1:06:29] start just with the pure design uh

[1:06:32] elements regarding the finishes and the

[1:06:36] color. I feel like it's too big of a

[1:06:38] building to be so white to I echo what

[1:06:42] my colleague said here about the base to

[1:06:46] really read as a base. I think it would

[1:06:47] be more successful if it were darker.

[1:06:50] Um, and to that end, it I think it would

[1:06:52] also be more successful if it had more

[1:06:56] texture than just being stucco. For

[1:06:59] example, considering making using the

[1:07:02] siding but running it vertically and

[1:07:05] painting it a different color, having it

[1:07:07] be darker than the main house. I think

[1:07:11] the white the white white everywhere is

[1:07:15] going to make that building just look

[1:07:17] enormous up on the hill. So, I think

[1:07:20] that would go a lot that would go quite

[1:07:22] far to mitigating the perceived mass.

[1:07:25] Um, I also think with a really white

[1:07:27] building and black um window sashes,

[1:07:32] it's so contrasting and you've got a lot

[1:07:36] of windows there. If you might knock

[1:07:39] down the contrast, I also think that the

[1:07:42] roof material is a little too light. You

[1:07:45] could go a shade darker because there's

[1:07:47] a lot of roof. You actually see a lot of

[1:07:50] roof. So those would be my suggestions

[1:07:53] just from a purely color point of view

[1:07:56] from finishes. I I don't have any

[1:07:58] problem with the pool equipment where

[1:08:00] it's showing specifically because it's

[1:08:03] on Sir Francis Drake and the noise it's

[1:08:05] already noisy and I think that's that's

[1:08:08] a perfectly fine place for it. I would

[1:08:11] pull the patio back and provide planting

[1:08:14] screen, just more green, not have the

[1:08:17] patio right up to the um to the uh to

[1:08:21] the property line. I also agree with my

[1:08:24] colleagues about

[1:08:26] some sort of way to uh ensure that that

[1:08:31] flat roof won't become a deck someday.

[1:08:33] Some way to do it legally. And uh

[1:08:39] what were the other issues we had

[1:08:40] discussed? Um

[1:08:43] I think that's it. That's really what I

[1:08:45] felt the most. It was just too big and

[1:08:48] too white because it's such a big

[1:08:50] building.

[1:08:52] >> Thank you.

[1:08:53] >> Okay.

[1:08:53] Uh thank you everybody for your

[1:08:55] time.

[1:08:57] Now we will move on to the next item.

[1:09:01] Um, Robera and Alex have some

[1:09:04] information for us.

[1:09:06] >> Um, so this is a continuation of the

[1:09:10] discussion

[1:09:12] to draft a pool and land landscape

[1:09:15] feature exception. Um, the process would

[1:09:18] basically have to be considered by the

[1:09:20] council, but it would streamline pools

[1:09:25] and landscape features that are at least

[1:09:27] a 10-ft step back from the property

[1:09:30] lines. Um, in our last meeting, there

[1:09:33] was a question about

[1:09:36] um, hillside lots and pools on hillside

[1:09:39] lots. So,

[1:09:42] what did we find, Alex? Based on what we

[1:09:44] found, they weren't necessarily

[1:09:47] pushing the pools closer to the um

[1:09:51] >> property line but there were some

[1:09:55] instances where

[1:09:58] it was closer than 10 ft

[1:10:02] >> like two, I think

[1:10:02] >> there were two. So the option there

[1:10:05] would be that this uh pool exception

[1:10:10] process would not apply to hillside lots

[1:10:13] and if they want a pool in the setback

[1:10:16] it would be the same. They are asking

[1:10:18] for a variance that would go before the

[1:10:20] ADR and then the council. Um a lot of

[1:10:24] the pools we're seeing though aren't

[1:10:27] necessarily in hillside lots and that

[1:10:30] this process would help them. Um, and so

[1:10:34] the next step of the process is really

[1:10:36] just kind of going through the draft and

[1:10:39] if there's any questions or anything

[1:10:41] that we're missing that we want to

[1:10:43] capture to do that now before we send it

[1:10:46] to the town attorney's office um for

[1:10:50] their legal review.

[1:10:53] >> I want to bring Mark up to speak because

[1:10:54] the three of us were here last month and

[1:10:57] made this comment about the hillside

[1:10:58] lot. So the the question was

[1:11:02] whether or not we're going to see we

[1:11:04] wouldn't see pools on a hillside which

[1:11:08] um might necessitate a large retaining

[1:11:10] wall at the let's say the downward edge

[1:11:13] of the pool and that would be we might

[1:11:17] not we might want to see those in lie of

[1:11:20] having them be administerially done

[1:11:23] because that could get it could

[1:11:26] exacerbate some conditions if it's

[1:11:28] within 10 ft. of a property line. So

[1:11:30] that was the discussion.

[1:11:31] >> Doesn't that need to come in front of

[1:11:32] the ADR if it has a big retaining wall?

[1:11:35] Does the retaining wall necessitate a

[1:11:38] variance or something else if it's

[1:11:39] higher than six

[1:11:41] >> anything over 48 in

[1:11:43] >> Yeah. So that it was a discussion we

[1:11:46] had. We weren't we didn't make a

[1:11:48] recommendation. We just we just asked.

[1:11:50] >> So I'm just just thinking out loud.

[1:11:53] Let's say something is exactly 10 feet

[1:11:55] from the property line and it's exactly

[1:11:58] 48 inches tall, the retaining wall,

[1:12:02] >> and you're downhill from it because

[1:12:05] that's

[1:12:06] >> if you're above it, you don't care,

[1:12:07] right?

[1:12:08] >> So, I'm just trying to envision that.

[1:12:09] So, 10 feet, you know, I'm here to that

[1:12:12] wall

[1:12:13] >> and then it's slightly above me. So,

[1:12:15] maybe like where that picture frame is

[1:12:17] and then on top of that there's a 4ft

[1:12:20] retaining wall and then a pool. So

[1:12:22] theoretically, it could almost be as

[1:12:25] close to me as that uh

[1:12:29] molding

[1:12:30] >> and then they put a railing on top

[1:12:32] >> and then a railing on top and there are

[1:12:33] people standing there and they're 10 ft

[1:12:36] from my fence. So yeah, I could see that

[1:12:38] being an issue when it's 10 ft and it's

[1:12:42] above you

[1:12:42] >> and it's a slope.

[1:12:44] So they're building

[1:12:45] that 48 in allowed

[1:12:47] >> Yeah.

[1:12:48] >> by right retaining wall. Yeah, that that

[1:12:51] makes sense. Try to envision that. It

[1:12:53] seems like it could be looming.

[1:12:54] >> Yeah, I think that this whole new

[1:12:58] program we're

[1:13:00] probably

[1:13:02] shouldain.

[1:13:04] >> Yeah, I'm okay with that exception as

[1:13:07] far as because we don't see that many

[1:13:09] coming for a hillside lot. So, that

[1:13:10] means we won't be overwhelmed by every

[1:13:13] pool in the setback. And then there's

[1:13:15] one other potential issue that that just

[1:13:19] made me think of. What if it's not a

[1:13:21] hillside lot? What if it's just a

[1:13:23] relatively normal lot, but it happens to

[1:13:24] just slope down at the end?

[1:13:26] >> Mhm.

[1:13:27] >> And then you could have this exact same

[1:13:28] situation

[1:13:29] >> because it's a 10ft slope.

[1:13:33] >> Yeah.

[1:13:36] >> Right. So theoretically there could be

[1:13:37] like a 1acre flat lot. Yeah. Yeah.

[1:13:39] >> And then just right above my fence, it

[1:13:42] slopes down 15 ft and build the pool at

[1:13:44] the end and like then I've got that same

[1:13:46] scenario even if it's not a hillside

[1:13:48] lot.

[1:13:49] >> So maybe

[1:13:50] the the issue is it shouldn't apply if

[1:13:56] there has to be a retaining wall built

[1:14:00] on the downward slope.

[1:14:03] Like then maybe it shouldn't be 10 feet.

[1:14:05] So, even if it's not a hillside lot,

[1:14:07] maybe it should just be on pools that

[1:14:10] require

[1:14:12] uh a retaining wall because they're

[1:14:14] built on a slope. If they're within 10

[1:14:18] ft of the property line, regardless of

[1:14:20] if it's a hillside lot or not, maybe

[1:14:23] that should not be allowed. I I I

[1:14:27] remember so there was one more piece of

[1:14:29] the conversation we did have is staff

[1:14:31] has the ability to look at something

[1:14:33] like this and say ah we're not

[1:14:35] comfortable with it because we're

[1:14:37] starting to see an unusual exception to

[1:14:40] this 10-foot rule and you can say I'd

[1:14:44] like that to go before the ADR. So we do

[1:14:46] have a sort of the staff has an out if

[1:14:48] you're starting to see something that

[1:14:49] gamifies the system so much that it

[1:14:51] creates a really bad scenario. I like

[1:14:54] the idea of the hillside lot because

[1:14:55] it's very succinct. It's very specific.

[1:14:57] It can be very like it's those lots.

[1:15:00] They don't qualify because when you

[1:15:01] start to get into like, well, if they

[1:15:03] got a little retaining wall, then it

[1:15:04] starts to be a little mushy.

[1:15:06] >> Or maybe and maybe even so the out that

[1:15:08] they have,

[1:15:10] >> which might be hard to do, but maybe

[1:15:12] there's good wording for that. If they

[1:15:14] have the out where something looks that

[1:15:16] you could say

[1:15:17] >> in cases

[1:15:18] >> such as retaining walls you could even

[1:15:20] call it out because otherwise at some

[1:15:23] point someone say well everyone's

[1:15:25] allowed 10 feet

[1:15:26] >> so we should be allowed 10 feet because

[1:15:28] our retaining wall is only 3 feet tall.

[1:15:30] >> So like you might even use that as an

[1:15:33] example

[1:15:34] >> uh for ways to maybe not just approve it

[1:15:39] by right. How do you guys think about

[1:15:42] what is your opinion on this particular

[1:15:45] issue?

[1:15:46] >> So, I'm very supportive and I want this

[1:15:49] to move forward. I am a little fearful

[1:15:52] that

[1:15:54] the two of us are going to get all the

[1:15:55] complaints, right? like why did you guys

[1:15:57] allow all these 10- foot away pools? And

[1:16:00] no one we no one ever told us our

[1:16:03] neighbor was going to build a pool 10

[1:16:04] feet away from us and if it's elevated

[1:16:08] or on a retaining wall and then maybe

[1:16:10] there could be privacy issues then

[1:16:12] they're like now they're they can look

[1:16:14] over to our house that gives me a little

[1:16:17] bit of pause. So I would want this to be

[1:16:21] as I guess strict as possible. Maybe for

[1:16:26] now it's really only for

[1:16:29] in ground or pools that don't require a

[1:16:33] retaining wall more than a certain

[1:16:35] height.

[1:16:36] >> I mean, I'm if if that works, Mark's

[1:16:38] suggestion, I think I'm fine with that.

[1:16:40] >> Something about the retaining wall

[1:16:41] height. Um because if your neighbor's

[1:16:45] lot is relatively flat, but happens to

[1:16:47] slope down just above you, like that

[1:16:49] unusual rare

[1:16:51] >> Yeah. circumstance.

[1:16:53] If the retaining wall was only a foot

[1:16:56] high, well then it's basically flat for

[1:17:00] the pool. But, you know, maybe you just

[1:17:02] say any retaining wall uh over

[1:17:06] >> 18 in 2T

[1:17:07] >> over 18 in and then they can always come

[1:17:10] in and get it approved and people can

[1:17:12] always say, "Oh, look. Well, yeah, it

[1:17:13] slopes down a little bit, but the

[1:17:15] neighbors above it because there's a

[1:17:17] creek or something like that. So, it

[1:17:19] doesn't matter.

[1:17:20] >> You can always

[1:17:21] approve it,

[1:17:22] >> but it's hard to deny it in the very

[1:17:26] unlikely and unusual cases where it

[1:17:29] would be looming over somebody's place.

[1:17:32] >> I'm I'm good with that.

[1:17:33] >> Okay.

[1:17:33] >> What do you think, Joey?

[1:17:34] >> So,

[1:17:35] >> yeah, I I'm comfortable with the

[1:17:38] retaining like if it requires a

[1:17:40] retaining wall, then that triggers you

[1:17:43] determining if it needs design review.

[1:17:45] Is that what we're saying?

[1:17:46] >> Any retaining wall? Yeah. Just

[1:17:48] >> Yes. If it requires a retaining wall,

[1:17:49] you need designer. You can

[1:17:50] >> And then if we do that, we're not going

[1:17:52] to say the hillside lot thing, right?

[1:17:56] Sometimes the like the opposite of what

[1:17:58] he's saying. You can have a hillside lot

[1:17:59] and it's still totally flat on one side

[1:18:02] like my yard.

[1:18:03] >> Oh, yeah.

[1:18:04] >> Yeah. I think that that's I think that's

[1:18:05] appropriate.

[1:18:05] >> I think that would cover Yeah. It would

[1:18:08] >> the you know concern of the unusual

[1:18:11] circumstance. Yeah. Right. Can can we

[1:18:12] talk about what we uh not that

[1:18:15] >> um

[1:18:17] we had a we had a set height for things

[1:18:20] that could be within this 10 foot or or

[1:18:22] within this special zone let's call it

[1:18:24] right between a building setback

[1:18:26] >> 20T to 10t

[1:18:28] >> well it was 40t to 10 ft right to 10t so

[1:18:31] in that zone we had said I think we had

[1:18:34] said 36 in because we were thinking a

[1:18:36] countertop right for like an outdoor

[1:18:38] kitchen.

[1:18:38] >> Yes. Um,

[1:18:39] >> I thought we said higher, but

[1:18:40] >> that's what I I I kind of want to know

[1:18:42] what we did say. I was scrolling through

[1:18:44] the draft and I can't remember.

[1:18:48] >> I thought it was 48.

[1:18:49] >> It might be. I don't know. Alex, can you

[1:18:52] find that in here?

[1:18:53] >> Oh, yeah. There it is.

[1:18:54] >> Yeah. Right.

[1:18:55] >> The following landscape features shall

[1:18:57] not exceed a maximum height of 4 feet

[1:19:00] measured from the finished grade. Go

[1:19:01] down a little bit, Alex.

[1:19:03] >> Okay.

[1:19:03] >> And that's an outdoor kitchen, an

[1:19:05] outdoor fireplace, and the built-in

[1:19:07] seating. So if you have any of those

[1:19:10] >> four feet instead of six feet.

[1:19:12] >> Yes, I'll tell we'll tell him.

[1:19:14] >> But there's that there was that other

[1:19:16] piece that was

[1:19:18] >> right. So they would drop

[1:19:20] >> they would be from

[1:19:22] >> but we're giving them a variance like

[1:19:24] we're not approving it based on a future

[1:19:27] code change. We're giving them a

[1:19:29] variance based on the fact that that's

[1:19:31] happening.

[1:19:32] >> That is correct. But when we think about

[1:19:33] that, so what Joey just said, this term

[1:19:37] says finish grade.

[1:19:38] >> So when they built a deck, finished

[1:19:40] grade,

[1:19:40] >> which one is the finished grade in that

[1:19:43] scenario? Is it the patio or is it the

[1:19:45] actual grade at 2 foot6 below that?

[1:19:48] >> The patio.

[1:19:49] >> So the patio, why isn't it the grade?

[1:19:51] >> But that's perfect because that's

[1:19:52] actually what we told him. We told him

[1:19:54] that it had it could be six feet

[1:19:57] including the two feet below the patio.

[1:20:00] So, which meant 4T above the finished

[1:20:03] grade. So, we actually did end up here,

[1:20:05] which was correct. Do we like that? Do

[1:20:07] we like No, I follow you. I think you're

[1:20:09] correct. It's 2 foot six

[1:20:11] >> because wherever the grade is like, you

[1:20:13] know. So, so I'm on my deck.

[1:20:14] >> It's a wall

[1:20:16] >> 11 ft away from the property line and

[1:20:18] I'm standing here. I'm 6 feet.

[1:20:21] >> If I got something four feet tall,

[1:20:23] >> it doesn't affect

[1:20:25] like it doesn't matter. This is the

[1:20:27] green. This is the patio. So, it's like

[1:20:30] I'm standing I don't know what this is.

[1:20:31] Okay.

[1:20:31] >> And most of the retain

[1:20:34] >> this one here.

[1:20:35] >> I think it's the view from it's the

[1:20:37] neighbor's view at now this thing is 10

[1:20:40] ft from the from the fence. This is the

[1:20:41] fence up from

[1:20:44] allow that deck.

[1:20:47] >> Well, it's not a deck though. I think

[1:20:49] it's just like a

[1:20:50] >> It's a It's a retaining wall.

[1:20:52] >> We would have to allow that patio to be

[1:20:54] built if it was four feet tall.

[1:20:56] Actually,

[1:20:57] this whole thing would not

[1:21:01] >> come to us.

[1:21:10] » That's right.

[1:21:13] >> Is a retaining wall.

[1:21:16] >> So, this wouldn't Oh, Joey, your mic.

[1:21:19] >> Whole thing has gotten jacked up. Yeah,

[1:21:23] >> they conveniently didn't give us a

[1:21:24] section of the pool.

[1:21:26] >> It it the whole thing has risen to the

[1:21:29] level of the house.

[1:21:31] >> Okay. Right.

[1:21:31] >> And the whole

[1:21:33] >> land sloped away. So with our new

[1:21:36] >> regulations that we're speaking of, this

[1:21:39] would not have qualified for the 10 foot

[1:21:42] deal

[1:21:43] >> because that what is

[1:21:44] >> over 18 in. It's 32.

[1:21:47] >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So,

[1:21:49] uh,

[1:21:50] >> the pool wouldn't have worked,

[1:21:52] >> but the and neither would the

[1:21:55] >> patio and none of it would have worked

[1:21:58] >> in the new our new plan.

[1:22:00] >> So, so let's just clarify that the

[1:22:02] retaining wall for a pool is different

[1:22:04] than a retaining wall for that patio

[1:22:05] space where the barbecue in is, right?

[1:22:08] >> It's still 10 ft from the setback line

[1:22:10] and it's over 18 in. The retaining wall

[1:22:13] is bigger than 18 in. So therefore they

[1:22:16] wouldn't be allowed to have this deal.

[1:22:18] >> Yeah. Because Steven was very uh clear

[1:22:20] in his suggestion, which is a good one,

[1:22:22] of limiting things to the 18 in

[1:22:24] >> 18 in above

[1:22:25] >> grade.

[1:22:26] >> Great.

[1:22:26] >> Yeah. Otherwise, the 10 foot thing

[1:22:28] otherwise you're going back to 40 ft and

[1:22:30] >> so they're 26. It should have been if it

[1:22:32] was 18. We're okay with that. It would

[1:22:36] have been fine at the barbecue area if

[1:22:38] it was 18 in of a retaining wall and

[1:22:40] then a 4ft barbecue.

[1:22:42] >> Yes.

[1:22:44] >> Exactly. because we're still saying

[1:22:45] finish grade isn't isn't the ground,

[1:22:48] it's the new patio.

[1:22:53] » No, I think we're saying it's the two

[1:22:55] different things here.

[1:22:56] >> This is what I'm Yeah. So, let's

[1:22:58] >> two different things. We're we're saying

[1:23:00] this deal doesn't even pertain to

[1:23:02] anybody that's got to build a retaining

[1:23:04] wall bigger than 18 in.

[1:23:07] So number one, this you don't get this

[1:23:10] 10 foot

[1:23:11] >> okay

[1:23:12] >> leniency if you must build a retaining

[1:23:15] wall bigger than 18 in

[1:23:17] >> and we just came up with the 18 inches

[1:23:18] now we just said that okay sober

[1:23:21] >> I think that was already part of it like

[1:23:23] >> we had something above we did have

[1:23:25] something in here above

[1:23:27] >> already for decks and patios

[1:23:29] >> right decks and patios okay

[1:23:30] >> was it 18 in I think that's what

[1:23:33] >> I I I

[1:23:34] >> it's number two the pool decks pool

[1:23:36] decks not exceeding 18 inches in height.

[1:23:39] >> Patios, fireplace.

[1:23:41] >> Yep.

[1:23:42] >> Okay. So, we had that.

[1:23:43] >> Okay. So, that makes So,

[1:23:45] >> that's all good.

[1:23:46] >> He got away with lots of stuff in some

[1:23:48] ways, shape, or form because that should

[1:23:49] the 2 foot six should be 18 in.

[1:23:51] >> Mhm.

[1:23:52] >> And the retaining wall at the pool

[1:23:54] wouldn't be allowed unless we it came

[1:23:57] here and we gave it a variance.

[1:23:58] >> But it did come here and we were okay

[1:24:00] with it.

[1:24:00] >> Yeah. Yeah. But you're right. that would

[1:24:02] not be just allowed by right uh three

[1:24:04] months from now if everything gets

[1:24:05] approved.

[1:24:06] >> Right. So council

[1:24:07] >> to clarify Roberto we were saying that

[1:24:10] no

[1:24:12] retaining walls associated with pools

[1:24:15] >> fall into this

[1:24:16] >> but is there an 18 in

[1:24:19] >> that's why I was wondering.

[1:24:20] >> Yeah we just do the 18 in keep

[1:24:22] >> okay keeping consistent.

[1:24:23] >> So keeping the patios and pool retaining

[1:24:26] at 18 in max.

[1:24:27] >> Yeah.

[1:24:28] >> Call it a day. Okay. Well, and and we

[1:24:30] sort of have that with the pool decks

[1:24:31] not exceeding 18 in.

[1:24:32] >> Yeah.

[1:24:33] Yeah.

[1:24:34] >> And then you get 48, right? So that's

[1:24:36] >> on top of the 18 or 48 from

[1:24:40] >> I think you get it on top of finish

[1:24:41] grade.

[1:24:42] >> Yeah. Finish grade becomes the pool

[1:24:44] deck.

[1:24:46] >> What do you think of making that 36 from

[1:24:49] finish grade if you have an 18 inch

[1:24:53] jackup? Or you can have 48 if you need.

[1:24:57] No. Because think about it.

[1:24:59] >> Yeah. Yeah. You then you're getting plus

[1:25:02] 48 is a lot.

[1:25:03] >> Yeah. I'm okay with that.

[1:25:05] >> Yeah. I think that actually is good.

[1:25:06] >> You you get 48 either from finish grade

[1:25:10] or you get 48US 18. Like you're saying

[1:25:14] 36 from finished grade. If it's so

[1:25:16] you're saying 48 in from

[1:25:20] >> grade is really

[1:25:22] >> 36 inches from an 18inch raised patio or

[1:25:26] >> which we don't have to qualify if we if

[1:25:28] we qualify it as above finish grade

[1:25:31] >> not

[1:25:33] that's the definition of finished grade

[1:25:35] here in our code. I don't know if it's

[1:25:38] the new surface you've created or the I

[1:25:40] always thought it was the the soil,

[1:25:43] >> right? Can can it

[1:25:44] >> unconstructed? Can it say over existing

[1:25:47] grade?

[1:25:48] >> Finish grade.

[1:25:48] >> Okay, so grade. So this should be

[1:25:51] >> 48 inches above grade.

[1:25:52] >> Above grade is what you get. If you go

[1:25:55] to a finished grade that's

[1:25:57] >> 18 in

[1:25:59] >> or less above grade, then you get a 30.

[1:26:04] I mean, or should

[1:26:06] >> I don't think you have to say the second

[1:26:07] one at all.

[1:26:08] >> You just have 48 inches from grade

[1:26:10] >> and just to clarify so it's

[1:26:14] >> easier for people to understand and you

[1:26:17] don't get in these arguments in future

[1:26:19] years. I I think it could be worded as

[1:26:21] 48 in above grade,

[1:26:24] not finished grade to clarify that it's

[1:26:28] grade not finished.

[1:26:29] >> I think that's fine. Yeah. Because

[1:26:31] otherwise people well they'll then be

[1:26:33] having this argument and like well we

[1:26:34] thought this and that way it's just very

[1:26:36] clear.

[1:26:37] >> I think that's clear.

[1:26:38] >> Yeah.

[1:26:38] >> So if you're building on grade you get

[1:26:40] 48 in. If you've raised it 18 in then

[1:26:44] you get 36.

[1:26:46] >> What if somebody else raised it and you

[1:26:48] buy the house and move in then what is

[1:26:51] existing grade?

[1:26:55] >> You know what I mean?

[1:26:55] >> Whatever the grade is at the end. It's I

[1:26:58] wouldn't say it's it's not a to existing

[1:27:00] grade. It's too grade

[1:27:02] >> great.

[1:27:02] >> So if they have they could burm it up.

[1:27:05] I'm sure there's other tricks that

[1:27:06] people will try to do.

[1:27:09] >> I'm guessing.

[1:27:11] >> But is that good? Do you have that?

[1:27:13] >> Yes.

[1:27:13] >> Okay, great. And that's I think that's

[1:27:15] easier then and we'll put less pressure

[1:27:17] on you going forward which is what we

[1:27:20] want to do also.

[1:27:23] » Okay. And the trellis's comment I made

[1:27:25] last week, did we incorporate that in

[1:27:27] there? Can we get I want to make sure

[1:27:28] that I

[1:27:30] >> just wherever it's appropriate to use

[1:27:32] trellis as an example of something that

[1:27:33] can't go in this special zone.

[1:27:36] >> Yeah, I don't think we have trellises as

[1:27:38] part of landscape structures.

[1:27:41] >> That needs to go through.

[1:27:43] >> However you read it, if someone apply

[1:27:45] like I want to build a 10-ft trellis in

[1:27:48] this thing, you know, 10 foot away from

[1:27:50] the sideyard setback. I want to make

[1:27:51] sure that that's clear. You can't get

[1:27:53] that in this special exception.

[1:27:55] >> Well, I think the height does that

[1:27:56] anyway.

[1:27:58] Yeah, it was some of the language in the

[1:28:00] document that made me think that troll's

[1:28:03] fall as an exception. I just want to

[1:28:05] make sure it was clear.

[1:28:06] >> No, this is our definition for landscape

[1:28:07] futures produc

[1:28:13] » seats. Oh, I can zoom in

[1:28:14] >> 100%.

[1:28:15] >> So,

[1:28:16] >> that's why I want to make sure it was I

[1:28:17] think it was our I think it's the ex um

[1:28:21] I wanted to see trelluses as an example

[1:28:23] of landscape features

[1:28:26] >> in this. So we have decks, patios,

[1:28:29] fireplaces,

[1:28:32] seat walls. I would love to see

[1:28:33] trelluses.

[1:28:34] >> Just add the word trellis.

[1:28:35] >> Yeah.

[1:28:35] >> Wait, but that's what's allowed.

[1:28:37] >> That's this is what we consider

[1:28:40] landscape.

[1:28:41] >> Go ahead and do that.

[1:28:42] >> No. No.

[1:28:44] >> Yeah.

[1:28:44] >> Okay.

[1:28:48] » Um,

[1:28:48] >> so if they're applying for that 10 foot

[1:28:50] setback, then this is what they can

[1:28:52] have.

[1:28:52] >> As long as you've got that covered, that

[1:28:54] one.

[1:28:55] >> Yeah. then I'm fine.

[1:28:58] >> Um, and then I know we have kind of gone

[1:29:00] back and forth on the Oh, does it say it

[1:29:03] there? Pool equipment on the pool

[1:29:05] equipment thing. So, is the pool

[1:29:07] equipment going to be allowed to this

[1:29:09] new 10-ft setback?

[1:29:11] >> Uh, we crossed it out.

[1:29:13] >> I think not.

[1:29:14] >> No. Okay,

[1:29:15] >> we crossed

[1:29:16] >> Okay, that's I I don't care either way.

[1:29:18] I'm just trying to make sure I know in

[1:29:20] my head what we're

[1:29:22] >> And I think that's good because that's

[1:29:23] noisy eight hours a day. It's not like

[1:29:25] >> and there's already an exception.

[1:29:27] >> There's already exception. Can you

[1:29:28] remind us what that exception is?

[1:29:29] >> Yeah, pull equipment exception. They can

[1:29:31] put it in a setback is uh they have to

[1:29:33] meet the noise requirements which is 55

[1:29:35] dB. They have to get consent from the

[1:29:37] adjacent neighbor.

[1:29:38] >> Okay.

[1:29:40] >> Zone, but they have to have those

[1:29:42] >> and some other conditions. But those are

[1:29:44] the main

[1:29:44] >> the project that we just discussed the

[1:29:47] pool equipment.

[1:29:49] >> They don't need to do that because

[1:29:51] >> they they can't because that's just for

[1:29:53] sight and rear setbacks. exception is

[1:29:54] just for not for front setbacks.

[1:29:57] >> I see. Okay.

[1:29:58] >> Yeah.

[1:29:59] >> Okay.

[1:30:02] » Mhm.

[1:30:06] » So, they'll the pool equipment will show

[1:30:07] up in this special zone as long as they

[1:30:10] have it soundproofed and they get the

[1:30:12] neighbor approval

[1:30:14] >> for a minor exception. Yeah. They can

[1:30:16] apply. But if it's in the side or rear,

[1:30:18] if it's in the front, then

[1:30:20] >> either they um place it not in the

[1:30:23] setback or they're also going to have to

[1:30:25] apply for a minor exception.

[1:30:26] >> Okay.

[1:30:27] >> To put it in the rear or side front is

[1:30:30] always a variance.

[1:30:31] >> And is the minor exception just what you

[1:30:34] discussed is what they have to do. They

[1:30:36] don't come here for that or

[1:30:37] >> No, it's just we do notice it to the

[1:30:39] adjacent neighbor.

[1:30:40] >> Um but yeah, it doesn't really go just

[1:30:44] goes to like whoever touches the

[1:30:45] property. So maybe two neighbors, maybe

[1:30:48] three. Just depends.

[1:30:52] » Okay.

[1:30:54] Anything else?

[1:30:56] >> So are is the ADR ready to recommend

[1:30:59] this to the council or um do you want to

[1:31:02] see it again? What um is your

[1:31:05] recommendation?

[1:31:06] >> I would be ready.

[1:31:07] >> I am ready. I'm ready. Yes.

[1:31:08] >> So all four of us are ready to recommend

[1:31:10] it to the council. Okay. With that one

[1:31:12] change that

[1:31:13] >> with the change discuss.

[1:31:15] >> Yeah.

[1:31:16] Great.

[1:31:17] >> Great.

[1:31:17] >> Thank you.

[1:31:20] » Okay.

[1:31:21] I suggest we adjourn the meeting.

[1:31:23] [laughter]

[1:31:24] >> Second.

[1:31:24] >> Third. Ajourn.

June 16, 2026 ADR Meeting

Agenda

Transcript