Okay. All right. We're going to go ahead
and call the meeting to order and think
we have an echo. We got Okay. We're
going to begin with the pledge of
>> allegiance.
One nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
>> All right. Roll call.
>> Chair Gar
>> here.
>> Vice Chair Tobert
>> here.
>> Commissioner Weaver
>> here.
>> And Commissioners Evans and Ganero are
noted absent.
>> Great. Uh are there any changes to the
agenda?
>> Um there are no changes to the agenda.
Uh however, you have two desk items. Um
one is from a member of the public. Uh
she's um brought up some concerns
related to unpermitted improvements and
the equestrian trail easement for our
only public hearing tonight, which is
item number two. Um she's also uh
brought up some questions about
landscaping in the right of way. And um
in response to that, those are items
that will have to be dealt with um in
any event. But it also in response to
that, we've included a few extra
conditions of approval uh just to ensure
that those unpermitted um improvements
are taken out of the trail easement and
that they work with the public works
department uh to determine what if
anything can remain in the public right
away regarding the landscape elements.
Um and then uh lastly in the um desk
item resolution, it's just a formatting
change that we're doing with all of our
staff reports for formal design review.
It's just the leadin to the findings and
so we've just revised that for our new
uh updated format, but it doesn't have
any substantive change. Um and then
Jillian will present the project when we
get to that item. All right.
>> Okay. Thanks. We're going to move to uh
public communications. If there are
members of the public either here or on
Zoom have a comment about an item not on
the agenda tonight, uh now is the time.
And for those online, please use a raise
hand feature if you'd like to make a
comment.
» There are no raise hands.
» All right. Uh we are going to move on
then to the consent agenda. So aimed
tonight, I believe the first item we
have is the minutes. So uh approval of
the May 20th, 2026 minutes is the first
piece. And does anyone have any comments
on the minutes? Uh as written.
» I move that the minutes from May 20th be
approved.
» Chair Weaver.
I'm sorry. Excuse me. Chair Gar.
>> Yes.
>> Vice Chair Tober.
Commissioner Weaver.
>> Yes.
>> You
okay? Uh well, in that case, we're going
to move on to the uh the public hearing
for the first item, which is 170 Fox
Hollow Road.
Uh everyone hope you're having a great
start to your week. Um, this
presentation is going to include a brief
analysis for formal design review uh to
demolish an existing single family
dwelling
school and associated site improvements
and construction of a new single family
main residence with an attached garage
and attached studio ADU. Two detached
accessory dwelling units, a detached
trellis, a pool and associated site
improvements on a lot located at 170 Fox
Road. The project does require approval
of a maximum mean resident size
exception as well as a grading exception
for site grading in excess of 1500 cubic
yards. Um the desk items as mentioned
earlier are pertaining to this
particular item and the project is
categorically exempt from the provisions
of SQA.
As a quick overview, the subject
property is about 3.013 acres and it's
located at the end of Fox Hollow Road.
It is currently developed with a single
family main residence, a pool and
associated site improvements which we
can see a little bit on the existing
plans here on the right. Site slopes
upward from Foxall Road and contains
numerous significant trees along the
peripheries of the property. Large
portions of the existing tree stands
existing east, south, and west of the
existing main residence.
We can see here that the applicant is
proposed to construct a new single
family main residence which is the
L-shaped structure that you see
approximately in the center of the lot
here. Um near the general location of
the existing main home which we can see
dashed outlined in the center as well.
Um the attached garage is towards the
front of the structure where my cursor
is and then the detached um the attached
studio ADU is uh partially daylighted
and it's under this portion of the
residence. Um this is the proposed pool
ADU up here. Trellis is dashed over
adjacent to the pool. And then we have
new guest ADU adjacent to a proposed
autoc court. Um the driveway here has
been rerouted from the lower portion of
the property frontage to the northward
portion of the property frontage. Uh we
can see that outlined here in the darker
gray.
Here's a quick overview of the main
residence elevations.
Um we can see that the main residence
employs one and twostory elements. Um
which helps to break up that massing a
little bit. Um, we have covered patio
spaces adjoining adjoining the front and
the rear property facads and the
building contains medium to high pitch
gable roofs connected by a series of
small breezeways.
Um, we can see that there is also some
glazing that is oriented towards these
outdoor living spaces.
The form of the accessory uh dwelling
units that are detached from the main
house are complimentary to the main
house structure. where they have medium
pitch gable roots as well. Um, and you
can see uh relatively low visual
footprint on that trellis adjacent.
Here's a brief overview of the colors
and materials palette. You also have
physical material samples to your left
on the table uh for a little bit of a
better idea of what those look like in
person. Um the main house contains
weathered wood siding, rubble stone
walls, standing sea metal roofs, patina
steel doors, windows, metal railing, and
metal cladding. Um we have an assortment
of earth tones including browns, grays,
um charcoal gray leaning towards black
and um similar materials are being
proposed in conjunction with the
detached ADUs including wood siding,
steel doors and windows, stone veneer,
and standing seam metal roofs as well in
the same colors and materials palette.
On September 15th of last year, this
project did go before the architectural
and site review board for conceptual
design review. The applicant was
commended for their colors and materials
choices as well as their simple forms,
but the ASRB did request that they make
some tweaks to the fenistration on the
building as well as um the site grading
to minimize that to the greatest extent
possible. The project did return on May
18th for formal design review and at
that time the architectural and site
review board deemed that the project had
satisfied all their outstanding design
concerns.
Um big meat of tonight's analysis will
be pertaining to the grading exception
um which is the planning commission
angle that was not addressed by the
architectural insight review board. As
mentioned earlier pursuant to section
151.22 of the municipal code. Um this
grading exception is required because
the grading for the proposed site
exceeds 1500 cubic yards. We have a pro
a proposal of approximately 2560 cubic
yards of sight specific grading that
doesn't include things such as like the
basement or the pool cuts. Those are
excluded from that valuation. Um the
municipal code does allow the planning
commission to approve a site grading
exception so long as the findings that
you can see here on the right side of
the slide are met. After reviewing the
proposed project, staff believes that
the project plans meet the findings
required to grant a grading exception. A
comprehensive review of the overview of
um the stat the staff determination is
available in the staff report if you
want details regarding uh the detail uh
sorry the various facets of the project
that came to that determination. Um but
we are happy to provide an overview of
both the required findings as well as
the project details that we believe
support the findings if additional
information is required from you.
>> We ask questions now or should we wait
till the end of the presentation? Um,
that's the brief overview of everything.
Um, I just want to flag we do have
members of the team here available to go
over both the architectural angle and
the grading angle. Um, so if you have
anything that's not clearly covered by
the staff report, they will be able to
help. But otherwise, I'm able to answer
some question.
>> I just had one actually on the on on
this slide particularly which is just so
we're understanding the finding, right,
which is
>> the constraints finding. Mhm.
>> So when it's saying there no significant
physical constraints related to grading.
So just want to make sure I'm reading
this correctly which is if if lock
configuring topography
uh removal of significant trees. So it's
basically saying that we have to find
that there's no removal of significant
trees required or is it are we
interpreting that correctly?
Um I think it's to look at this kind of
holistically with all of these different
items. So any one of these things could
be a significant constraint to grading.
Um so uh trees sometimes are a
significant constraint. Uh you know it
doesn't mean you can't remove any trees
but an effort to try to preserve some of
the trees on site. Um sometimes that has
to do with why grading is occurring. Um
other times you may be dealing with
other constraints such as septic systems
and areas where you sometimes can't um
balance your grading on site. Those are
other things that are considered. So,
it's just kind of looking at each of
those items and are are those things
that uh would not be significantly
impacted by the proposed grading. Um, so
you would not impact your septic
systems, your groundwater, the you know
landslide areas, all those things would
have to be dealt with appropriately.
>> Thank you.
Um that's pretty much the overview of
the project. As mentioned, um detailed
findings are available in the staff
report as well as the draft resolution.
Um, but happy to answer any questions
pertaining to how staff came to our
recommendation or any further questions
on the grading exception in and of
itself or if you have any questions on
the maximum main resident size exception
which is also um needed for approval in
conjunction with this project. Happy to
help answer any questions.
» Yes, I had a couple of brief questions.
Um in this case the maximum resident
size exception is purely formulaic and
if the grading exemption was not
required this uh particular project
would not have come to planning
commission.
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. Um the second question is related
to equestrian access
along the rightway on Fox Hollow Road.
um made a second site visit this
afternoon with that in mind and it looks
like going on Fox Hollow Road that the
horse path such as it is
um crosses the road a couple of times
based on the slope immediately where the
asphalt ends and where trees are and and
so it goes back and forth across the
road. Does the town ha um
if the town uh by virtue of the road has
an easement along both sides of the
road, do we actively defend the easement
on both sides of the road if on one side
of the road it's clear that there really
isn't any effective um um equestrian
access?
So, it's a public road, so I' I'd have
to look at maps, but my guess is that
the trail is it within the public right
of way. Um, so it wouldn't necessarily
be uh a dedicated easement. So, um if
there's any trails within the right of
way, they're allowed to be there. They'd
be maintained and um the way they're set
up is usually what how best suits the
topography or what's been out there. Um
but trail easement on the property,
that's a dedicated easement. the town um
maintains those easements. Uh but as
noted earlier, they'll have to
>> but the rule is you're not allowed to
have an improvement on the easement even
if it's an impracticable easement from
the standpoint of walking or riding or
being used at all.
>> There's encroachment permits can be
granted an easement similar as they are
in public rightways. Um, trail easements
are generally to be kept free and clear,
but if there's some reason for some type
of improvement, that would be looked at
by public works and technically the
process would be to get an encroachment
permit.
And then the final point would be in the
context of looking at equestrian access
to the trail that runs along the edge of
the property where that is located at
the very end of the culdesac
where a number of properties come
together. They're quite large
properties. They have nice outdoor
landscaping. They have pools. I suspect
that quite often people would have
rather large parties out there. And the
question came up in my mind is
um does the town ever put up no parking
signs where the trail access point
begins to ensure that during a party
that the valet doesn't block the
equestrian trail access?
>> That's a good question. Um I have to
talk to public works. I I mean I think
it's something we can easily pass on to
them as a concern. Uh and because you
were correct obviously it'd be very bad
if they blocked the trail and the horse
was trying to get out of it especially.
I mean I know that there are other
locations where such trails start and
there's a gate but like in my
neighborhood I know that there are
certain locations where in 20 years I've
never seen vehicles parked but it seemed
like out here at the end of the
culde-sac that that would be a prime
location for the equestrian trail to be
blocked by vehicles parked there.
>> Yeah. No, that's it's a very good
question. We'll definitely follow up
with public works to see if some I think
some good signage there would be
important.
>> That is all I had.
» Well, a few questions. Um, and we'll
probably get into them a bit more when the applicant presents as well, but
just interested in the ASRB sort of the
context of some of the discussion there.
Mhm.
>> Um, you know, so I went went to the site
earlier and and and looked at it and I
mean it's interesting that the mask kind
of hits you when you when you go there
it's it's uh it's it's sort of oh that's up there kind of turning your
head up which is a little bit uh not not
super typical in Woodside. Um and I'm
sort of interested in in the discussions
around you know mass and bulk. saw they
had um asked about the the sort of the long or the short ends, right? And and sort of stepping back which um
which it looks like was done in a in an
iteration. At the same time, there's the
longest sort of
um lack of a better term sort of slab
sides of the twotory structures are, you
know, single material,
no variation in terms of all of that,
which
when I look at the design guidelines,
mass and bulk, it's it's a little bit
different in terms of how that reads
versus what I see in the design. I'm
just curious, was that discussed in
ASRB? because I saw them sort of
commending but at the same time some of
these pieces seem a little bit different
than what we see in the design
guidelines.
>> Yeah, absolutely. Um I did pull a couple
slides um kind of showing the changes um
that occurred between conceptual and
formal design review. Is that showing up
for you guys on the screen? Okay. Down
there. Okay, great. Um so actually they
did commend the materials pallet
especially um and the simple forms of
the structure. So those were areas that
they actually highlighted some
appreciation for um as seen in the CDR
action letter. Um their primary concerns
as it pertained to the actual structures
um and these were matters that were
rectified prior to formal design review.
You can see here um CDR difference
between
the fenestration that we see on the
south and north elevations. Um they did
some substantial decreases um in the
amount of windows and glazing on the
facades of the buildings uh just because
they had expressed concerns regarding
light emission. But that was really the
central piece of commentary from the
architectural and site review board as
it pertained to the actual structure
designs. Um and they felt as though
these modifications as we see on the
lower level here had sufficiently
rectified those concerns. In all out,
they they did discuss the the mass. I I think it'd really at the they they um
they kind of looked at the simplicity as
a positive and with that, you know, be
given the different kind of wings at the
end with the lower levels. Uh they
didn't have any direction to further
break up this larger center mass.
You next question is about so about the
grading itself. Um so the the finding
that it was you're asking about the
language of before so finding a where
it's talking about essentially
constraints on the the grading right uh
it does seem like there's removal of
trees that are associated with this
>> and so can you talk a little bit about
maybe take us through some of the
details on uh how the specific areas of
grading
well essentially just how that all ties
together, right, in terms of tree
removal and grading and relocation of
the driveway, etc., etc., etc.
>> Yeah, absolutely. And the applicant can
speak in a little bit more detail. Um,
are you specifically concerned with the
ASRB's initial comments regarding
grading and topography um relative to
this constraint or um more so to the
constraint itself relative to the final
site condition? I mean really trying to
understand if if if we can make the
finding as contingent on you know those
constraints not being there. So I'm just
trying to get get a sort of more
intuition for the degree to which things
like the trees etc are potential
constraints. Does that make sense?
>> Okay, perfect. Sounds great. Um so
here's a brief overview of the
comprehensive site plan. Um we can see
in here tree removal marked in the small
red X's. Um, and as you can see
throughout the site, um, these bubbled
areas are representative of existing
tree canopies that exist on the
property. Um, so much like with other
woodside properties, we're operating
under a condition that there are some
substantial quantities of trees out
there. Um, and the code does allow for
tree removal in conjunction with
approved development permits. Um, in
reading the applicants narratives
regarding their grading selection and
the locations in which they've chosen to
orient their structures, um, one of the
primary goals that they had highlighted
was retaining the most significant
amount of trees possible, especially as
it came to um, balancing site grading.
Typically, you'd be wanting to balance
those quantities per the requirements of
the code. um they are doing um an
exception to balancing to avoid
potential impacts and fill and cut uh
regarding to those existing on-site
trees. Um a lot of this orientation of
the site is centered around existing
development to the greatest extent
possible. We can kind of see as
mentioned earlier we do have the dashed
existing structure. this lawn area does
have a significant degree of overlap
with the existing flat topography on the
property. Um so there are areas in which
tree removal is being done in
conjunction with the proposed
improvements. However, uh given that the
site is heavily vegetated um to some
degree the tweaking kind of runs us up
against that problem regardless. Um but
I think the applicant can speak in
greater detail if there's anything uh
regarding specific tree removal
specifications.
Um but they did highlight that that was
essential part of their grading design
was um minimizing impact on those
existing trees as much as possible
especially as it pertained to balancing
fill on site. And yeah, I'll just add as Jillian's noted the the tree removal
are some of the smaller trees and
they're in the areas of the proposed
development for primarily the structures
um but some with the autoc court and
then they you know they've chose to
redirect the driveway um but they're
also trying to be careful of avoiding
those larger trees in the front. That's
part of some of the grading that
occurred for the driveway. And then per
the ASRB's recommendations as well,
we'll ensure that there's an arborist uh
report completed um and that the they
have an arborist on site specifically
with any of the grading around the
trees.
» Okay. Can you help point out on this
diagram
it looks like it's the red
» Sorry if the resolution's a little bad.
Pull up the site plan. So, um, we have
this is kind of showing the development
on the lower half of the property. I'll
scroll up whenever you're ready. Um,
just that you can see kind of the tree
removal on the upper portion.
>> You'll see the one in the autoc court
and then couple in the footprint of the
buildings. So, that's the ADU and then
that's the main residence and then
there's some more um kind of near right
near the other accessory structures and
the pool area.
Okay, sounds good. Yeah. Do we do we
have in the plans the the details of
those?
» Yeah, I can there
>> pull it up real quick. I'm going to get
the higher resolution up so we can
actually read.
Oh, was sorry didn't switch over.
looking at something completely
different than you guys.
So, um, not clearly xed out on here, but
you can see some of the labeling here. 6
in oaks, 10 inch oaks.
Within the footprint, you have 10.1
by one.
» They're significant trees or I'm looking
here. It doesn't look like they're
>> Yeah, there. So, so I'd have to remember
the certain sizes. Um, some of those are
close to significant or maybe like that
14-inch oak be a significant tree. Um,
yeah, I think a 13 inch once you get to
the 10 in and below, um, those would not
be significant trees. Um, just a
reminder to us all when you say 13-inch
tree, is that diameter or circumference?
>> Very good question. That's diameter.
to
» good evening. Jim, Toby, Liam Braves
Engineering, um with Civil Engineers on
the project. And as um Julian and Sage
are showing you here, you can see a lot
of the trees, they're um kind of xed
out. But um as the architect and the um
design team all together tried to figure
out what we can do out here, we really
tried to make sure that some of the more
major trees, if you kind of go to the
next page, Julian, if you would please,
in 2.2, you can see like for instance on
the left hand side, kind of between the
driveways over to the left more where
your cursor is, you see some pretty
significant trees. Um there's a lot of
significant trees that have been worked
around like those are 25 in 24in oak
trees pretty nicer oak trees than some
of the ones we're saving also in the
driveway. Um sorry go back to the other
page you were just at C 2.1 you can kind
of see right there you exactly right
there you can see there's some
significant trees that that are being
worked around lit the driveway is
literally being moved around so it works
around those existing larger oaks um
trying to make this work. Um, in terms
of a lot of the grading on there, you
know, one of the big things that
Woodside requires or tries to push on us
is to try to balance grading. Um, the
way the code reads in Woodside is that
the balance, it's the site grading, not
so much the the foundation and the
basement grading, but you're trying to
balance the site grading. And we're
actually pretty darn close on that based
on what we're trying to make work. You
know, it is a big site, but there's a
lot of constraints in the way. We have
trees, we have septic, um we have a lot
of the required items such as firet
truck access, firet truck turnarounds.
Um we have to provide a retention pond
for storm water quality. So there's a
lot that goes into all this and when you
start to add all those various things
together, that's where you start to get
some of these what look like bigger
numbers of grading. Um so we really
tried to do our best to try to balance
that as much as we could and try to work
around some of the more grand trees out
there. Yes, there's some trees that are
going to be going, but they're more of
the smaller trees for the most part and
trying to work around everything. So,
um, and trying to take all of those
various things into consideration. Um,
we have a 3acre plus site here. Um, we
have a lot of requirements that we have
to work around and that's how we kind of
came up with some of the numbers we did,
but we did our best to try to balance as
much as we could on the property.
So, if you have any questions, I'm happy
to answer them.
I mean this distinction between smaller
trees and and you referred to them as
grand trees or we've talked about
significant trees. Can you talk a little
bit about the
smaller trees that you're taking out and
>> how big are they? just an idea versus
this [clears throat] what we call
significant trees or you refer to as the
grand trees.
>> You can see a lot of those trees right
there. We're talking about, you know,
>> I would say typically if I'm of all the
projects I've worked on Woodside and in
the greater Bay Area, the trees that
people seem to be most concerned about
are oak trees and we're trying to
preserve a lot of those oak trees. So,
we have some sycamore trees, we have
some smaller oak trees there. It's
really the bigger trees, the 24, the 36
inch trees. We're refer to them a lot of
times as heritage trees. Those are the
grand trees that you see. We're trying
to preserve those. Those are the kind of
the what give you the grand view, but
also the the the feeling that you're
really in part of nature still. So,
we're trying to work around those and
preserve those as much as we can. So,
given the that how many trees there are
and trying to do, you know, the all the
requirements we're trying to do, you can
see that this kind of weird dash that's
in the background right there, that's
the required fire truck turnaround. Um
there's a lot of things we do that take
up a lot of room that are required. Um,
septic's a good example as well as the
firet truck turnaround. We're trying to
work within all those rules and confines
and just pure nature of the beast. We
there are definitely some of the smaller
trees that we're going to have to get
rid of.
>> And how big are they in diameter?
>> Um, well, they're they're um if they're
a 10-in tree, so we I would have to do
the calculations, but you know, you're
going you would have to go 2 pi r. So,
whatever the radius is, half the radius.
So 5 in tree 2 * 5 * pi would be you
know 30 in something like that 30 in
around for a 10-in tree.
>> Yeah. And that's the circumference. I
think he was just asking about the
diameter. I
>> was asking about
>> Oh diameter is um
>> that's what's shown on the plants.
>> Yeah, that's right there. 10inch tree is
the diameter.
>> Most of the trees that you're cutting
are less than 14 inch in diameter.
>> I'd say the majority of them. Yes.
They're they're between 10 and 14 in. We
really trying to save some of the bigger
ones. You can see that's 10. That's 13.
Um, you can go around the plants.
There's a bunch of different sheets
there that go around the plants.
Anywhere you have an X around that,
that's um, you know, smaller tree.
That's a 5-in Japanese maple right
there. So, you know, we prioritize the
bigger trees. That's always what we're
trying to do and trying to work around
those. And that's, you know, gives the
not only the grand look of the site, but
also preserves what are more of the more
significant trees to nature. You're not
cutting any trees above 20 in?
>> I don't believe so.
>> And you mentioned you mentioned a
working around other constraints. You
mentioned sewer. You mentioned can you
just highlight the other constraints and
how you've worked around them.
>> Yeah. So, um being where we are in
Woodside, we're nowhere near a sewer
system. So, we are on septic. Um septic
takes up a fair amount of room. Um
Jillian, if you want to go back to that,
there's actually at the end of the civil
plan set, there's a there's a um SUIC
plan. I can kind of show you how much
room that really takes up. There we go.
Um and you can see here there's two
different color lines. There's um the
blue lines are purple and the green
lines. And what you're required to do in
Woodside is is provide two sets of
lines. You provide primary septic system
lines and you provide expansions. You're
really only installing the primary
expansion, the primary lines. the
expansion's there in case there's ever a
problem, which I don't think I've ever
seen in my lifetime, you know, any sites
that really need that. I I wouldn't
expect in the next hundred years that
those those expansion lines would need
to be used, but nonetheless, we have to
provide for them by county code and for
health and safety reasons. Um there's a
whole bunch of places we're trying to
work. We're trying to use the natural
topography. You know, there's also a
bunch of trees that are in that area
we're maintaining and working around,
but we decided that, you know, try to
use the topography that's there. Try to
use the existing where the existing
house is now. Try to use where a lot of
the developments happened and where we
have more of a sloped area. That's where
we're putting the septic. So, once the
septic is installed, you'll never know
it's there. It's all underground. But,
we're trying to prioritize trees as well
in those septic areas so that we work
around them.
Um, some of the other constraints are
obviously the driveway. You know, fire
department has very strict requirements
as far as the how wide the driveway is,
how steep it is, and at the end of the driveway, we have to
put a fairly large fire truck turnound.
So, we're making sure that's installed
in there. So, between that and then
also, if you can go to I think it's 31,
you can go real quickly. Yeah. See up
there in the top there's this what's
called a bio retention area. This is
something that's used for storm water
quality. It's um think of it as kind of
depressed planted area. Um general way
to think about it is if you were to
accidentally open your car door, you're
a nice person, you care about the
environment, you accidentally your
Starbucks wrapper falls out. Um your car
leaks a little oil, you don't even
realize it. When it rains, that all gets
picked up. And when what we do is we
grab all that, you know, water that
might have some hydrocarbons in it or
might have some trash in it. It goes to
this this bio retention area.
Essentially, it acts as a filter. Any
major trash gets stuck at the top.
Anything that's kind of in in this in
the water goes through kind of a planted
area where the plants actually help
decompose some of that um nasty water
and stuff like that. And what goes out
is more of a clean water. That's a
requirement that's all throughout
California now. So, but you can see just
by the look of it, it takes up a fair
amount of room. So, that's also a site
consideration that we have to be careful
of. And so we looked at try to find a
area of the site that was kind of out of
the way, wasn't going to um impact
trees, wasn't going to cause a
significant grading concern. And that's
kind of how we end up where we did
» question. It's a little bit difficult in
the drawings to understand the specific
cut bill areas.
>> Can can we maybe would you be able to
take us through that?
>> Yeah. So, um, you can kind of see right
here that the the var let's go down one
page. We'll get the overall picture.
There we go. Nope. The overall There we
go. So, um, what we're doing here is
we're trying to say, you know, the
driveway comes in. We're keeping the
kind of more sloped areas that are off
to the right as you drive in or more top
of the page, top right of the page
there. Trying to keep that area natural.
Everything else in the areas that have
already been developed, those are the
areas we're trying to do grading in. So
you have things such as the roadway
itself as you come in off the off Fox
Hollow. You're having to dig down to put
a roadway base in there. So you uh you
know typical roadway, you know, you
can't just drive on the dirt. You have
to put down asphalt. You have to put on
rock underneath it. All that gets
contributed to how much grading you're
doing. We're trying to match the
existing grades as much as possible. But
even when we're matching existing
grades, we have to dig down to put the
appropriate materials. Um, as you go
around the property, you know, we've got
in the backyard there the the the law
the lawn area, which is basically taking
up the area where the old original house
was. We're going to be filling in the
foundations for that original house.
We're going to be filling that area a
little bit in so that it's a little more
level, a little more more usable area.
And then, of course, the house itself
has a basement, has a a driveway that
goes down to the bottom level. All that
is sight grading that we're using, but
we're trying to minimize that. I would
say in this case it's not so much we're
taking a huge one small area and doing a
massive amount of cut or fill or
anything like that, but we're kind of
spreading it out through most of the
site to kind of just balance things out.
» Can you maybe highlight the fill areas?
>> The what?
>> The fill areas.
are going to be kind of
over toward the left where the ADU is
and the fire truck turn around and then
also in the area in the back where the
um we have a routine wall in the back um
where the lawn is. That's along the the kind of large square back there.
Yeah, right around there. That's got a
couple feet of fill. Um, again, the
driveway itself is cutting out and we're
trying to place that fill somewhere. So,
we're trying to balance. So, we're
trying to do that kind of magical, you
know, let's take some from over here and
place it over here. So, those are the
kind of the main areas. The driveway
takes up a huge amount of it and we're
using that kind of backyard to kind of
place it still so that we can kind of,
you know, balance that out. But by
balancing it out, it also kind of makes
a usable area for the client to be able
to utilize and have what they would like
to do, you know, to have they can enjoy
their property.
>> And when you fill there, how does that
sort of look relative to the natural?
>> Well, again, that whole area is an area
that's already kind of flattened out.
So, it kind of raises and falls where
the old house was, where old landscape
was and everything like that. And we're
just kind of leveling it out. So, it's
not an area that was already very hilly
that we're cutting in or filling in or
making it so it's unnatural. We're kind
of just spreading it out and leveling
that area out a little bit.
uh with respect to the bio retention
area when all the grading is complete
and the site is developed what sort of
square footage is that retention area um
u um draining essentially
>> I don't have that number exactly in
front of me but it's several hundred
cubic yards of grading um you can
imagine that that area right there you
know I would say that area is probably
about 50 by 70 ft and What we have to do
there is we have to dig down about 5 ft
straight down and replace that that dirt
that we took out. And then what gets
replaced with is a combination of
gravel. I have like 18 inches of gravel.
Then we have what's called a bio
retention mix. It's kind of a special
soil that's just good for the
environment, good for um filtering storm
water. We have to import that soil
because it's not the soil that's on
site. the site, the soil that's on site
is fairly clayy and we're looking for
something that's kind of a combination
of mulch and sand and everything that
water can permeate through but also
plants can grow in. Um and that that's a
again that's that takes up a fair amount
of grading just that one entity that's a
requirement of the state to be able to
put that in.
>> Right. So that's included in the grading
total now.
>> Oh absolutely.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. And then final question um the
size of that retention basin that is
sized for some nominal event is that
sized for like a 5year rainfall event or
20 year or
>> No, it's actually a little different
than that. So um the way it works is you
are required to provide a bio retention
area that essentially 4% of the
impervious areas on site that's driveway
roof stuff like that. It's a little
different than when you're talking about
storm drainage when you're like get
these events. Bio retention, ironically,
is made for smaller rainfalls. So, we
call it the first flush. You have the
entire summer where it hasn't rained and
that's where you can get stuff on the
ground. You get gunk from your car that
might fall out. You get trash that might
fall out. You don't even realize it.
It's that very first rainfall you get of
the season that picks up the most
dirtiest water and that gets
transferred. Once the rains start, the
vast majority of the um rain is clean
because that's we've already got that
first gunk. It's usually like the first
rain, even if it is January and it's
been raining all season, it's the first
couple hours that rain that's really
picking up the most and that's what
we're trying to take with that. So, if
we get an absolutely huge storm, it'll
actually have a bypass that it goes
right beyond that. it should go through
pretty well, but when you get a really
huge storm, then it goes on to what's
called the retention system, which is
another storm drain device we have to
work on at Woodside that um basically
retains the water. So, because we're
changing the amount of impervious
surface on the site, we're not able to
let that water percolate into the ground
as much. We don't want to exasperate the
creeks. Creek creeks right down by
closest to Woodside Road. There's that's
where Bear Gold Creek is. um that's
where we're going to be basically reme
metering the storm water and releasing
it at a slower rate. So we're kind of
doing double duty and that also gets
included in that calculation. We have to
put these fairly large pipes in the
ground. That also gets calculated in
that that calculation so we can make
sure that we're accounting for that for
the amount of dirt we're moving around.
So there's a lot of requirements just
not only what the client wants to see
out there but with all the regulations
that either the town has or state of
California has imposed on the town and
we have to follow.
» Thank you.
>> You're welcome.
Got
» Hi, my name is Ken Lindstead. I'm the
architect for the project. Um,
Commissioner Gar, I think you asked
about the the um the massing and you saw
a twotory story polling that seemed
large. Um, I wanted to say that the
break up of a mass, it's something that
I've employed on other projects, is to
actually break up the building into
several component parts so you're not
looking at one massive structure. So,
the idea is to have gaps between
buildings. There is one twotory element.
Um, I always think story polls look a
little more um alarming than they will
be in in kind of built form, but the the idea was to do simple forms but
break up to several buildings. So, I
just wanted to point out that it's not
necessarily changing materials in the
facade, but to just break up the
buildings as separate masses. And then
the other point I wanted to make is that
um I think the intent around uh
Woodsides kind of like trying to limit
the grading is so that you don't reshape
a site from its natural state into
something else. And we are really doing
almost all of our grading as I've looked
at Jim's numbers in that central area.
We're filling in a big hole where the
current house is. But I think it when
it's all done it's going to be more
restorative to the original topography
before the last remodel was done. So
those are my comments.
» Thank you.
» Are there if there's any members of the
public?
>> Yes. Public comments. Um are there
anyone in the anyone in the room or on
Zoom who would like to comment on the
project?
There are no members of the public on
Zoom.
» Great. Okay. Then we will close the
public hearing and we will move to
commission discussion.
>> Would you like to
>> um
Yes. Um, I mean, based on what we've
heard tonight and with the revisions in
the draft resolution,
um, I can make the findings and have no
problem with this project.
» I'm in the same boat.
» Okay. Um, yeah, I believe I can make the
findings as well. The the one that I was
eventually concerned about was the tree
removal. It seems like that is not the
significant trees. I mean, frankly, that 42 in oak is just like that. I
mean, that's like a heritage tree. So,
if that were going, that would be
another story. Um, but I think that's
been that's been effectively balanced.
um
yeah I mean we talked through the the
design guidelines um
sort of defer to both the ASRB and the
architect on the the massing strategy be
a personal choice but at the same time
it's um you know from a making the
findings standpoint and with that want
to respect their decisions at the ASRB
level and so with that I believe I could
also make the findings for this
anyone like to any further discussion or
do we want to make a motion?
» Um, I would move that we approve the
amended res um draft resolution as
provided to us this evening by staff.
» Seconded.
» Chair Gar.
>> Yes.
>> Vice Chair Tober.
>> Yes.
>> Commissioner Weaver.
>> Yes.
Okay. Um,
the decision of a planning commission
may be appealed to the town council. Uh,
there is a 10-day calendar appeal period
and additional information will be
obtained by staff.
With that, uh, good luck with the
project and, um, thanks for your time
tonight.
» Yeah. And sorry
and s are there any I don't see any
reports on the agenda but is there
anything that you
>> No there's nothing further um we will I
just want to update the exact date um
the ADU ordinance that you all looked at
uh we will be bringing that to the town
council on
speak um
it will be on June June,
I think June 28th. Um, so I just wanted
to report that.
>> Sorry, it's going to town
>> to to town council on June 28th.
>> And that's all I have to report at this
time. And then, um, Sage, I've been out
of the loop for a while. I perhaps
missed it. Has the judge made any ruling
on the litigation surrounding the
parking lot expansion at Kinyatta
Corners or is that still being
>> There there is there was a um
a decision no Jean if you're online if
maybe
>> yes I am there was a tenative um ruling
issued and the parties are further
briefing and so there is no final ruling
yet.
>> Is thank you. Is the tenative ruling
public information?
>> The the tenative ruling indicated that
the town needed to um abandon the entire
easement as opposed to a portion of the
easement on on the back of the property.
Uh and that is what's being further
briefed at this point.
All SE I'm sorry, all squa um challenges
were rejected by the judge.
» Okay. Thank you.
>> You're welcome.
>> So, that's all I have.