[0:04] February 18th, 2026 meeting of the Town
[0:08] of Woodside Planning Commission. We'll
[0:10] start with the pledge of allegiance.
[0:34] Roll call, please.
[0:36] >> Chair Weaver,
[0:37] >> present.
[0:38] >> Commissioner Appfell,
[0:39] >> present.
[0:40] >> Commissioner Gonerko,
[0:41] >> here.
[0:42] >> Commissioner Tober,
[0:42] >> present.
[0:43] >> Vice Chair Gar is noted absent.
[0:46] >> Are there any changes to the agenda as
[0:49] published?
[0:50] >> There are no changes to the agenda.
[0:52] However, you do have two desk items. Um
[0:54] they are both for item number uh two on
[0:57] the agenda 133 Marva Oaks. Um one is
[1:01] just a letter of support for the project
[1:03] that was included in the staff report
[1:05] packet as well as um some recommended
[1:10] condition changes from staff and um
[1:12] assistant planner uh KGO will address
[1:15] that during his presentation.
[1:19] So noted,
[1:23] we'll move on to our public comment
[1:25] period. This is a chance for members of
[1:27] the public to address the planning
[1:29] commission on items of interest to the
[1:32] town of Woodside and the planning
[1:34] commission, but which are not on
[1:37] tonight's agenda. Uh such public
[1:39] comments cannot be acted upon tonight or
[1:42] discussed at length but may be referred
[1:44] to staff or agendaized at a future
[1:47] meeting. Um such public comments are
[1:50] limited to five persons max at 3 minutes
[1:54] each. So is there anyone here tonight on
[1:57] Zoom or live that wants to speak on a
[2:00] topic not on tonight's agenda?
[2:09] Oh, if you're interested in speaking,
[2:12] please come up to the microphone. If you
[2:14] grab the red lever, you can adjust the
[2:16] microphone up and down.
[2:19] >> Sorry.
[2:24] » Like you can move the whole
[2:26] >> Can you hear me?
[2:27] >> I know. Oh, here we go. Sorry.
[2:30] >> All good.
[2:32] >> How's that? If it's good for you,
[2:35] >> it's good. Sorry, I'm not very good with
[2:38] speaking in front of a lot of people.
[2:40] I'm going to actually read um Sorry, need my glasses.
[2:49] Um
[2:52] to the chair, the vice chair online and
[2:55] the members of the planning commission.
[2:57] Good evening. My name is Terra Pachuan
[3:01] and I reside at 164 Baret Road. Um,
[3:06] thank you for volunteering your time and
[3:09] service to our town. My family and I
[3:11] truly appreciate it. Um, your your
[3:14] dedication to the community.
[3:16] I'm reading my comment to remain concise
[3:19] and precise. So, please bear with my
[3:21] reading. I respectfully request that my
[3:24] statement be recorded verbatim in the
[3:28] meeting minutes. I will also provide
[3:30] this written copy to Julie um the town
[3:33] clerk for the record. I'm here to raise
[3:37] concerns regarding the proposed new
[3:39] resident at 156 Bardet Road, my next
[3:44] door neighbor
[3:46] as the immediate adjacent property
[3:48] owner. um directly affected by the
[3:50] design and the sitting of the project.
[3:54] The conceptual plan that was submitted
[3:58] um and went on the review board on
[4:01] November 17
[4:03] uh last last year reflects unresolved
[4:06] setback compliant issues including
[4:10] approximately 10 uh foot encroachment
[4:13] into the required setback along our
[4:16] share property line. In addition, the
[4:19] proposal does not meet cutback
[4:22] requirements on the other three sides,
[4:25] especially the front
[4:27] due to the height of the new proposed
[4:30] structure. The project also proposed
[4:34] two tier retaining walls approximately
[4:38] in combination 8.5 ft tall
[4:42] along the frontage of Bed Road in order
[4:46] to create a raised building path for the
[4:49] new resident. So it's all can be in one
[4:51] level ground.
[4:55] Um while these objective code compliant
[4:57] matters remain unresolved, the project
[5:00] has advanced to formal design. I
[5:03] submitted an appeal of that advancement
[5:06] respectfully requesting the applicant
[5:09] first revise the plan to comply with the
[5:13] applicable setback requirements and
[5:16] other objective standard provisions of
[5:19] the uh municipal code and adjust the
[5:22] story poles accordingly. So the
[5:25] neighbors may meaningfully review a code
[5:29] compliant design before the project
[5:32] proceeds further and it has been not
[5:37] unanswered.
[5:39] In fact, my appeal was rejected.
[5:42] I'm providing the commission with I'm
[5:45] going to provide you guys with a copy of
[5:47] my appeal. Um, I respectfully request
[5:51] that this objective compliant issue be
[5:53] addressed and resolved prior to any
[5:56] advancement of the project to formal
[5:58] design review.
[5:59] >> Thank you very much for your comments.
[6:02] Um,
[6:04] at this point I might ask Sage to step
[6:08] in and address some of the
[6:11] administrative issues. um um one of
[6:15] which is being at what stage is this
[6:17] particular project at?
[6:18] >> So the project uh has was submitted for
[6:21] conceptual design review and so that's
[6:24] the beginning part of the design review
[6:25] process. um that went to the ASRB as the
[6:29] speaker mentioned um at that time the
[6:32] ASRB did not have significant concerns
[6:35] with the general design of the project
[6:37] and forward it to formal design review
[6:40] and what the speaker has mentioned is
[6:41] that um there are some areas where there
[6:45] need to be corrections regarding
[6:46] setbacks. Um they're not significant
[6:49] issues. It's quite common at the
[6:51] conceptual stage where everything is not
[6:53] 100% buttoned up. Um that's always been
[6:56] the intent of the concept review. Uh we
[6:58] actually don't even require a lot of
[7:00] information that would um uh be a allow
[7:05] us to verify 100% zoning compliance. Um
[7:08] so with this project as it progresses
[7:11] through the design review um process uh
[7:15] they will have to be 100% zoning
[7:17] compliant uh when they submit their
[7:19] formal design review materials. if for
[7:22] some reason they're making changes that
[7:25] would provide significant design
[7:26] changes, they would have to go back to
[7:28] the ASRB for further review. Um, we have
[7:31] met with the applicant. Um, there's a
[7:34] couple they're going to do a minor shift
[7:36] in where the building location, kind of
[7:38] turn it a little bit. They're doing some
[7:40] minor adjustments to the roof line and
[7:42] it looks like they'll be able to um they
[7:45] understand the issues that they have to
[7:47] meet in terms of heights and setbacks.
[7:50] uh and they will have to address those
[7:52] items. Um given that the conceptual
[7:55] design review is just the beginning part
[7:57] of the design review process, that
[7:59] process isn't complete yet. Um so no
[8:01] action to approve or deny the project at
[8:04] the concept stage uh is is done and so
[8:08] therefore there's no action to appeal.
[8:10] Um so the speaker was notified um that
[8:14] we couldn't process the appeal and we
[8:17] note the concerns that are expressed. Um
[8:19] we have also offered to we will continue
[8:22] to make sure that she's contacted um
[8:26] when the formal design review materials
[8:28] are submitted. Um she can come down and
[8:30] meet with us. We can go through those
[8:31] materials in details. Um and any action
[8:34] that's taken uh to complete the design
[8:36] review process to approve or deny the
[8:38] design um could be appealed at that
[8:40] time. And so um it's been uh she met
[8:46] with myself, town manager, um town
[8:48] manager, town attorney, myself, we've
[8:50] met several different times. Um it's
[8:53] clearly consistent town practice. We've
[8:56] never had an appeal um processed for
[8:59] conceptual design review. So at this
[9:01] particular stage, the design review
[9:03] process is still ongoing and once we get
[9:06] those detailed materials, they will have
[9:08] to be 100% zoning compliant. Otherwise,
[9:11] they can apply for an exception or
[9:13] variance which would become before the
[9:14] planning commission. Um, and speaking
[9:16] with the applicant, they have no
[9:17] intention to request any type of
[9:19] exception that requires planning
[9:21] commission review. Um, so they should
[9:23] address these things as they've prevent
[9:25] presented to us in a draft form um just
[9:27] at a meeting. So, we don't have those
[9:29] copies, but um the there will be more
[9:32] opportunity to comment um and and
[9:35] provide any uh recourse on whatever
[9:38] decision is made at that time.
[9:40] >> Thank you very much, Sage. Ma'am, we
[9:42] hear your concerns. Um is there anyone
[9:46] else here tonight that wants to speak on
[9:49] an item not on tonight's agenda, either
[9:51] live or on Zoom?
[9:53] >> For those online, please use the raise
[9:54] hand feature if you'd like to make a
[9:55] comment.
[9:59] There are no raise hands online.
[10:01] >> If not, may I have just one more minute,
[10:03] please?
[10:03] >> Um, no, we need to move on to the agenda
[10:07] items. Um, uh, for the people that came
[10:10] here for the items that are on the
[10:12] agenda.
[10:13] >> Well, I I just have one question, right?
[10:15] Is that
[10:16] >> one question?
[10:16] >> Yeah. Um so because of 10 feet
[10:21] encroachment is not minor and because of
[10:25] that why does it get advancement to
[10:28] formal design review to me now
[10:31] >> the town has not granted anything to the
[10:34] applicant for that property so there's
[10:36] nothing to appeal I think that's the key
[10:38] issue right
[10:39] >> that's it and and the issue isn't a
[10:41] 10-ft difference it's it's when you have
[10:44] to apply this 10-ft difference and what
[10:46] the applicant is doing is lowering the
[10:48] height so they don't have that issue and
[10:50] they're slightly uh adjusting it. So
[10:52] they will have to be 100% zoning
[10:54] compliant and those design those will be
[10:58] presented once we get those materials
[10:59] >> and it's sort of in their interest to
[11:01] draw up their plans that they'll invest
[11:03] a lot of money in.
[11:04] >> In your ASRB agenda, it say that any
[11:08] decision made can be appealed.
[11:11] >> Well, I I'll pass this along. That's all
[11:13] I wanted to do. Thank you for your time.
[11:15] It can be appealed at an appropriate
[11:17] time. Ma'am, so um
[11:21] were there any other public commenters
[11:24] online?
[11:25] >> No, there are no raised hands online.
[11:28] >> Okay, given that we will close the
[11:30] public comment period and move on to the
[11:32] consent calendar.
[11:39] and the consent calendar. Um, the one
[11:43] item on there is approval of the minutes
[11:45] from our January 14th meeting.
[11:49] Is there anyone here, staff or
[11:52] commission members, that would like to
[11:53] make a revision, elaboration, or changes
[11:56] to the minutes as provided in the uh
[12:00] meeting packet.
[12:03] The chair would entertain a motion to
[12:05] approve the minutes.
[12:06] >> So moved.
[12:08] Second, please
[12:11] second the motion.
[12:15] >> Chair Weaver.
[12:16] >> Yes.
[12:16] >> Commissioner Appfell.
[12:18] >> Yes.
[12:19] >> Commissioner Gonco.
[12:20] >> Yes.
[12:21] >> Commissioner Tober.
[12:22] >> Yes.
[12:24] >> Okay. We will move on to the main item
[12:27] of the evening, which is
[12:31] a discussion on a property at 133 Marva
[12:34] Oaks Drive, which involves the granting
[12:38] of a variance for a swimming pool
[12:42] in uh in a setback. And I believe that
[12:45] KGO is presenting the staff report. And
[12:48] I will we will listen to you, Ko.
[12:57] Hello and thank you. I will be
[12:59] introducing the project at 133 Morbida
[13:01] Oaks Drive for planning commission
[13:03] review. For this planning commission
[13:05] review, the applicant requests approval
[13:07] of a variance to the setback
[13:09] requirements for the construction of a
[13:12] new swimming pool that would encroach
[13:14] into the required setback side setback.
[13:17] This application is categorically exempt
[13:19] under the California Environmental
[13:21] Quality Act uh SQA guidelines 153003
[13:26] section E uh which is new construction
[13:29] of small structures including swimming
[13:31] pools. And so uh the planning director
[13:34] mentioned earlier uh there are two desk
[13:36] items for tonight's hearing uh both
[13:38] pertaining to this project. Uh one is
[13:41] from an adjacent neighbor uh reiterating
[13:43] his support for the project and is uh
[13:46] attachment uh number six is the first
[13:48] letter uh that that adjacent neighbor uh
[13:51] originally sent um dated December 18th,
[13:54] 2025
[13:55] uh expressing support uh for this
[13:57] variance request. And the other desk
[14:00] item tonight is amended language for the
[14:03] resolution in particular condition one
[14:07] uh F.
[14:09] And this relates to the uh existing hot
[14:12] tub, sauna, and deck area that is shown
[14:14] near the near the um uh center portion
[14:18] of the site. And uh just to give a brief
[14:22] background, um since the completion of
[14:24] the main residence, no recent permits
[14:25] appear to have been issued for those
[14:27] site improvements. Um originally the
[14:30] staff has recommended for uh removal of
[14:34] these unpermitted items. Uh however um
[14:37] with this amended language, should the
[14:39] homeowner decide to pursue the process
[14:41] of getting these items permitted, um
[14:43] town staff will be able to work with the
[14:45] homeowner/applicant at that stage.
[14:54] So this is uh the aerial photograph of
[14:57] 133 Marbor Oaks. The subject site is
[15:00] approximately 3.73 acres and is in the
[15:04] RR zoning district. And so the basic
[15:06] setbacks for this lot is 50 ft for all
[15:09] sides. Uh the lot has roughly six sides
[15:12] and extends significantly to the west
[15:14] and north towards the Rayundo roadway on
[15:16] the northern side. The overall site is
[15:19] relatively flat on the southwestern
[15:21] portion with a steep decline from the
[15:23] southern to the northern side. Uh the
[15:26] site contains an existing two-story
[15:28] single family residence with an attached
[15:30] garage and existing hardscape that are
[15:33] located on a relatively flat
[15:34] southwestern portion of the site. And
[15:37] the project site also includes easements
[15:39] uh for public utilities along the
[15:41] western and northern sides.
[15:46] It's a topographic survey for the
[15:48] project site.
[15:52] So the survey itself identifies areas of
[15:55] the site that contain slopes in excess
[15:57] of 35%
[15:59] mostly along the southern portion. Uh
[16:03] the side municipal code section 153 uh
[16:07] section subsection 415 does not allow
[16:10] for development on natural ground slopes
[16:12] that exceed 35%. Uh however, development
[16:16] will be allowed in man-made slopes in
[16:18] excess of 35% uh so long as prior to the
[16:22] slopes being man-made were also 35% or
[16:25] less. And so the applicant also
[16:27] submitted uh a geotechnical report uh
[16:29] certified by civil engineer indicating
[16:32] that the areas to be developed for the
[16:34] proposed pool uh were on slopes um that
[16:38] were man-made uh and prior to being
[16:40] man-made were of 35% or less.
[16:48] And this is the extent of the proposed
[16:51] uh location of the uh pool uh to be
[16:54] encroached into the side setback.
[16:58] And uh to give you a bit bit of a
[17:00] reference, uh there are existing uh
[17:02] permits um under separate review and
[17:07] under a separate permit uh particularly
[17:09] the ADU and the uh the lawn and the
[17:12] surrounding deck area around the pool.
[17:17] And so
[17:21] uh the pool
[17:29] The applicant is requesting approval of
[17:31] a variance um as mentioned earlier to
[17:33] locate a new swimming pool within the
[17:35] side setback and at its closest point
[17:37] from the property line it would be 14.83
[17:41] ft from the side property line.
[17:47] This is the uh proposed elevation
[17:49] section of the pool.
[17:53] The applicant has also provided uh
[17:55] renderings of the pool.
[18:01] And to your left are the uh the actual
[18:05] physical materials of the pool as well
[18:08] as a reference materials list for uh
[18:10] other items uh that are also uh under
[18:13] separate uh review uh such as the ADU
[18:17] and for the decks. And so for the pool
[18:21] uh they are um proposing uh wooden deck
[18:25] tiles for the exterior and pool coping
[18:28] uh with this uh darker shade color as
[18:30] you can see on the bottom right of this
[18:32] materials board.
[18:37] And so findings have been provided by
[18:39] the applicant. Uh the applicant is
[18:41] requesting a setback variance uh for
[18:44] with the following reasons uh listed
[18:46] below. And to quickly summarize, the
[18:48] applicant has stated that the design
[18:50] proposal and variance request is
[18:52] consistent with the zoning ordinance and
[18:54] that it avoids development in areas of
[18:56] the site that might result in erosion,
[18:58] earth movement and degradation of water
[19:00] quality. Thereby preserving the natural
[19:03] and scenic character of the town by
[19:05] retaining most of the property in its
[19:07] natural state. Also that the strict
[19:10] application application of the
[19:11] provisions of the zoning ordinance would
[19:14] result in uh requesting for a variance
[19:16] to develop in areas of the property that
[19:18] are heavily wooded and steep uh
[19:21] requiring significant retaining walls
[19:23] fill and tree destruction. therefore
[19:25] creating a greater environmental impact
[19:28] and also that the swimming pool would
[19:29] not be visible from the road and the
[19:32] proposed ADU under a separate permit
[19:34] would act as a visual and noise barrier
[19:37] and the tree screening that exists uh
[19:39] between the two properties would obscure
[19:42] much of the view um of the pool from the
[19:44] adjacent property.
[19:47] And so town staff has also uh prepared
[19:50] findings as well uh citing um elements
[19:54] from the Woodside general plan. Uh goal
[19:57] in particular goals open space 1.1
[20:02] uh conservation uh goal 1.1 and land use
[20:05] 1.2 two which are regulating land use
[20:08] and development to conserve open space
[20:11] uh limiting the intensity of development
[20:13] on steep hillsides and uh protecting
[20:16] lives and property.
[20:19] So that concludes my presentation. Staff
[20:21] is happy to answer any questions. Um the
[20:23] applicant has also uh directed story
[20:26] polls at least 10 days before the
[20:28] hearing date and the applicant is also
[20:30] here in attendance to answer any
[20:31] questions. Thank you.
[20:38] Alex, you got any questions for Keo?
[20:42] Richard?
[20:44] >> None for me.
[20:46] >> Uh, neither do I. Um,
[20:50] at that point, if the applicant wants to
[20:53] make a presentation, you are welcome to
[20:56] do so, although it is not required.
[21:04] I promise to keep it short and sweet.
[21:07] Um, unfortunately the applicant would
[21:10] have loved to been here to uh go over
[21:12] the project with you. He's off on a on a
[21:14] ski vacation in Colorado and regrets
[21:17] being here and but uh he's what he's
[21:20] looking for is he's trying to create a
[21:23] environment for his kids and his family
[21:25] for outdoor use of the space. The site,
[21:29] as you've gotten the explanation from
[21:31] KGO, is very constrained. Um, and there
[21:35] really isn't much areas where you can
[21:37] keep a swimming pool close to the house
[21:40] and and also be part of the, you know,
[21:43] the family environment. So, when we
[21:46] started designing all this, we we you
[21:48] know, we added in a there was an ADU
[21:50] that was part of the part of the program
[21:52] as well as a swimming pool. And because
[21:55] of the grade differential, there's a
[21:57] there's an area underneath the house
[21:59] that allows for uh pool
[22:02] functions and, you know, pool house type
[22:04] stuff. Um
[22:09] the neighbors have all looked at it and
[22:12] have approved. In fact, John's here. Um
[22:16] and uh he's the adjacent neighbor and
[22:19] you know, everybody's everybody likes
[22:21] the idea that we can tell. So, um, it's
[22:25] a very constrained site and we, you
[22:27] know, I think the findings are pretty
[22:28] clear in terms of what, uh, how it meets
[22:31] the requirements of the town of
[22:32] Woodside.
[22:34] There any questions? I We have, we have
[22:36] some more pictures, but it's basically
[22:37] the same as already what Keo showed. So,
[22:42] any questions?
[22:43] >> Do any commissioners have questions for
[22:45] the applicant?
[22:46] >> I have a couple. Um, thank you very
[22:49] much. I I was able to get site today, so
[22:51] I appreciate that I had a chance to look
[22:52] at it. Um, can you just um help me
[22:56] understand what what is down below in
[22:58] that large swale? Is that is that the
[23:01] sites owner's property or is that
[23:03] >> Yes.
[23:03] >> What does it what does it go up against?
[23:05] I'm just curious. I couldn't even tell.
[23:06] >> There's a swale. There's a there's a
[23:08] eerial stream that runs through that.
[23:10] So, you can see the kind of white
[23:11] section between the two.
[23:14] >> Um, so it's it's a it's really a big
[23:16] valley. Um, and you can see all of the
[23:19] all the 35% slopes
[23:22] above and some of the stuff on the right
[23:24] hand side of that are man-made
[23:28] report,
[23:29] >> but that goes down. And what does that
[23:30] abut against? What's on the
[23:33] >> There's another There's another house
[23:34] that there's other houses to the to the
[23:37] both above, below, and to the sides.
[23:39] >> Okay. I I couldn't even see the house
[23:40] below. That's why I was asking. Sorry, I
[23:43] wasn't trying to trip you up.
[23:44] >> Yeah. So, so that gives you a period of,
[23:45] you know, of what's of what's out there.
[23:48] >> Got it. Got it. Okay. Thanks for
[23:49] clarifying. And then my only other
[23:50] question, forgive me if this is seems
[23:53] presumptuous or or maybe aggressive, but
[23:55] I'm just curious, why why are why why
[23:57] are you not doing this as part of the AD
[23:59] why are they separate? Why is the ADUP
[24:01] separate from the pool? Was there any
[24:03] thought about doing it as one cohesive?
[24:04] >> Because we want to be able to start
[24:06] construction on the on the ADU this this
[24:08] spring.
[24:09] >> Okay. Okay. And there is and there's
[24:10] work there that needs to get done. And
[24:13] the variance process, you know, is going
[24:15] to take a little bit of time plus, you
[24:17] know, getting that stuff done. So, our
[24:18] hope here is to get this through the this variance process and
[24:24] then get it in for construction.
[24:26] >> Understood. Thanks for clarifying. I
[24:27] have no other questions.
[24:31] >> Richard, got any question?
[24:35] Alex?
[24:38] >> Okay. Um,
[24:39] >> thank you. If you got any other
[24:40] questions, let me know.
[24:41] >> I do not have any questions.
[24:42] >> Okay.
[24:43] >> In that case,
[24:46] we will open the public comment period
[24:49] on this variance hearing. So, if there
[24:52] are any members of the public that wish
[24:54] to address the planning commission
[24:57] regarding this uh uh potential variance,
[25:00] please come up to the mic or if you're
[25:02] on Zoom, raise your hand and speak up
[25:05] now.
[25:13] John, I know that you know how to move
[25:15] the microphone up and down the
[25:17] >> Been here before.
[25:18] >> You've been here before.
[25:25] » I'm John Hughes. I own the property to
[25:28] the uh north and west of the subject
[25:32] property. And uh I uh we first bought
[25:36] the land there in 2006. We built uh our
[25:41] home from 2006 to 2008.
[25:45] And um uh and as we were building our
[25:50] home, I personally I I like trees. So I
[25:57] personally made sure that we had a whole
[26:00] line of trees
[26:02] uh planted 17 years ago uh all along our
[26:08] uh um uh uh border with 133. We're in
[26:15] 117.
[26:16] 133 is immediately to the south uh west
[26:19] of us. Uh why did I do that? And is
[26:23] because the previous uh one of the the
[26:28] owner when we moved in uh was uh a uh
[26:32] older gentleman. He had a junkyard in
[26:36] his backyard. It was awful. He had three
[26:41] awful uh um uh trailers. of what uh uh
[26:46] the people lived in and that there was a
[26:49] constant I don't know you pick up people
[26:51] at one of the local bars, bring them
[26:52] they lived there. Oh, it was really
[26:55] awful. And I just the only thing we
[26:57] could do is uh patch the fence. So, make
[27:01] sure the fence was and then uh plant all
[27:04] these trees. Well, 17 years later, these
[27:08] trees have done what we wanted them to
[27:10] do and the property is now under uh
[27:14] competent ownership and we love it. That
[27:18] is just the way we want it. We can't see
[27:23] anything that's going on in that
[27:25] property from the upper deck of our
[27:28] house, which is generally where our uh
[27:31] living room and kitchen is. It's it's
[27:33] quite a bit above the so even when we
[27:36] look down on it we can't see. And uh
[27:40] immediately on our side of the fence is
[27:43] uh one of our vineyards. We have two
[27:45] vineyards, one in the north and one in
[27:47] the south. This is a south vineyard.
[27:49] There is nobody near this uh swimming
[27:52] pool within hundreds of feet who is who
[27:56] would ever be uh inconvenienced with it
[27:59] in a in the current setting. So, we uh
[28:02] strongly uh request that this uh setback
[28:07] be approved because at least we have
[28:11] only good things to say about our
[28:13] neighbors and about what he's doing.
[28:16] Second point I'd like to make, I was
[28:19] astounded to to read in the materials
[28:22] before coming here about the sauna and
[28:25] everything that uh was supposedly
[28:29] unpermitted. What I want to say is we
[28:32] never knew about it. We it was all
[28:36] blocked. It's so it even the the the
[28:39] sauna on that property is certainly from
[28:43] our perspective not any kind of
[28:46] impediment to the view to anything. We
[28:48] can't see it. So uh again we uh from our
[28:54] perspective we'd uh hope that uh this is
[28:58] resolved uh uh both the towns and the
[29:01] applicants uh uh um uh mutual uh
[29:06] interests. So thank you very much for
[29:09] your attention. Is there any question?
[29:10] Anybody have any question for me? I'd be
[29:13] glad to I have a quite a history with
[29:15] this house next door. Uh, so I've we've
[29:19] watched it for a long time.
[29:21] >> Does anyone have any questions for John
[29:23] since he is the neighbor who's
[29:27] on the property
[29:29] um affected by the setback?
[29:32] >> Okay.
[29:32] >> No questions.
[29:33] >> Okay.
[29:34] Thank you.
[29:35] >> Thank you, John.
[29:36] >> Is there anyone else here live in the
[29:38] room that wants to speak?
[29:41] Failing that. Is there anyone on Zoom
[29:43] that wants to speak?
[29:44] >> No, we have no raised hands online.
[29:49] If no one else in the room wants to
[29:52] speak, I will close the public comment
[29:54] period and we can move on to
[29:56] commissioner deliberation on this topic.
[30:00] Who wants to start?
[30:04] >> You're looking at me. Um well I'm
[30:06] persuaded by all all of the applicants
[30:09] uh findings uh specifically finding
[30:11] number two that rejecting this variance
[30:15] would force them down into an
[30:18] environmental
[30:20] hit I'll call it down at the bottom of
[30:21] that swale. This is clearly the best
[30:23] location for it. Um, I'm also quite
[30:26] pleased that the really the only
[30:28] neighbor affected not only wrote a
[30:31] letter but came tonight and spoke very
[30:32] eloquently about their support or his
[30:35] support of the project. So, I'm fully
[30:37] supportive. I see no issues.
[30:44] » Use the microphone, Alex.
[30:50] » There you go. Sage, I have a quick
[30:52] question. You have a desk item here when
[30:54] we arrived and and under the original
[30:57] packet,
[30:59] it addressed the unpermitted Anna and
[31:02] hot tub. And I think on the desk item
[31:04] that was here when I arrived, there's an
[31:07] alternative.
[31:10] And the alternative is to pass this and
[31:14] require the applicant to get the sauna
[31:19] and the hot tub permitted by the time
[31:22] this swimming pool is finally approved.
[31:24] Is that correct?
[31:25] >> That's correct. So, yes, it's it's just
[31:27] really clarifying the different options
[31:29] that the applicant has. They can either
[31:31] remove the work or they can pursue
[31:33] obtaining permits. From a planning
[31:35] perspective, location, paved area,
[31:39] things of that nature. It's unlikely
[31:41] there will be any significant issues
[31:43] from a planning perspective. We'll look
[31:44] at those details closer when the uh when
[31:47] if a permit submitted. And then they'll
[31:49] also work with the building department
[31:50] to make sure they comply with all those
[31:52] uh requirements for a permit. So, um the
[31:54] desk item that you have is simply
[31:57] clarifying the two different options
[31:58] that the applicant can pursue. And yes,
[32:01] they would do that um kind of uh uh
[32:05] >> parallel with with the swimming pool
[32:07] project.
[32:08] >> So, so I'm I'm persuaded. I mean, for
[32:12] the reasons that Matt mentioned, you
[32:14] know, this I've been to this site, it is
[32:17] severely constrained with slopes.
[32:20] the variance, you know, as a neighbor
[32:23] spoke, I mean, it's it's not an
[32:24] intrusion on the neighbor's property,
[32:26] but I just want to make sure that of the
[32:28] two options that we have, I am for the
[32:32] option of having this run in parallel,
[32:34] that is not delay this, but require the
[32:38] applicant to get the get the unpermitted
[32:40] structures permitted and hopefully it
[32:43] all by the time the final approval
[32:45] happens, it all happens at the same
[32:46] time. So that's that's the flavor of the
[32:49] motion that I am inclined to support.
[32:53] >> So you were in favor of the revised
[32:56] >> I was
[32:57] >> resolution as written or did you want
[33:00] tweaks to that?
[33:01] >> No, as written.
[33:02] >> Okay. Okay.
[33:03] >> In the desk in desk item number two.
[33:05] >> Okay.
[33:07] Richard,
[33:14] » I don't have anything to add either
[33:16] other than to echo what's been said
[33:18] before that this is a good example of
[33:23] neighbors cooperating.
[33:25] And I think that the Burmans are very
[33:27] lucky to have Mr. Hughes as a neighbor
[33:30] and and the fact he has no problem with
[33:33] this. Um, so it's always good policy to
[33:38] get along with your neighbors. So
[33:40] unless any other commissioner has a
[33:44] comment to make, I would the chair would
[33:47] entertain motions on this.
[33:52] » Go ahead.
[33:57] >> It is.
[34:00] So it is the So um the commissioner is
[34:03] asking for which flavor is it and it's
[34:07] the flavor that says alternatively the
[34:09] owner may pursue permit approval of the
[34:12] unpermitted development if the
[34:14] development complies with all permit
[34:16] requirements from all applicable
[34:17] agencies and obtains permit issuance
[34:20] prior to the start of construction of
[34:22] the swimming pool. And then it says, if
[34:25] the owner pursues permit approval of the
[34:27] unpermitted items listed in condition
[34:30] one, if those permits shall pass final
[34:35] inspection before or at the same time as
[34:37] the permits for the swimming pool. If
[34:39] the owner proposes to remove the
[34:41] unpermitted items, the unpermitted items
[34:43] shall be removed prior to the passing of
[34:45] final inspection for the swimming pool.
[34:48] So that would allow both projects that
[34:51] would allow the pool to start.
[34:54] >> That's correct. They could uh pursue the
[34:56] permits for the pool in parallel with
[34:57] the other permits or even ahead of the
[35:00] other permits. Um I've I've spoken with
[35:02] the applicant and um looking they they
[35:06] just wanted to make sure it didn't hold
[35:07] up their building permit for the pool.
[35:09] Uh so the way it's written um it's all
[35:12] fine and agreeable and they can uh
[35:14] pursue that prior to the construction of
[35:16] the pool.
[35:20] Perfect. I mean, I I'll make a motion on
[35:23] the 133 Marv Oaks Drive with regards to
[35:26] the variance request.
[35:28] I move that we approve the motion with
[35:31] uh um with the conditions that I just
[35:34] read
[35:36] found in desk item number two.
[35:39] >> Second.
[35:41] >> Chair Weaver.
[35:42] >> Yes.
[35:43] >> Commissioner Abfel,
[35:44] >> yes.
[35:45] >> Commissioner Gonarco,
[35:46] >> yes. Commissioner Tober.
[35:47] >> Yes. All right. Takes care of this item.
[35:54] Sage, what else do you have for us
[35:55] tonight?
[35:56] >> Um, just a couple brief reports. We we
[36:01] have the the January director's report.
[36:05] Um, just notable, you know, kind of the
[36:07] new thing we've kind of focused on with
[36:08] these is that looking at housing
[36:11] numbers. Uh unfortunately in January
[36:13] there were no permits issued um for ADUs
[36:16] or single family dwellings. Um but I I
[36:19] did take a peek into February just to
[36:22] give a little um better news uh that
[36:25] within within the first 10 days of
[36:27] February already three permits have been
[36:29] issued um for new units. Um I think one
[36:31] house and two ADUs. And so, uh, you
[36:34] know, different months yield different
[36:36] numbers and hopefully we stay on track,
[36:38] uh, for our goals of at least 15 ADUs
[36:42] per year, but, um, hopefully per our
[36:46] last few years, over 20 would be great.
[36:49] Um, and then that's it for that stuff,
[36:52] but I do just want to thank Commissioner
[36:54] Abfell. Um, this is his last meeting. um
[36:58] uh he's served on the ASRB as well as
[37:01] the planning commission for a number of
[37:03] years. Been a
[37:05] great contribution to the community. So,
[37:07] just want to say thank you very much for
[37:09] serving. Um it's it's been great to work
[37:11] with you.
[37:11] >> Thank Thank you, Sage and team. I really
[37:13] appreciate it.
[37:14] >> It has been a pleasure to work with you,
[37:16] Matt.
[37:18] >> I would just encourage the thousands of
[37:20] people in the room and the millions of
[37:21] people watching at home to get involved
[37:23] with public service. It's actually
[37:24] really great in this town.
[37:27] Thank you.
[37:31] » All right. There being nothing else on
[37:33] the agenda, we will close this meeting.
[37:35] Thank you very much, everybody.