This is the call to order for the
January 14th, 2026 meeting of the Town
of Woodside Planning Commission.
And we'll start with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Indivisible, liberty, justice for all.
» Roll call, please.
>> Chair Weaver,
>> present.
>> Commissioner Abfell,
>> present. Remotely.
>> Commissioner Gerko,
>> present.
>> Commissioner Tober,
>> present. Vice Chair Gar is currently
noted absent.
» Are there any changes to the agenda as
published?
>> There are no changes to the agenda and
there are no desk items.
>> Um given that we will open the public
comment period for items which are not
on tonight's planning commission agenda.
This would be an opportunity for members
of the public to speak of items of
interest to the planning commission or
the town of Woodside, but which are not
on tonight's agenda. This is
traditionally limited to at the
beginning of the meeting to up to five
speakers, up to three minutes each. Such
items cannot be acted upon, but can be
taken down by staff and agendaized at a
future meeting. Is there anyone here
tonight that wishes to speak on an item
not on tonight's agenda?
>> For those online, if you'd like to make
a comment, please use the raise hand
feature.
» And I see no raised hands.
Given that we will close the public
comment period
and move on to the consent calendar
which consists of item one and item two
which are the approval of the minutes
from the December 3rd and December and
December 17th planning commission
meetings.
Do any commissioners, staff, or members
of the public have any comments,
additions, deletions, or elaborations on
those minutes?
Since there seems to be no request for
that, the chair would entertain a motion
to approve items one and two on the
consent calendar.
» Second the motion.
Uh, could someone make the motion first?
>> So moved.
» Chair Weaver.
>> Yes.
>> Commissioner Abfel.
>> Yes.
>> Commissioner Gonerko.
>> Yes.
>> Commissioner Tober.
>> Yes.
>> All right. Um given that we will move to
the next item on our agenda, which is
the
um a formal design review and
consideration of a variance for a
property at 125 Farm Road.
And I believe that Sarah's presenting on
this Sarah and I'll just clarify this is
for designer view um a gradient
exception and a maximum resident size
exception.
» Okay, thank you.
So I will be introducing the project at
125 Farm Road. The project includes the
construction of a new single family main
residence with an attached garage as
well as a pool house, gym, ADU, swimming
pool, sport court, and other site
improvements on a vacant lot.
The project also includes a maximum
resident size exception and a grading
exception for site grading in excess of
1500 cubic yards.
Um the property is approximately 4.8
acres and it's in the SCP-5 zoning
district. It's located near um Portola
Road in the southern part of town. The
site has a gradual slope um away from
the road to the back of the property
where there is a town designated stream.
Uh the as I mentioned the property is
currently vacant and the new main
residence is proposed in uh the
approximate center of the property. So
that's um on the screen that's these
structures here.
There will also be an attached garage
here.
Um and there's uh several other
accessory structures that I mentioned.
So, there's a detached garage here. Uh,
this building over here is a detached
ADU.
And then over here, we have a pool
house,
gym, and then their proposed swimming
pool. And then on this side is a sports
court.
There is an existing driveway that will
be removed and a new driveway is
proposed in the northern corner of the
property. That's up here in this corner.
The new driveway will include an autoc
court and parking areas as well as uh
firetruck turnarounds and access roads.
Um, and it'll extend to that sort this
auto court here for the detached garage
and attached garage.
There are vehicle gates proposed. One
sort of at the entrance to the property
and then um two others kind of in this
auto court area.
Um there's a number of fences proposed
um with various designs and heights.
The height of the residence will be
approximately 29.7 ft
um at the highest point. It will be
mostly single story with a modest second
story. Uh the main residence and all
accessory structures design will be
similar in style and materials and the
structures are spread throughout the
property to create a lowlying profile
and to be harmonious with the natural
features of the site. And the material
will be vertical wood siding, stone
veneer, vertical wood slat screens, um
painted metal windows and doors and
slate tile roofs.
Um and there are two exceptions as part
of the project. The first is a maximum
resident size exception. Uh this is a
formula based on the size of the lot. So
in the SCP-5
zoning district, the maximum resident
size is 6,000 square ft.
However, the formula allows for
additional square footage depending on
the size of the lot. So, the proposed
main residence is about 7,400 square ft,
which does comply with the maximum that
they're allowed based on their lot size.
And the second exception is a grading
exception. So, the project includes
sight grading in excess of 1500 cubic
yards. The site grading is due largely
to the grading required for the
driveway. So the elevation of the road
is much higher than the elevation of
where the buildings are proposed. So
there's a sign significant amount of
grading um due to the existing terrain
and the access required onto the site.
Um engineering and planning staff have
reviewed the findings for approval of
the grading exception and recommend
approval
um as described in the draft resolution.
The project was reviewed by the ASRB in
July 2025
and the board was supportive of the site
planning, building design, community
character and landscape elements um and
did recommend approval of the project.
Uh the grading exception does require
approval by the planning commission.
Therefore, uh the entire project shall
be reviewed by the planning commission.
So, the planning commission may approve
the project as presented in the draft
resolution.
Um, you may make changes or add
conditions of approval or deny the
project. But that uh concludes my
presentation and I'm happy to answer any
questions. Thank you.
>> So, this is where we note for the record
that during the staff presentation that
Commissioner Gar entered the room.
>> Yes. And it's noted in the minutes.
>> Thank you.
So, do any of the commissioners have
questions for Sarah?
» Start with Alex.
>> I don't have any.
>> Okay.
» Um, yes.
>> Okay. Um, if you're Um, hold on a
second. Let's see if we're done with
staff first. Um um um Matt Gar, you have
any questions for Sarah?
Okay. Um Sarah, I'm 99% sure the ent
driveway entrance that is still on Farm
Road, right?
>> Yes, that's correct.
>> It's just at the other corner of the
property.
>> Yeah, I can pull up um a plan and show
you.
Um
so this is like their existing
conditions. So right now their driveway
kind of comes in here sort of center on
the property and they're proposing to
remove that and then move it to like
this corner. But yes, both still on um
Farm Road.
» Absent. Any further questions for Sarah?
We would invite the applicant or the
applicant's architect to come up and
speak. You don't have to do so, but
you're welcome to do so if you want to
say a few words or a lot of words.
Keep it brief hopefully.
» Good evening. Um, my name is Marcus. I'm
from Arcano Architecture with the
architects on this project. Oh,
>> how about that better?
>> Oh, sure.
>> Uh, my name is Marcus. I'm from Arcano
Architecture, the architects of the
project. Um, as Sarah introduced
fantastically in this, uh, we have a a
grading issue with the site. Uh the
levels from Farm Road down to the
largely flat portion of the site are
challenging. Uh so we've relocated the
driveway as mentioned uh partly due to
um the building position which were
limited on by the uh the fault line kind
of trench investigation that was
conducted and then also on septic um
requirements. So percolation tests uh to
kind of locate that septic requirement
at the top of the site. Uh so by
shifting the driveway to the far corner,
we've tried to lower uh the actual you
know grading um levels that we're
working with. So it's the it's the
lowest corner of the site as well as
maximize the septic um allowance that we
can we can work with uh by keeping most
of the project or most of the site as
natural as possible. So, that's kind of
why the why we've moved the driveway.
And then the building itself, uh, we've
positioned to limit the amount of cut
and fill that's going on. So, we've pushed it up into the hill because
we know we're going to have to add some,
uh, some some, you know, earth to get
our driveway working. So, the goal is to
have a almost net um, even cut and fill
on the site. That's where this grading
exception is kind of coming into play.
Uh, in terms of the building itself,
we're kind of we're working with
agricultural forms. So, a number of
volumes in a courtyard uh orientation
and then several outbuildings with kind
of barnlike uh structures to kind of uh
break up the the massing and then also
lean into the the surrounding buildings
or the the agricultural um
lay of the land so to speak. Uh
that's the kind of just to you know jump
on the back of Sarah's introduction
that's the the overall picture. Um, I'm
happy to go into more of the the details
of the project. We've also got on the
call, we've got landscape architects um
from Grand Studio and we have our civil
engineers at BKF uh for more detailed
questions that I might not have the
answers to.
Thank you.
Okay. Um,
now would be the time for the
commissioners to uh what put questions
uh to the applicant if they have any.
Yeah. Hi.
>> Hi.
>> So, I I have a question regarding the
tree removal of the 54 significant
trees. I'm sorry. I I probably am not
looking and it's in the plans. Uh the
tree removal page.
>> Yeah.
>> Do you know which one that might be?
>> Uh A2. We've got the existing plan and
then A3 uh is our proposed. So A3 is
probably our friendliest one there. Can
you repeat that, please?
>> A 03.
>> A Z3.
>> Yes.
>> I noticed that uh you're planning a lot
of bushes
um along the bottom section of Farm
Road.
>> Mhm.
» And how high are those
when mature?
I am going to let uh our friends at
ground studio pop in that one. Uh the
landscape architects on the page. Have
we got uh yeah Johnson will jump in
here?
So if you could help me which area has
the majority of trees removed?
>> Uh it will be along the the northern
boundary. So along along Farm Road,
there's a
>> That's right. So along Farm Road and the
common uh the common property line on
the north side as well as there's some
removals that need to take place on the
western side. A majority of the trees
that were removed almost in their
entirety. Uh you'll note uh along with
the corresponding arburous report are
trees that are in very poor health. And
actually since we have submitted for and
our our our initial set of documents,
there are several trees that have come
down on site of their own valition. Uh a
lot of this has to do with uh either
mistakes in planting trees long ago.
There's some African pines and there's
some eucalyptus trees on site that were
simply planted too closely together and
they've colonized um through the
agricultural use. Over time, as you
know, seeds get dispersed along fence
lines. And so, there's a very dense
collection of trees. And so, uh, as part
of our our urban forest best management
practices, we are doing we're proposing
some selective thinning of ailing trees.
Uh, and along with the on the tree
removal sheet, you can see the reasons
listed in the arborist report for those
trees coming down. So, yes, the number
is the number is what the number is. Um
but we feel very strongly that the moves
that we're making to protect the health
of the overall urban forest specifically
along common property lines um are meant
to enhance viewsheds rather than create
these you know uh unsightly barriers. So
to answer your question the largest
plants that we have uh currently planned
for common boundaries um would be in the
7 to9 foot range.
» So in yellow would be 7 to 9 foot range.
Oh, excuse me. Sorry. That those those
trees we're thinking of of those as
ornamental olive trees that we would
keep in the 12 to 15 foot range.
>> And those are uh on the hill obviously
down at the the toe of the slope as you
head um head towards the house.
» All right. Thanks.
>> Mhm. And just to clarify um for the
record while we have you here, it's 54
trees, not necessarily 54 significant
trees.
>> That's correct.
>> Okay.
» Uh gentleman was mentioning that uh
these a lot of them are unhealthy trees.
>> That's correct.
>> Be large and unhealthy. Significant and
unhealthy.
Um, Sage, how are um how are the trees counted in a report
like this?
You will have your number of trees and
then sometimes not all of them are
significant. So let's look at I think
what we're looking at uh AO2 I think.
» Yeah. So
AO2 will show the diameter size of the
different trees. Um
and they use the word protected or not
protected under significance. Uh so I
believe there will be some that for removal that
are not significant trees. There will be
a handful of those.
>> Right? Because where I get confused and
then you could perhaps educate me on
this is that
I would consider a significant tree in
the context of something that would
require a tree destruction permit from
the town if I were just doing
maintenance of my uh you know property.
>> You're exactly correct. So uh there's
three categories of significant trees.
Um there's a short list of fast growing
natives, a short list of slow growing
natives, and then there's everything
else. Um and so those three different
categories have different diameter size,
what is determined to be significant,
and you are correct that if you were not
deemed significant, it would not require
a tree destruction permit by the town.
So, there are a handful of trees here
that would not require a permit um if
they did not meet those size uh restrict
our size minimums.
Other questions for the applicant?
» Commissioner Appfell.
>> No, no questions from my end. Thank you.
Um
given that um if there are no further
questions for the applicant, we can go
ahead and move on to the public comment
period.
If there are members of the public
either in the room, which seems to be
the uh the empty set or anyone online
that would like to comment on this, now
would be your time to uh speak up.
And as a reminder for those online,
please use the raised hand feature if
you'd like to make a comment.
» There are no raised hands.
>> Given that we will close the public
comment period and move on to
commissioner deliberation.
And I invite Commissioner Gar to start.
Sure. Um, so I mean looking at it, I
guess a number of things, you know, as
far as the grading in particular, it's
basically
>> if you could speak into the microphone,
just make sure everyone on Zoom here is
listening. Is it There we go. Um,
the the volumes are relatively balanced,
so there's not a lot of inflow outflow.
So I think that's great. We talk
sometimes about, you know, lots of
trucks and traffic and road damage. So
this will all sort of be contained on
site, which seems good. Um I mean it
looks like the area that we're
traversing of the high slope is as far
as I understand it kind of condition
coming off of the road that was graded
previously. Uh so kind of going over
that seems fine. We also you know in
many cases have looked at 35% and found
it acceptable as well. So it seems
pretty uncontroversial. I mean I agree
on the ASRB
uh findings in general in the house is I
think quite tasteful. blends in like a
lot of square footage but looks kind of
it I sort of it fades in nicely. It's
kind of like almost like type of design
which which is kind of cool. And so from
my perspective it seems it seems pretty
reasonable.
» Richard, do you have any comments?
>> No negative comments this time.
Alex,
>> no I don't. I think I I follow the
staff's rationale on the formal design
review with regards to community
character and
site planning. I think the site planning
has some constraints
with regards to the building design and
the landscape elements. I think with
regards to the two exceptions
on resident size, I mean it's within the
>> Sorry again. you just speak into the
microphone. The people on Zoom can hear.
>> I think with regards to the exceptions
um it's with it's within the
um within the except with within the
exception
um and then under grading as Matt said,
I mean it's
it nets out. So good.
>> Commissioner,
>> I have nothing substantive to add to my
fellow commissioners. I'm uh very
supportive of the project.
>> I will just echo what Commissioner Afel
said. I'm supportive of the project and
can make the findings.
>> So given that we could entertain a
motion to approve the draft resolution.
>> So moved.
» And I second.
» Chair Weaver.
>> Yes.
>> Vice Chair Gar.
>> Yes. Commissioner Appfell,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Gonerko,
>> yes.
>> And Commissioner Tober,
>> yes.
>> All right,
that takes care of that item. And moving
on, Sage, do you have anything for us
tonight?
>> Um, first, I'll just note that there is
a 10-day appeal period. And if anyone
would like to appeal the decision of the
planning commission, uh, please see the
deputy uh, town clerk. Um, and
>> there is a fee involved for appealing.
>> Yes. Yes. Thank you. Um, and as far as
you do have two director's reports from
November and December in your packet.
Um, I'll just go to the December one.
Most notably, something that's kind of
this nice new inclusion into these
reports are what our housing numbers
are. And so we completed 2025. So, um,
we can note that the town had a total
of, let me double check on my head, uh,
11 single family dwellings, which is
actually a little bit higher than
typical. Typical or a little bit close
to 10 or under 10. Um, and then we had,
uh, 23 accessory dwelling units, hoping
for that 25, but we did get to 23. And,
um, that is also a fair number. Um we
have been kind of hovering around the 20
to 23 range over the last few years. Uh
if everyone may recall that our housing
element targeted 15 per year for ADUs.
Um so we've always uh for every year of
this housing element cycle, we have been
um well above that 15 number. So that's
good news for the town. Uh well that's
good news. There's still a ways to go um
through this cycle. we still need to uh
have varied types of housing throughout
the town. So town will continue to
pursue the different programs and
strategies within the housing element.
Um but it is nice to report that those
numbers for single family dwellings and
ADUs um are at or above where we would
expect them to be.
>> As are those the SFRs are all net new?
>> Uh they're I wouldn't say net new. um
the the HCD uh used to count finaled
permits and they would do a net
calculation. Um so demolished versus uh
what's new. Um they still have you track
the demolished units although that does
not come into play with regards to units
being counted towards your arena
numbers. And so and also the numbers uh
now are counted based on permits issued
as opposed to permits final. Um and so
there's a a bit of a different
methodology. So sometimes people will
gasp and maybe should at the larger uh
allocations distributed to the different
jurisdictions noting that there is some
slight changes in how units are counted
uh which would be to the benefit of
jurisdictions being able to just count
all new units.
>> So the 11 and 23 are issued
>> those are all permits issued in 2025.
Yep.
Um, and with that, um, yeah, I mean,
you'll see the valuations and permits
listed. You know, we continue to keep
busy. Uh, we've just received, um, I
don't know, four or five planning
applications in the last, uh, two to
three weeks, um, extending back to right
before the break. So, uh, there will
still be more stuff. and uh been working
with the town manager and town
attorney's office and we're focusing on
some goals um many of which will be come
before the planning commission this year
and uh some which will likely be in the
first quarter of this year
>> and then we will definitely be having
another meeting next week.
>> Um no.
>> Okay.
>> No, next week has been cancelled. The
next meeting is scheduled for February
4.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. So that concludes my report.
>> We don't have it.
>> Okay. Um
>> does that mean it may or may not happen?
>> It means uh we don't have any items
confirmed yet for the February 4th um
meeting. Um we'll know two Fridays. I
think two Fridays before then we'll have
it confirmed.
>> Did anyone else have anything for Sage
or staff?
>> Nothing for me.
>> Oh, sorry. Um yes, thank you. There's
just one more thing I'd like to report
um that some commissioners are probably
aware of. Um for districts, one in three
of our planning commissioners, so
Commissioner Gar and Commissioner
Appfell terms are expiring here in
February. And so those um the town is
accepting applications for those that
are due by February 4th. So this is for
districts one and three. Um
so uh if you know anyone in those
districts who would like to apply uh
there is a provision that the council
can point someone out of district with a
four-fifths vote. Um they probably
usually tend to defer to folks who are
in the districts but um if there are
none who apply within the districts uh
they would likely consider some other
alternatives.
» All right with that we will close
tonight's meeting. Thank you very much
everybody.