Are we good to go, Julie?
All right.
This is the call to order for the March
4th, 2026 meeting of the Town of
Woodside Planning Commission. We'll
start with the pledge of allegiance.
Roll call, please.
>> Chair Weaver,
>> present.
>> Vice Chair Gar,
>> here.
>> Commissioner Evans,
>> here.
>> Commissioner Gonerko,
>> here.
>> Commissioner Tober.
» Are there any changes to the published
agenda? There are no changes to the
agenda. There are no desk items. I do
want to just take this opportunity to
introduce and congratulate our new
planning commissioner, uh, Darren Evans.
Um, and also congratulate Matt Gar for
being reappointed.
We have a full group and that's great.
And, uh, look forward to many meetings
ahead.
» Welcome to Darren.
Welcome.
» We will now open our public
communication period for items not on
tonight's agenda. Uh this is an
opportunity for members of the public to
bring up issues of interest to the town
of Woodside and its planning commission,
but which are not on tonight's published
agenda. Uh this is traditionally limited
to up to five speakers at a maximum of
three minutes each at the beginning of
the meeting and if there are more
speakers than that that can be deferred
to the end of the meeting. But this is
for items that are not on tonight's
agenda. So given that is there anyone in
the room or on Zoom that would like to
speak during the public comment period?
>> We have no attendees online at the
moment.
>> Okay.
Given that I will close the public
comment period and we can move on to the
consent calendar which seems to consist
of the approval of the minutes from the
February 18th meeting of the planning
commission.
Does anyone in the public
staff or on the commission wish to make
a alteration, correction, elaboration or
other change to the minutes of the
February 18th meeting as published?
There being no call for changes, uh the
chair would entertain a motion to
approve those minutes.
motion.
» I second the motion.
» Chair Weaver.
>> Yes.
>> Vice Chair Gar.
>> Yes.
>> Commissioner Evans.
>> Think I should abstain since I wasn't
here.
>> Commissioner Gonerka.
>> He learns fast. Yes.
>> And Commissioner Tober.
>> Yes.
We will now move on to the main excuse
me uh the main item on tonight's agenda
which is a application for a variance
for a new detached garage at 1583
Kinyatta Lane and I believe that the
staff presenter on this is KGO.
So, KGO, please go ahead and uh start us
off.
>> Hello and thank you. I will be
introducing the project at 1583 Kinyata
Lane for planning commission review. For
this review, uh the applicant requests
approval of a variance to the setback
requirements for the construction of a
new detached garage that would encroach
into the front required front setback.
And this application is categorically
exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act SQA guidelines
1533
uh new construction of small structures
including garages. And as the planning
director has mentioned earlier, uh there
are no desk items at this time.
And to give a quick summary on the
property, the property size is 0.88 88
acres and is in the suburban residential
uh SR zoning district which has basic
setbacks of 50 ft from the front uh
property line, 25 ft from the rear and
20 ft from the sides of the property
line. The overall site is relatively
flat on the southwestern portion uh
inclining through the center and
northeastern portions. The elevation
ranges from 148 ft on the southern side
to approximately 185 ft on the northern
side. The site contains an existing
one-story single family residents and
existing heartscape that are located on
the relatively flat uh southwestern
portion of the site. And as mentioned in
the staff report, uh the project site
includes an easement for a public
rideway at the southern side. And this
determination was made by the town's
engineering department. And this
determination is important for
determining lot size for allowable
uh thresholds for floor area and paved
area as well as determining uh the
setbacks from the front.
And as mentioned, the applicant is
requesting approval of a variance to
locate the detached garage uh within the
front setback. Um, as explained earlier,
the 30 foot half width of the kinyatta
lane uh projects into the front side of
the project site. Uh, therefore, the
proposed location of the garage would be
1 ft away from the interior boundary of
this rideway. Uh, the proposed location
of the garage would require the removal
of three trees in its vicinity. Uh, the
proposed garage would be designed in the
same style as the existing main
residence. And as you can see on the uh
physical materials board on your left
hand side uh shows uh the materials uh
for the proposed garage
uh including uh identical exterior
materials such as brick uh black asphalt
roof finishes and gray stained wood
siding color.
Here are the elevations for the proposed
garage.
Here
is the existing uh vantage points uh
from the adjacent kinata lane and from
the private road.
Lastly, staff recommends that the
planning commission adopt the draft
resolution in attachment one uh making
the required findings to approve the
variance. And so that concludes my
presentation. Uh staff is happy to
answer any questions. Uh story polls
were installed at least 10 days before
the hearing date and the applicant is
also here in attendance to answer any
questions. Thank you.
» Do any members of the commission have
questions for staff?
>> I I do. So So that I mean it seems like
the nature of this whole thing is based
on the 30foot implied sort of right of
way right from from Kenyatta from what I
can kind of tell. So, um I mean I guess
it seems like that's historically.
There's
records that are kind of there. We think
it does exist, but the implied thing was
a little bit weird. So, I mean, my my
read of this whole thing is essentially
we have a 30 foot se from the road where
the road is. It's unlikely that would
ever get built into the implied right of
way. So, that that's kind of how I'm
looking at it, but is that the right way
to look at it? And you know,
>> yes.
>> How have how are cases on this street
been looked at in the past?
>> The so our engineering department then
we have outside consulting surveyors who
review all the different documents. Um
based on what they reviewed um they
determined that the easement is there um
it wasn't something that was recorded on
the property but given all the different
documentation they have uh that it is an
easement for a road right away. Um, you
are correct. There is there are no plans
to widen that road now and there
probably wouldn't be plans to widen that
road in any time in the near future for
sure. Um, uh, so yeah, it is it will
still at least for several years unless
something drastic changes out there with
road widening and sidewalks and things
of that nature. Um, then it would still
have that buffer between the roadway and
the proposed garage. just follow. Have
there been other other projects with
this that we've come across before? And
is do we have a precedent?
>> It's it's not completely uncommon. You
get into older, you know, when lots were
cut up, you know, pre-1950,
uh, you get a lot of these things coming
up from time to time. Um, you get into
the western hills, there's questions
about right road right ofway widths. Um,
I don't know if anyone was around and
215 Grand View was heard. that was a
major topic of that project. Um, and so,
uh, so it does come up from time to
time.
When before there was a subdivision
ordinance, um, lots were created in
different fashions, often just kind of
drawing up a deed and getting it
recorded at the county, which was a
legal way to create a lot back then. Um,
and sometimes it's a little bit
difficult to find all those details.
Am
I correct in that the uh lot official
lot line is actually goes over in the
road or the entry road.
>> Yeah. So what's what's being shown if
you want to pull up the site plan is um
is yes you have a 60oot right ofway and so it
usually is 30 feet on one side and 30t
on the other side. Um so if you zoom in
a little bit my eyes aren't that good.
Um the the property line that is the
outer boundary of the 30 foot easement
um is just right about where the
pavement is.
>> Okay.
>> See
>> the blue the blue the blue is the
property line
>> line right? So you know the pavement is
just right around here and you can see
the um the the these uh hatched areas.
These are identifying little pockets of
35% slopes. So, it's kind of just
steeping. The road uh pavement kind of
goes right up to where that slope starts
to go uphill
>> down at the corner where the garage is
supposed to be. That corner trips over
the road.
That correct?
>> Um Oh. Oh, right here in the corner.
Yes. So, again, it's a roadway easement,
right? So, that is something that could
exist in that location.
Any other commissioner questions for
staff?
Go for it. So, it's for stage S stage,
excuse me. Uh, can you bring up that
picture um to the right of the driveway?
Not not this part of the uh lot, but
behind the drawing here, behind where it
shows Yeah, that way. Okay.
Um,
so I'm wondering what what is that? It
looks like a wall. Is that a retaining
wall?
>> Yeah, it's a it's a short kind of rock
retaining wall. So, right where the
existing driveway is, you notice it
really slopes upward. Um, here the
applicants are also contemplating an ADU
in the future. Um, that would probably
be placed in that portion of the the
lot. So from this particular portion,
yes, this is a kind of a short rock
wall. Um that's
>> So the reason I'm asking, you sort of
answered my question. So perhaps there's
plans for the ADU in in the future right
at that spot. When when I visited the
site, um I had a question, why wasn't
the garage put on the right side instead
of sticking into the uh setback?
Yeah, and the applicant can also
probably help answer that as well um in
terms of what their thought process was.
Uh but yes, it's partially that they do
have future plans as well as um kind of
uh the slope going upward um at that
portion of site. And so they they chose
to keep an area where they typically
park their cars today.
>> All right, those are my questions.
Alex, did you have questions?
Um, well, Richard's question prompted a
question from me. Um,
I believe that there was mentioned in
the staff report that the goal is to
create four spa is once the garage is
done to have four spaces of off-
streetet parking.
Will that meet the requirements for what
is built on the property now or will the
construction of a future ADU require
that um more parking be created?
>> It depends on the design of the ADU. So,
if it's a studio apartment, it would not
require a parking space. If it's a
one-bedroom or more, it requires one
parking space. Um and that simply just
has to be something that's in the
driveway area.
Yeah, the the I've seen the driveway
driveways is uh fairly wide and probably
accommodate a lot more than few cars to
park there even for the ADU.
>> That's correct.
Um, given an absence of further
questions for staff, the applicant or
the applicant's representative is
invited but not required to come and
speak and let us know uh your thoughts
and what you're asking for. So, um, feel
free to come up to the mic if you wish.
You're not required.
Um, if you don't have a presentation,
whoever you want to designate to come up
and field questions,
go on up to the mic.
>> And you can just press that red handle
on the mic to adjust the height.
>> So, make yourself comfortable.
>> Height's okay.
>> Okay.
Um, questions for the applicant.
>> So, I just had one. um doesn't really
apply to most of what was talked about,
but the I saw a down the right side uh a
stream bed looks like a way to sort of
funnel water. Um is there do you guys
ever have any water problems running off
the road?
>> If you could Sorry, I just we it's for
recording and people on Zoom if you
could speak to in the microphone.
This is the under the water comes down
the hill and it's met in a French drain
and goes underneath the driveway and the
that rock wall it uh creek bed
dissipates the water. If you look at it
the the t it tails off to the right. So
if there's any water that makes it that
far then it just trickles down. So no
never had any flooding. The runoff that
comes off the property
uh is minimal. We don't have any.
>> Do you get some off the road into your
property?
>> Well, the upper lot, you know, rain
comes down over the upper lot and and
washes down to the to my house at 1583.
>> The then I guess this is hopefully
you're thinking about this. The I saw
the um it does go down and make that
little curve. I think the curve's
underneath the corner of where you want
to build. Um so you may want to like
>> Yeah, it'll have to be moved at the end
a little bit. Yeah,
>> my my property has all kinds of water
issues and
acute awareness. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
» Question just in in terms of choosing
the location. Um Richard asked the
question about looking maybe up the
hill. Maybe just be interesting to kind
of learn just your thought process
around citing it where where it is. And
then also
I'm just interested also like with this
uh implied easement. I I could sort of
how you just think about the site and
how you know folks in the neighborhood
think about the site as far as you know
setbacks being
it sort of seems like if you just look
at it you would think it's from from the
road right um versus this easement. I'm
just interested in all that and how you
thought about the the sighting. Does
that make sense?
>> Yeah, go for it.
Hi. Um,
so we looked at he currently parks on
the driveway where the where the garage
is cited now. Um, and he uh and David is
planning on doing an ADU. So, and not um
doing another driveway entrance,
basically coming up and then turning up
into an ADU. So, that is actually in the
works. Um, but we also didn't want to
locate the garage too far too far from
the house. We we did a bunch of kind of
turning it a different, you know, kind
of turning it. We could do a like
exception and try to go to the to the
side. We looked at all that. We just
didn't have enough space between the
existing house and the garage to turn it
a different way. And then if you pull it
up too far, it's then it's all you see
outside of the existing house. the house
um it's it's listed as being built in
1905. Um David actually thinks it was
built earlier than that. So it was way
before the town was incorporated or
there was a zoning ordinance or you know
so that's kind of the main hardship
um and reason for the variance.
Um yeah and the implied easement the
nobody could find an actual recorded
easement. So it's implied because the
you know everybody kind of assumes it's
there but nobody could actually find a
record of it anywhere.
>> When did likement
come up process something that started
playing and then where did the easement
come from or how does that look like? We
started looking well we have to get a
title report for for this process and
the title report didn't have one and
then the survey had had an easement
shown and that was like where so that
started kind of the whole discussions of
where you know and then it became
implied and then the city had to kind of
do a whole you know deep dive and um
come up with a ruling on it and everyone
kind of uses it as assumes it's an
easement from from the city and the
property owner side so that's why it's
labeled complied.
>> Thank you.
» Alex, you have questions for the
applicant.
Um,
given
what uh, Commissioner Gar and
Commissioner Evans have already asked, I
have no further questions. Um
so given that um we could open the
public comment period
on this issue. And so is there anyone in
the room or online that would wish to
speak regarding this item of considering
a resolution to grant this variance?
>> We still have no attendees online.
Uh there being no public comment period
either written via Zoom or live in the
room, we will close the public comment
period and move on to commissioner
discussion and we will start with
Commissioner Evans to welcome him. And
» thanks uh really don't have any
comments. I think it's a logical place
to put it. seems like a if you're going
to add ADU in the future, this should
really only place to go and you want to
have enough space in a garage to be
useful. So, seems like a reasonable plan
and very well thought through as well.
Yeah, I think but also one on on on the
points from Commissioner Evans. I mean I
think to me also
it's a question of how we look at the
setbacks which is why I was asking about
you know this
how sure are we about the implied
easement uh etc. And it it it feels to
me like for all intents and purposes
it's set back 30 ft from the road which
I think is what the intent of the
setbacks is intended to do in the first
place. Um I agree also, you know, other
sighting options don't seem as as good.
The distance from other structures is
large. We don't have any any neighbors
or desk items who seem concerned with
it. Uh so from all those reasons, I can make the findings in this case.
» I have very little. I mean I think it's
in the right place.
Sorry, could you just speak into the
microphone? Thank you.
>> I I don't have anything else to add. I
mean, I think it's in the right place.
It doesn't affect other neighbors and
it's screened from both roads.
» So, one one comment and maybe one
addition. Um there are three trees.
They're mature trees to be taken down.
Um, their canopy is nice, but their the
canopy is fairly high, so it really
doesn't screen anything. It wouldn't
have screened screened anything. My
concern is uh that the uh from the road
there are some shrubs. There are smaller
shrubs um not small shrubs, but you
know, I don't know, they're 8 ft high. I
don't quite remember. Uh I just wanted
to stipulate that uh just to make sure
that there is going to be screening,
make sure that these shrubs are in good
health and if they're if one is suspect
or whatever, just to plant something
else that'll be permanent since it's so
close to the road.
» So Richard, are you proposing that the
draft resolution be tweaked to add that
requirement?
Yeah, I I see that the owners are
nodding their head. Would be
>> is that allowable, Sage?
>> Sorry, what' you say?
>> Um
>> yeah, we could amend the the draft
resolution. You could add a condition um
to the project if uh to ensure that uh
any of the existing vegetation that um
is not within the footprint of the
building gets retained uh to the extent
feasible. Obviously, there will be some
little grading around that area.
>> Is that language acceptable to you,
Richard, or do you want to try your own?
>> No, no. I'm sure Sage can can articulate
it well.
I guess my my only comment on that would
be
if the intent is is the is the screening
is maybe we put the condition talking
about screening rather than necessarily
the existing vegetation like if the
existing vegetation is
>> Oh, I I meant that you know if there's
any lack in the existing vegetation that
the screening uh should be inspected and
approved.
There there is there is a um looks like
utility boxes on the ground.
>> There's what
>> some there's some utility boxes or
something on the ground that between the
road and where the structure would be.
So if they may not have a whole lot of
space to get too fancy with the shrubs
or the vegetation.
Um just a it's a question really if if
you want to require stuff in there. We
have to make sure there's space to put
it. And what what are those things that
are on the ground behind the in the
corner there
>> or the underground?
>> They're like metal plates.
>> Oh, uh in the road or
>> between the road and and where your
building would be. Yeah. Please come up
to the microphone just so we have it for
the record.
>> Um those boxes, they're labeled uh
there's two electric boxes and one looks
like a cable TV box.
>> Okay. I I just make sure that whatever
we say doesn't uh make them interfere
with those boxes.
>> We could um if if looking for a
condition provide a new condition onee
um that's prior to the issuance of a
building permit the applicant shall
submit and then um updated plans uh
indicating to retain the existing
vegetation adjacent to the roadway. Um
if the vegetation needs to be removed,
uh it shall be replaced
with other screening vegetation
that
uh there's I probably planted
somewhere around 90 trees and shrubs on
the big shrubs on the property. Um
Whoops.
Don't bail me out here. No. Uh the we're
going to end up every shrub that comes
out of the ground, if it's in where the footprint of the garage, it's going
to get transplanted to other areas. So,
I won't destroy any trees. I'll actually
transplant everyone that comes out of
the ground.
>> Those two big oaks you're going to
transplant.
>> I'm sorry.
>> Those two big oaks?
>> No, they they're coming down. The one
big oak. There's just one big oak there
and it's pretty in poor shape as the
artist said. It's it's dangerous. It
could happen. So, yes.
>> Um,
also the the owner is interested. There
there's an oak and a redwood that's
right as you back out of the garage on
the side. We've shown them as being
removed. Um, but he, for the record, is
going to see if he can try to keep them.
It's just kind of a worst case scenario
with the backup if and the cut of the
driveway, but he would like to maintain
them as well. I think he's also willing
to um put more shrubs behind the the new
garage once it's up.
>> That that was my point. Yes.
>> Yes. And yeah, he he wants his property
screened as well. So, he's that would be
a perfectly fine condition for us.
>> Yeah. Th those utilities are probably in concrete boxes. So, you know, small
roots from shrubs are are not going to
interfere,
>> right? And there's like there's room
between the the garage and where they
are.
>> Yeah. And there's trees. Trees have
large roots and I'm sure they make their
way a lot more invasively than than just
shrubs.
>> So, I want to maybe make another point
on this though, which is so we're
talking about basically a 30-foot
setback from the road that's all within
a 30ft defensible space zone. So, if
we're I don't know. I I don't
necessarily feel comfortable
requiring like planning that we keep
vegetation in an area where fire may
well say like that needs to be taken out
anyway, right? Cuz we have a there's a
5ft dead zone and then beyond there
there's like everything's actually
supposed to be cleared up to 6 ft high.
So, that vegetation is actually like
non-compliant given what fire would come
and say.
>> That's a good point.
Yeah, I mean I think if you have an
applicant who is kind of committed to
keeping the vegetation there to the
extent feasible, it' be up to the
planning commission they want to add a
condition.
Um
>> well
uh
this week uh I forget the name uh the
company but they've been putting in
utilities right along Kinata Lane. And
anytime a utility goes in, they don't go
more than maybe this far off of the
road. So there's like two or three
layers of shrubs in between that area
and the property line. So, and the
shrubs I have, they grow to about 18t
tall and uh they should they're really
dense when they grow. And uh I think
it'll uh look good.
Fine. Just to leave this as is.
I given the fact that in 2026 we're
steering between the fire district and
the more traditional Woodside style of
nestling buildings and shrubbery. Um,
I'd be inclined to leave it as is and
uh rely on the applicant's goodwill and
trying to work it out as best he can
with the fire district, which I think is
an evolving standard
none of us understand.
>> I would second that. That's fine. I I
see that the uh applicants are are quite
amendable to to screen the property in a
proper way and uh that's that's fine
with me.
If we're headed towards a consensus, the
chair would entertain motions.
>> Make a resol or I would make a motion to
approve the resolution as presented.
» Chair Weaver,
>> yes.
>> Vice Chair Gar,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Evans,
>> Commissioner Gonerko,
>> yes. Commissioner Tober.
>> Yes.
>> So approved.
» Good luck.
>> Enjoy your new garage.
» And if you crack the code with dealing
with the fire districts, they do the
inspections. Share your experience with
us.
>> Y
um Sage, do you have anything for us
tonight?
>> Um there's no director's report as we
haven't finished. Well, we just wrapped
up February. Um, so we'll have that at
the next meeting. Um, the town is uh
completing its housing element annual
report that will get submitted to HCD.
That will go before the council on March
10th. Um, and
um
and and Julie will reach out to you
about next meeting which is uh April
1st. Um I believe it's also the first
day of Passover. Um, so we're going to
look uh to make sure we we're looking at
um in April is when we switch the chair
and vice chair and we may not have all
commissioners at that first meeting. Uh
so we'll we want to make sure all
commissioners are available when we take
that action. So Julia will reach out.
We're going to look at the first if if
we move it a week if people will be
available or if we just focus on a
second meeting in April. But we'll have
that information uh probably by next
week at the latest.
>> Yeah. Those of us that have school age
children, that's there's usually a
spring break either first or second
week. And
>> there is in the San Francisco district
is spring break that week.
>> Yeah, our the Woodside spring break is
the following week. So the first week
should be here.
>> Okay. So that's that's also good to know
for us as well if we're looking to
reschedule because that may come.
>> Julie will reach out and get a poll
going and
>> six to 10.
>> Yep.
>> Actually, I was not here at the last one
because of the last break.
>> Might be good.
>> Right. So that's it. I have nothing
further to add.
>> Just brief question with with some of
the recent personnel changes. Are there
any does is there any changes to
existing business like things that have
gotten pushed, rescheduled, etc.
>> Um the council schedules are just being
set up and looking at you know what can
uh on each agenda but um but otherwise
notes business as usual.
>> No no changes to housing element, things
that were interrupted etc. No, no.
Everything there is just on track and
the that report um should be released by
tomorrow if not the latest Friday in
terms of the report going to the council
on uh March 10th um for the housing
element report. Uh so that that will be
on we do uh we have to submit to HCD by
April 1st of each year. And so there's
the general plan report card uh which
goes through all the elements, but the
housing element is a separate one uh
given that that has much more detailed
information and a different format
that's required by HCD. Um so if you're
interested, that report will be
available by the end of this week. Okay.
>> And it it has the it's a it's a a series
of Excel sheets, a few of which don't
apply necessarily to Woodside. Um, so
you'll see those will be blank, but the
primary ones list all the permits issued
identified by address. Um, and it it
outlines the number and income levels.
» Sage, got a question for you. The uh the
work uh the road work and I guess the
utility work on High Street, does that
have anything to do with the multi- uh
>> uh No, not at all. Um, so I'm not I they
I know the public works director is much
more familiar with it. Um, but that is
not any direct relation to uh the that
site on High Street.
>> I wrote.
» All right. Given that we will close
tonight's meeting. Thank you very much
everyone.