Thank you. Good evening. I like to call the February 26th ASRB meeting to order. It is 4.36 p.m. Apologies for the late start. I have a member from New Zealand tonight. So we were just ironing out some technical issues. Let's begin with the roll call. You're apple. Present vice your Lindsey. Present. Number Comra. Present. Members of you. Present. Thank you very much. Are there any changes to the agenda tonight? There are no changes to the agenda. However, you have a number of desk items. You have one desk item. It's just an updated floor plan and this is for. The item at it's item number three at 3985 Woodside Road. You have 13 email desk items for item number four 176 our cross road. those emails are an opposition to the proposed fence for that project. And the last two desktimes you have are just the director's reports for November and December of 2023. Thank you, Sage. I think now is the time for public communications. I'd like to invite anyone to address the board on matters that are not on tonight's agenda. There's anyone online who'd like to address something that's not on the agenda, please raise your hand virtually. Seeing none, and I just want to also note before I start, there's a sign-in sheet that's put at the back table and it's intended for any members of the public would like to be contacted with regarding any action letters or further up meetings for any of the items on the agenda and you can write down your contact information to ensure you receive any future correspondence on the item regarding the public hearings. Thank you, Sage. I believe we don't have anything on the consent agenda for this evening, so let's go right to our first agenda item, which is 272 Eleanor Drive for ASRB review for this conceptual design review project. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single story house and detached garage and to construct a new single-story residence with an attached garage swimming pool and site improvements. And there are no desk items at this time. The property size is approximately 1.25 acres and it is in the suburban residential zoning district. The overall site slopes gently upward from an elevation of approximately 120 feet on the west side to 150 feet on the east side. The site has a lawn adjacent to the residents and maturitries and other landscaping around the perimeter. This is the topographic survey. Just to reiterate, it slopes gently upward from the west side up to the east side. So this is the overall site plan, which shows the details and extent of the conceptual design project. The proposed main residence and attached garage will be located at the center of the site. A new pool is proposed to be located at the rear of the main residence. The project proposal also includes a pool equipment enclosure, storage shed and trash enclosure. The existing driveway would be main in place. So here's the enlarged site plan that shows the building for the main residents. Note that the dash lines indicate the location of the existing residents that is to be demolished. So these next few slides are the elevations for the structures. This is for the proposed west elevation. This is for the proposed north elevations. This is for the proposed south elevations. These last few slides are the conceptual design project renderings. The design will be composed of four distinct pitch roof modules, separated by smaller flat roof links, breaking up the mass of the house and surrounding the outdoor courtyard and pool. The material in color palette is proposed to consist of warm gray stone veneer, black framed windows and patio sliding doors, and dark gray standing seam metal roofing. The applicant also proposes the main residence to satisfy a goal to promote a climate resistant home. So these are the various renderings. This from the bird's eye view from southeast from the southwest, from the northwest, from the northeast. That concludes my presentation. Staff is happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. At this time I would like to ask anyone from the SRB if they have questions for staff. Did we receive a materials board on this project? I don't believe so. Just to clarify, the conceptual design of UStage, they're not required to sometimes applicants choose to provide them. Any other questions, Member Lindsey? I know you're far away, but we don't have to get. Yes, a couple of questions. So there's a mention in the reports of the front setback may not be accurately represented. And I'm wondering if you anticipate any potential impact to the plan once that front setback has been properly established. Um, the applicant met with staff. There was a setback determination made 10 years ago or so from the previous planning director. It wasn't in our electronic files, but we were able to dig up that setback determination. So the way the applicant has shown the setbacks for the front is appropriate. They do need to make some adjustments to the side in the rear where they mislabeled them, but staff does not anticipate any significant if any changes necessary when adjusting those suffix. So, just to clarify, the way they've shown for the front and then having it move out to the side, the previous plan director looked at that as like it was a corner lot. And so the determination was made and they have satisfied that. Okay, thank you. Just a quick follow up question and this is regarding distance between this proposed structure and neighboring structures. Looking at the plan trying to figure out how to disbest describe. So at the end, which is garage, assuming this is outweft. Do we know the approximate distance to any neighboring structures? Are you describing the left side as you're looking at it from the proposed home from the driveway? So toward that left side or the right side is on the street. This left side of I. OK, I had a similar question. OK. I don't see good see anything in plans. That's fine. We can defer that question to when the applicant to the sheet sheet a dash 0.1 shows the proximity to the Jason structures. There's the one across the street that's 189. 162 to the north. There's two different properties. We have. 236 and 184. The nearest structure to the rear of the site is an accessory structure and then the main residents the accessory structure is 96 feet away and the main residence is approximately 112 feet away and the property further to the south is 176 feet Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? We'll see a detailed lighting plan at a later date. I think that's detailed lighting plan. We'll show up at a later date. Yes. Okay, great. No other questions. I'd like to invite the applicant to make a presentation before the board. Hi good afternoon I'm Jerry Winches on New York Tech for the project. Oh pardon me. Oh squeeze it. Is it is it on? Okay. Again, I'm Jerry Winches, architect for the project and thank you for your service on the board. Just like to just reiterate some of the things that the staff report said. Number one, my clients are love their site and they love woodside. They've been here quite a while. And they want to stay here and they want to build their forever home. And we want to respect the and preserve Woodside's community character, reflect the lifestyle and the tastes of our client, of course, and especially embrace sustainability and climate resiliency. So what we're trying to do is build a understated one level home which allows aging in place. We want to maintain the rural character by preserving trees, open spaces and natural perimeter screening, which is there. Quite beautiful. And we want to maximize the setbacks, which we've done by locating the house in the middle of the site. And maintaining the perimeter. Site planning, the current house is sighted lower than the driveway, and as an ongoing drainage problem and somewhat of a flood risk. So the new house will be raised slightly to the driveway level to ameliorate these conditions. The site greeting and drainage will be enhanced to direct water away from the house and capture runoff from the rear slope and directed to the existing drainage channels. So the new house will also be moved forward and away from the large red would grow on the property and this will narrow the current driveway area and reduce the large paved surface that is there. The new garage will be in the rear and will be less visible from the street and we are trying to minimize any tree removal and we are trying to work around all of the roots and the existing tree canubes to preserve the redwoods and the oaks that are there. As far as the building design was mentioned that there are four distinct pitched roof modules, the four are separated by smaller flat roof links, and this is for the idea of keeping it understated and breaking up the massing of the house. The four modules are semi-rebonic int of a simple rural barn massing with gable roofs. The great room in the master bedroom wings are turned 90 degrees to the other which create a nice beautiful patio and courtyard in the rear away from the street and neighbors sort of a reverse C shape. The great room in the master bedroom wings create this patio courtyard which will house the pool. The single story has a covered patio, large, covered patio, you can see in the rendering there. And it has flat roof overhangs, where we need protection from the sun, which also reduces the light pollution and heat gain away from the interior of the project. So the materials in the color palette are, again, understated and neutral, as he mentioned. We're using a warm gray stone veneer on the great room and the master bedroom. We're going to break up the stucco rather than having one material all the way on all four modules. We have a dark green non-reflective standing seam metal roof which will be quite attractive black form windows and doors. Gray brown integral color stucco on the rest and board form concrete planters and retaining walls, which will provide a very warm, kind of natural color palette. Of course, we want a fire safe design, which is at most importance with the use of exterior and non-combustible materials, metal, stucco, stone, and concrete. And we have an enclosed eve detail for defensible space planning and fire safety. Of course, we'll be using solar and batteries and electric appliances and heat pumps and meeting all the latest codes. As far as the landscape design, it's a minimal tree removal preservation of existing trees open space and all around the perimeter of the site. We're using existing previously approved fencing and gate that are to remain. So no work will be done around the perimeter. All work will be done away from the neighbors and toward the center of the site. And the new project provides a reduced lawn area and draw resistant plantings. So we hope to minimize water usage there. And of course we will have non-combustible hard-skitting materials. So we hope you like the project. We're very excited about it and think it'll really fit into the site and we'll have minimal impact and effect on a neighbor's privacy and minimizing the scale. So I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Any members of the board have questions for the applicant? Thank you. You did a beautiful job with the finishes and the overall project looks lovely in my opinion. I'm curious to see the landscape plan when you get around to that and how you'll avoid fire dangers at the insurance companies are looking for. Yes, not easy this days, but we certainly want to do that. Thank you. Member Lindsay, any questions? Yes. I had a question whether within the original brief in ADU or junior ADU was considered as part of this project. Not at this time. We may entertain that years from now, but it's not part of this particular application. And that might happen on the upper part of the site, but many, many years from now, if at all. All right. Thank you. Well, I agree with Pat. I think it's, all right. Thank you. Well, I agree with Pat. I think it's a lovely project and I like the idea of your forever home. And that is one story and the materials are lovely are the color palette. I like that in the minimal use of you know the landscape in the grass says so good luck. Wonderful. Thank you. Sorry, I saw some questions. Oh, questions. Oh, no questions. I had a few and I know where the conceptual stage. So that's pretty early. I did notice in the presentation or the report, there's removal of three trees and one of them is a significant oak. And it was in the report it was because it conflicts with the proposed house or the construction. Is it possible to show me where that is in relation to the site? Because I just didn't notice like where that tree was when I was on site. You can see it right if I could, don't have a pointer, but you can see there, it's marked there, existing oak to be removed. Ah, okay. There you go. And so what am I looking at? Am I looking at the proposed front of the house or the rear of the, I'm sorry. I'm looking toward the toward the front of the house. Okay. I see. And if you're going to bring the house out toward the driveway. Yeah. We really shoehorned this thing into the site. And we had to give up a couple of the trees. One is a magnolia, which is not particularly important. But the oak needs to be removed. But we have many other oaks, and lots of big redwoods, beautiful redwoods there. Well, that's why I wanted to clarify that. What I did like when I visited the site was, you know, jumping the gun here, but I thought the concealment around the perimeter was significant. I just want to confirm that that's going to remain. Absolutely, the perimeter will remain. I can understand a conflict with the perimeter, what we mean. I can understand it conflict with the house, but the concealment in the perimeter is important. Okay, great, that answers my question. Let's open up questions for any members of the public who have questions for the applicant. Should I say that? All right. Yeah, yes. Are we to be an elusive item. My assumption is that straight line in the back is the back set back. And the street set back 50 feet is along the street and the. Two side setbacks are along the driveway and that rather short run from this perspective from the lower left. Is that the case? It's hard to follow from afar. Well, let's see. Yes, this was just recently discussed with staff just a few days ago. And there was, I guess, apparently some changes in the definition of rear and front setbacks. We did discuss that with them. I believe now that the front sat back is toward the right side of the slide here. The side setbacks are toward the bottom and the top of the slide. And the rear setback is toward the left edge there. And also, I believe the lower little corner there is also our rear setback. So, do I have that right? Yes, that's correct. Yeah. So, we will be adjusting the rear setback. I believe it went from 20 to 25 feet. Is that right? Or the side side back, but it should not affect the plan and certainly not any changes to privacy or any of the other issues. But I did want to say though that the report was nervous about the heights and in the setbacks to the house, from the setbacks, from the setback line to the house versus the height. And I've checked everything, I've reviewed it with staff and it looks like we are complying and well below what is the max. So I believe we're all in good shape. That off-scale seated to Santa's look like we love the design. Well, thank you. I agree. Thank you for your comments. Do any other members of the public have any questions or comments on this project? Okay with that I'd like to close the public have any questions or comments on this project? Okay with that I like to close the public hearing and open up our board discussion which I have a feeling I understand some of the sentiment but let's hear comments from the board if I may. I'm looking for the scene of last week's design and the heights to be I I felt the same thing. It looked, I had to buy, but it was in keeping, according to the documentation. So, you seem like we could sort of check. Great. I would like to not, I mean, obviously not at this moment, but see the materials for some point. Okay, good question. Member Lindsay. some boy. Okay, good question. Member Lindsey? Yes, no, I think, of course, I think we always appreciate when plans so some restraint and pursue a single story addition to our town certainly has much less of an impact visually. But beyond that in terms of overall style and direction, materials, I think it's all clearly within town's hopes and guidelines, which we wish to see built. So yes, I think it's a good valuable addition to the town. I agree with my colleagues. I think it's a very exciting conceptual design. Very understated and we appreciate that. The materials look promising, although seeing the actual. Actual materials is always helpful. I think the tree concealment idea seems necessary and very glad to see that. Given what's going on in the neighborhood, I actually drove up to the top and you could see down from not next door, but further up to the top of the street. And so like being able to really mask that seemed important to me. I would pay some attention to the patio glass that opens up into the pool area. It did seem like there's a lot of glass there as there probably should be. It's a patio to an open space. But again, without getting around to the back of the home, I thought that you might have some lighting effects on your neighbors there. But as you move toward a formal design, whichever the process is, I would definitely pay attention and be very careful about not just how much glass is there, but whether you temper it, what kind of glazing you use, because I think that was the one place that I saw that could have some negative impacts with light. But other than that, I think it's a very exciting conceptual design. Thank you very much for taking the time to do it. Now let's talk about motions and next steps. What are the options stage? Or what's the summary and then what are the options? The S or B, committed committed the applicant for providing an understated and single story design for providing materials that look promising and both likely want to see the actual materials final comment. And the one recommendation in terms of design was to look at the patio glass that opens up to the rear and to review in the context of potential lighting mission impacts to neighbors. And if necessary to consider reducing glazing or other ways that could reduce light emission impacts to neighbors. With that, a couple of other comments were noted is that board members were looking to review the landscape plan and the materials board. Those two items are part of a what's required with a formal design review application. So story polls were installed for this project. The ASRB has the following options based on what I've heard tonight, that the ASRB can complete the formal, the conceptual designer view and have the entire package come back or formal designer view with story polls installed, or the ASRB can complete the conceptual designer view and ask for the applicant to just come back for the landscape planning materials board for review by the ASRB without the need to reinstall story polls. So it'd be focused on those two items with, and we can also include also include the comment about the glass and see how they've addressed that comment. Those would be the three recommended comments for them to address if the ASRB would like. They could just bring back those focused items prior to staff completing the formal designer view. Did have one question. I see that one neighbor spoke up, but was there a significant neighbor outreach to reach the other neighbors that are around here? There was no to seem provided. I'm not sure if the applicant did any other. I said, I said, where is it? Hi, I'm one of the owners, our sons here in the back too. So John is our back neighbor. We've lived there for 12 years now, so we've gotten to know each other well over the years. I called the Rossis, and we talked about the project, and he's here as well to, you know, I think be supportive and learn more. We've also talked to the Castellinos who share their driveway. And in fact, that's the side that the glazing that you brought up looks towards. And they actually sit up quite a bit. I don't know if you noticed that their house is quite a bit higher than ours. And then we reached out also to the people directly across the street, Liz and Doug, and they're fine with it. And we left a note for the people directly across the street, Liz and Doug and they're fine with it. And we left a note for the people directly across the street that we don't know as well. Maybe a couple of weeks ago and the story pulls up and we haven't heard from them. So we did do quite a bit of neighbor outreach. Thank you for clarifying. To back to our options. Sorry, you might have to do that. I got it. You should have a question. No. Or what do we think of the options here? Do we want to go right to formal? Do we want to have a, what I would call a stripped down version where we review the materials and that one comment on lighting and then moved to what I would call staff overview? How are we feeling? My position is uncomfortable going directly to staff for forable. Do we have a motion? I think you said comfortable is that correct sorry? Yes And then the question would be should these specific items a noted come back to the ASRB just for those concentrated review or the entire formal design review could be completed by staff. I don't have a strong opinion Don. Do you want to restate? I will restate my position. I am comfortable with staff handling all the formal review and all the outstanding issues raised. How do you feel about that? I have a motion to move to formal review. This project. I'll second. Chair apple. Yes. Sure Lindsay. Yes. Remember to go up you. Yes. Remember comrade. Yes. Motion moves. Thank you very much. So for the benefit of the public and the applicant, within the next couple of days you'll receive a letter and you will go directly to staff for formal design review. So that application is ready. You can submit that to staff. No problem. I'd like to move on to our second item. Sorry for moving pretty quickly. Act agenda this evening. Second item is I believe 15 would you lane? Is that correct? Great. Hey everyone, I hope you're having a wonderful start to your week. This evening I'm going to be introducing a project for conceptual design review for 15 would of you lane. This project includes the demolition of an existing single-family residence, detached garage, pool and shed to construct a new one-story single-family residence, with a basement, attached garage, outdoor pavilion, gym and pool house, detached accessory dwelling unit, pool spa and a associated site improvements. There are no desk items for this agenda item, and at this time there have been no public correspondence received for the project. During this review at a future application performance design review, we will determine if this is subject to the sequa. All right. The project is located on approximately 4.5 acre lot lot and it falls within the SCP-5 zoning designation. The subject's site is bisected by woodview lane into one large apportion suitable for development and one smaller portion not scope for development at this time. The southernmost end of the property is bordered by Portolo Road, therefore the site falls within the boundaries of a locally designated scenic border. The property is located within the Alquist Priolo Special Study Zone and the applicant shall meet with the talent geologist to determine if preliminary geotechnical review is necessary at the formal design review level. The topographic survey submitted by the applicant has identified slopes and excess of 35 percent along the southern property line that adjoins wood reeling and adjacent to the northern property line. The footprint of the proposed pool and deck does overlap with slopes and excess of 35 percent. However, the applicant has submitted engineering letter confirming that the proposed development encompasses manmade 35 percent slopes near the existing pool patio, which is just south of the proposed pool, and at the proposed entry driveway. The property has an existing single family main residence and detached broads, pool and pool equipment shed, all of which are scope for demolition. Larger portion of the site,oped for development has variable elevations and it slopes upward from would you lane at an elevation of approximately 484 feet to a maximum site elevation of approximately 554 feet along the side property line to the east. In the preliminary title report and topographic survey for this project, identified 15 foot riding trail easement and a five foot public utility easement on the smaller, non-developed portions of the property that is divided from the primary portion by Woodview Lane. In addition, there is a five foot public utility easement on both sides of the primary parcel developed or scope for development in this project. The proposed main residence is a one-story single-family home with a basement and attached garage located in a similar location to the existing main residence. The proposed main residence is approximately 7,432 square feet accounting for the multiplier reduction and garage exemptions and this project will therefore require a maximum resident size exception. The home is scoped at 27 feet 9 inches and is therefore compliant with the maximum main resident size for SCP zoning designation. The site proposal does include three accessory structures, an outdoor pavilion, a gym pool house, and a detached accessory dwelling unit. The accessory structures do not exceed the required overall heights or play heights and meet the required setbacks. Based on preliminary floor area calculations submitted by the applicant, all accessory structures do appear to be compliant with the maximum floor area permitted for accessory structures and what side. I do have physical samples available for you to view if you would like, but the applicant has proposed materials that are consistent with the main residents for all accessory structures. The applicants are proposing stained wood natural stone cladding metal wood cladding, metal frame doors, and windows, and painted metal trim. The building, the renderings provide a proposed color palette for the structures that include a variety of earth stone colors, and they are primarily in shades of brown and gray. And then the applicant is currently, oops, sorry about that. The applicant is currently proposing the removal of five trees as a part of this project scope, all of which are within or adjacent to the proposed building footprints in the plan development. The conceptual review submittal includes comprehensive arborist report, including an assessment of trees to be removed from the site. The arborist report does identify two of the trees proposed for removal as coast live oaks in Fair Health. The Arbor's report did not identify three of the trees proposed for removal at this time. And the five trees have all been proposed for removal. So accommodate the site design. Staff is available for questions. If you have any at this time, in addition, we do have members of the project team available both in person and online if you do have any more specific questions about the design. But I have materials if you guys would like to know if that was the spot. Thank you very much. This time I like to ask any members of the board to have questions for staff. I do. Is there a plan or elevation here that shows the location of the two coastal coast live-oaks, slated to removal. Bear with us multi-tasking. Okay. Yes, give me one second. I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. So free number 22 is one of the identified coast live oaks. So we have it adjacent to this auto court here. Sorry, I'm not seeing this on the zoom. Can you show the site plan that shows where the removal of that is? Right there. So tree number 22 right here is one of the COS Live Oaks identified. Then you believe that the other one is right here, Jason, to the EDU. Okay. Any other questions? Remember, Lindsey? No. I have a couple of questions for staff. So first I want to make sure I understand what we're commenting on. The driveway is going to change within but not the entrance of the driveway. It's going the gates going to remain the same. Are we do we once or inside the property, is that appropriate for us to comment on the driveway or is it really just about establishing that the main entrance is consistent and then do we care or we don't care about what happens in the property, I guess. So I will clarify they are proposing to maintain the existing driveway entrance. The rooting of the driveway is being modified to be more compliant with the standards of the fire district but they are proposing a new vehicle entry gate as a part of this project which was on their lands. Lands that were provide. Right but it would be in the same location if then the configuration is going to basically go to the left instead of the right if I'm reading this properly. Once you're inside the gate. Oh, yes, they're re-rooting. But otherwise, the entrance will be. Okay, and also I didn't know that it's a scenic corridor. The fact that there's a public park across the street. Does that add any other elements? Or is it scenic corridor? Are we supposed to consider the light of the public space there as well as it's just about the corridor? The project the ASRB evaluates, you know, the four topics of community character or site planning, building, designing, landscape elements. So, you know, visibility from offsite, offsite impacts, all that stuff is our items that they ask are be can open on. A scenic court or just identifies that the project would be viewed from a highly traveled area that the town is designated as a scenic court or but there are no special review criteria. Thank you. It's set for the scenic court. I ask because it's not a it's not a passerby thing right you have hundreds sometimes multiple hundreds of folks across the street and I just wasn't sure whether that makes it the scenic gathering versus versus well cars are driving by which is most just out. Yeah the visibility the side all the same. So so we're supposed to apply the same standard and look into the same same way as we would. Yes, the design guidelines, all of those. So we'll still apply correctly. Great. Thank you very much. I don't have any other questions. Anyone else? Yeah, for staff. Yeah. No design questions. Yeah, for the application. Okay, great. With that, let's invite the applicants up to tell us more about the project. Hello. That's pretty good. Okay. So, a few notes here. I'm Mike McCabe with Walker Warner Architects. I'll try to keep this brief because I know you have a packed agenda. But first of all, I want to say we're thankful for this opportunity to share a little bit with the board about this project tonight. Walker Warners had the privilege to work in Woodside for many years on many projects and we're happy to be back, especially with this exciting project. And one of the things I wanted to say is throughout the project, we've had throughout the design of the project, we've worked closely, of course, with our clients, but also with staff to make sure that the project not only is gonna sort of faithfully achieve our clients vision, but also to make sure that as we go through the project at each stage of development, that it's going to meet the residential design guidelines. And particularly those ones which are important to walk our water in all our designs, but especially we identify with the ones about subordinate, sensitive, and complementary to the natural environment. Because for us it all starts with the site, and especially a great site like this. We kind of look at it as like if we can avoid messing it up, you know, we've started with something great, so we have to compliment that. And I just wanted to share, you know, we have two great clients who are here tonight, Brian and Michelle. And they told us something early on in the process that affected me and set this in context, which was that they really saw it as an honor to build a project like this. And especially on a site like this, I think some of you hopefully visited this site and saw our story poles, you know, omnipresent views. Really like different corners of the property when you go there, there's terms like lodge, retreat, nature, preserve to describe their vision. In other phrases, like understated, the connection to nature and sense of awe to describe how they wanted the project to feel. At the same time, they were clear that while they started with a concept of lodge, they won the modern house, modern spaces that sit lightly on the land as opposed to a house with low dark spaces that wasn't connected to the outside and had rustic aesthetics that, you know, if we hear the word lodge, we might commonly associate with that. So as we began to evaluate the site, we saw pretty quickly that there was actually what we saw as really great alignment with what Woodside wants and what our clients want. The sites are challenging one, as I think anyone who went there saw is quite steep. It slopes in both directions. So it's kind of an interesting ridge site. And it has, you know, the amazing context of the Oaks that are there that we're really important to Brian and Michelle to work around. And so when we look at how we approach the site and how woodside is interested in the site being approached concepts like reducing the bulk and mass via a single story concept, versus a two story, which we evaluated both. And we ultimately went one story as you can see situating the buildings closely to the existing grades, stepping the massing of the different parts of the project down the hill, preserving trees. And then of course, the site really kind of dictates that we located our new development, really where the existing development was. So a lot of our disturbance is where prior disturbance was, certainly to the extent we could possibly do that. The new driveway is a kind of variation from that, but that's really all about the fire department requirements that existing driveway is phenomenally steep and couldn't be made compliant. But we have our landscape architect here and Jim Toby from Lane Brazes here. So if there's questions about that, they can address that too. So material selections, we have our materials there. You can see them. Those are influenced not only by the site, all the tonalities, everything. That's how we pick to try to situate and put the project deeply kind of in the context. But it's also for things that Michelle and Brian put out to us is very important durability, low maintenance, fire resistance. So those are really big ones. And as you can see on the exterior materials, the entire exterior envelope with the exception of the wood softlets that are, you know, we're projecting roofs out really to give solar protection. So with the exception of those softlets, the entire exterior is non-combustible. And I can talk more about the materials if you guys have questions. Sustainability is also an important topic for us. And as we go through the stages of development of the project, we'll be working a lot more on evaluating the different things. But, you know, one thing that should be pretty obvious, I imagine, is, you know, the flat roofs are an aesthetic choice. It's a low mass, low impact choice. But it's also a place that Brian and Michelle want to really put in a lot of solar have a great battery backup array. And so that that's a case where the aesthetics and the sustainability align. And for Walker Warner, probably like most of you, sustainability is about more than just that material choice and solar panels. Those are kind of the low hanging fruit as we call it. For us, it's more about making sure the buildings in the right place, orient in the right way, has the right solar protection and is substantially built. So it's going to stand the test of time. I made a few other notes here that I thought might be helpful to share because I know we know glazing is a big issue and our clients have this really strong desire for extensive visual connection to the landscape and the site's very private, you know the neighbors are very far away and so they want that connection, it's very important to them. And so we talked early on about the potential concern that we know will hear about the amount glazing. And so on that, we'll be using a very low visible light transmittance glass. I think something under 50% is what we're targeting. So that will do a lot to help with that. And then neighbor outreach was asked of the last applicant. So I figured that's a good one to address. Brian and Michelle have reached out to the two neighbors that are primarily adjacent to them. On the site plan, or if you look at an area, it'll look like there's more neighbors who are actually potentially impacted. But for example, on the backside of the lot, the hill drops straight off down. So those neighbors are not actually even sort of aware of the house up there. So they've reached out to both of them. There were no concerns. And I think there were no letters or anything that were received. And then I did want to mention our team has reached out to the town geologists and been told that there's no further anything required from them. So hopefully we'll be good there. And then if you'd like our Lansing architect James Lord is here and he can share a little bit more about landscape. Sure. thank you. You can get it just in case. I'll hold it. Hello everyone. So as Mike said, there's really rare sites like this. We've done lots of projects on the wood side and totally understand the set of activities, especially with materials and the character and everything. But this site is just spectacular. I mean, what's so lovely is to think about it in almost experiential terms because you're running along Woodpey Lane, which is very forested. We're like Mike said, we're keeping almost all the oaks at the holes advantage. It's just so absolutely beautiful. And the big issues that we've had were the fire truck to get up to the level. But we really tried to work to lay everything into the land and into the trees. The trees are spectacular. And so the idea, as you sort of circulate over literature, when you come onto the property, you don't see the house at all, which is sort of amazing. And then it's all until you start this work your way up, you slowly get almost a slow peak reveal of actually what's happening until you get to the very top. And even at the top, there's the more private courtyard that's organized at the front door. So you get a sense of arrival. And again, lays in that in that ridge line, so it's down low, which is fantastic. And all the plants we're using, they're basically 100% native. We're adding about 58 trees. Majority of those trees are actually stone fruit and citrus. The rest are all oaks and madrones and just really to complement the existing stands that are there. So we're actually adding trees to what's there, which is sort of lovely, providing screening against different neighbors. So they feel more private themselves and we've had those conversations. So I think, and the footprint of the actual landscape is literally where the landscape was of the prior house. We haven't gone out into the field because we don't really want to. We want the natural, we're working in the natural seed stock. All these things will be feathered into the existing oak savanna that's around the trees. So there's a blurring of the line. And then when you do have the the new landscape again, it's going to be native. It's going to have a meadow kind of quality to it so that seasonally it'll change so every time you come it'll be a little different. I think that's about it. Anything else? Jim, you want to hear if any questions? Okay, there you go. Thank you very much. Appreciate the detail to any members of the ASRB have questions for the applicant? I just have a couple questions. I don't think it's required at this point, but do you have a visual on the fencing and the gates? Or say, I'm not sure that's required at this point. They do have a proposed gate, confronted to what she puts on for you. And Julian, actually, if you could pull that up on the screen. And then the fencing, something that staff raised in the report, the plans indicate that they propose to keep the existing chain link fencing around the site and giving the full redevelopment of the site, it's something that the ASR beat may want to discuss. I'm a looking at fencing, but they do they do have a proposal for a new entry gate to which Gillian was pulling up here. Yeah, I actually had a question about the fence. Let's see the gate first and we'll get to that. I have a hard copy. It wants to curve. I'm sorry, but no, it's hard. It's how the other question I had, it was just about tree number seven, that's, you can. Then the other quick question I had is just about tree number seven that's you're going to be removing that's almost like right next to the ADU. Is that an open fair health or good health? I'm not sure what fair exactly means, but and is that because the ADU there's so much space. I mean, what did it think to move the that we're talking about? Excuse me. Could you use the mic? Thank you. Thank you. For the multitude's online. One tree is very close to the house and so just to be safe, that one is being removed. It could stay, but we just don't want to later on. If it does impact the routes that are there, that there's a potential for the health of that tree, but that's for the ADU, right? Yeah, for the ADU. And the health of that tree is already compromised. So that's why it's on the list. Does that make sense? I believe she's asking could the ADU be moved further away from the tree? Okay, that's more of an architecture crest in the night. So it's a combo of questions. So the ADU position is something that we worked on an awful lot with Jim Toby and James. And the trick, as you know, on steep sites is all about we have that plate height restriction on the ADU. And there's a very narrow window of the site where the grades are right to get the ADU in there and get the ceiling heights. So once you go out of that, then the grade starts to drop off. And we have to, we'd'd have to scrunch everything down to really low ceiling heights, which just wouldn't, you know, if you get into like eight foot ceilings in that space, it wouldn't be great. So that tree, one of the things that's a little hard to tell on the plan right there, if you do mind zooming in a little, I'll just point out one logistical thing which is again because of the grades that building is actually cut in on the uphill side and that's the worry is that we're going to potentially jeopardize those roots although as James said it's one of those trees that you could say we're going to try to save. It's really it's not a great tree which we could show staff or visit site with them as I recall. It's leaning slightly. It has a very awkward trunk because if you can see there's three very significant oaks above it. And so it's kind of this sad little guy that's under those canopies not getting enough light to flourish. So it's not really a great tree to start with. Yeah. Any other questions from the board? Thanks. I have a couple of questions on the materials. I heard everything that you've said about the desire for sustainability and for fire, redundancy, et cetera. It seems like there's an extreme amount of metal on the building. Am I just feeling that or? There's definitely some metal. The primary exterior materials are stone, glass, metal, and then the wood soft fit. And so on the exterior, we didn't want to have everything be a single material. And our clients really don't like Stucco. So then we were looking around for another metal. have everything be a single material. And our clients really don't like stucco. So then we were looking around for another metal. And as you can see, the metal, it has a really beautiful patina on it and kind of a hammered finish. So it'll be really beautiful and it'll live well in patina in that environment. So it's really kind of trying to find that way of keeping the building from looking super homogenous, like breaking down the massing, giving it some, the metal is also, it's vertical panels with slight gaps through it, so it's gonna give a different play of light as well, which is interesting, I think. So basically the stone is the surround for the garage area, and if you call them throughout. And the long blade walls, I don't know, we actually, in addition to the things that you've seen here on the screen, we gave staff a link to our navigable model. So if you haven't seen that, we could pull it up on the screen or maybe staff could. And we could show the stone walls are blades that run inside to out in certain locations. And then it also does occur on certain walls like the garage, the back of the master, or the primary bedroom. Yeah. Would you like to see that? I would love to. That's not a problem. Do you have the ability to pull up that link? It's... Yeah, the QR code if you go to Jacob might be able to help us. Or our team should be on the call and could share their screen if that's possible. Guys, you on the call. Is anyone there? Yeah, Mike Rear, I think Shoke and bring this up. Just give us a second. Okay. Thank you. You never know which way these meetings you're gonna have. I know. This will give a lot better impression. Or twist in turns in the driveway. Yeah. So show go over to the courtyard. This is driveway entrance. So here's the plan. Go back to the plan real briefly so we can orient everyone for where they are. So you've seen the plan and the little red dots are kind of like a real estate tour radio buttons that you can go into and click on and we'd hope that everyone would have the chance to see this but we'll show it here. Go to the main courtyard which is the formal arrival let's say. And so there you can see turn your head to the right show. So there's stone walls that run through. And basically it's kind of like a gallery entry and our client really loves early landscape painting. And they can speak much more intelligently about that than I can. But they have a really beautiful collection. And so the idea is they want to see through the house to landscape in the form of the paintings, see through gaps through the house to the landscape on the other side. And then when they're in the house, have the visual access to all the landscape that's framed by the house. So this is the main arrival. Of course, through there is the view to the distant ridge, Wendy Hill, et cetera. And you can see our versions of paintings on some of the walls. And so it's really this rhythm of the stone veneer, which is probably going to feel like a more primary material really when you're there in person, and then glass and the patented metal and then the wood soft, it's of course. So maybe go to the other side on the view side and let's show them from there. And then we have one down at the pool house too. And one of the other things that you'll see here, which is a little unusual for many projects, including some of our projects, there's not a lot of built exterior hard terrace. The clients had a desire to reduce that kind of paved surface. And so what they really wanted was landscape to run right up to the building versus have paving and seats and all that other stuff. There you go, kind of pan around. This is a little bit of a fish eye, so it kind of distorts things a little, but you can kind of get the feel. Let's go to the last point down by the pool real quick show. And so here you'll see the tree that you were talking about show you can kind of hit it with your cursor is back in there. And so it's under these really massive, really dominant oaks and it's just kind of a little guy with a funny canopy. We love every tree there, but you know, this site truly, if you got a chance to visit it, it's a beautiful oak woodland. And really, shoehorn was used in the last presentation. That's a good term. It's really like fitting all this in in the right places with the grade to preserve the trees. Flip around their show. You can look up towards the house. And then go to the pool house. Okay. And this pool area like we talked about is where basically it's where the existing pool was and the existing terrace. Oh, full. Thank you very much. Sir, I have additional questions if it's okay. A couple of quick ones. I did notice when you're reviewing that there seems to be a lot of thought. I mean, the consistency between the main house and the outbuildings. I'm wondering. How intentional that was and if you think there's additional areas where you could, I don't say conform, but where that consistency could be maintained or do you feel like you've done enough for par? Yeah, well, we intentionally tried, that was Brian and Michelle's goal, that they're all really of the same family. And we carried all the same systems, materials down through there. So it's not a scenario where you have kind of, you know, the ugly duckling that's kind of the lower level, it's different. So it's all the exact same systems approaches, everything between each building on site. Thank you. And one question about the chain link fence that you'd notice. I'm making an assumption and please clarify, if I'm incorrect, I'm making an assumption, it's not very rural and it's not very artistic. I'm making an assumption that you're leaving the chain link fence for financial reasons. Cost I would say is that accurate way for me to think about it or is there other concerns going into that? I think our clients and they could speak to it. They're here tonight if they'd like, but I think they look at it really as a sensible solution because the existing chain link is black. It's actually not present. It recedes very well. And we looked at some designs with the landscape team and they could speak to it for wooden wire, which is what we've commonly done on other projects in Woodside, and they actually become more present, I think, in their point of view. So it's a little bit of that, like, you know, if we don't need to, and this is me speaking, they can put their version on it. If we don't need to, let's not, you know. I was here as about the motivations. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for clarifying. I have no other questions. Don, good questions. Yes. Thank you for that brief little 3d tour. That's helpful for me being remote because I'm at a disadvantage. I'm unable to visit the site. I want to come back to the topic of scenic corridor and potential for light emissions, but not in the context of impact on neighbors, but rather as Chair Apple mentioned earlier across the street to the park. Not having visited the site, it's difficult for me on a just on a topography to try and assess the potential of creating a beacon on the hill, if you will, with light emissions. So I'd like to hear your perspective on that. And also my fellow members perspective on it, having visited the site. Sure. Great question. So the building is from certain areas of that park, it's going to be visible. There's actually a lot of layers of trees in between us and them. And we know it's one of those push pull scenarios where we're trying to achieve the client's goals for that amazing view, the connection to the landscape, which is, you know, they're outdoors people. That's really where they start. But also, you know, try to do the mitigating factors of really limiting the actual visible light that can get out via using the, you know, the low transmittance glass, which they understand is something that we've already basically committed to. Okay, just a quick follow-up. Is there any landscape plan as part of this to add additional screening? Well, James can speak to, we submitted, I believe, a pretty full landscape plan. And Mayor Lindsey, yes, there's a landscape plan in there. There's multiple layers of, like I mentioned, new oaks that are hiding these X the lower buildings and a layering of planting both in front of it and behind and also to the neighbor's side as well. So it's pretty well hidden. This is a little bit out of turn for me but I wanted to respond to member Lindsay. I actually did go across the street at the exact same thought you did. I went to the top of the skateboard ramp, and I, which I thought was the highest point in the park, it's just a skateboard ramp. And I could, I could not see, I could, I could make out the, the makings of what are the existing lower part of the property, but I couldn't see the story poles from there. However, the issue was, well, I didn't go up the hill, right? I didn't get all the way back out of what I would consider to be the public section of that park. Then again, I don't think a lot of people are walking all the way up that hill after dark, which is when I guess the main concern would be. But that is why I brought it up. It's also in staff report. And that's why I felt like we should have some discussion on it. And again, I know this is a little bit out of turn, but I'm just trying to stay on topic, given that it came up. I can see the concern for the beacon on the hill, but I could not get up that hill at night to actually replicate the problem, if that makes sense. Or the condition. I want to be biased, the potential condition. I think the landscape lighting will be what really shows how bright the house will be I want to want to be biased the potential condition. I think the landscape lighting will be what really shows how bright the house will be if we once we see the landscape lighting plan and I agree. Yeah, and we did submit one if you want to look at it. It's all intended to be very minimal. You know, Okay, just any other questions for the applicant? Nope. Great. Then let's open up for a public comment and discussion on the project. If we have anybody in the room or online, I'd like to comment or ask questions. Now is the time? Any hands raised online? No one. No hands raised online. Fantastic. And I would like to move to board discussion. We would like to go first. I'll go first. I confess I'm a bit biased since my own home shares many of the same characteristics, materials as this does. So that may influence my decisions on how my perspective somewhat. However, I think it's a wonderful project and has accomplished the goal of the lodge in terms of its, it's the layout of the accessory buildings, placement of the pool, lower on the grade, all of those things, I think, have lent themselves to creating quite an effective solution. Absolutely no concerns with regards to the style, design, massing layout materials. I don't think it's good. What else? Just as they're going to be some of the historical site evaluation issues that'll come up somewhere down the line. I believe the billions old enough where the town has a contract architectural historian and they will prepare a historical evaluation prior to the completion of the formal design review. The question. Yeah, African has actually also started pursuing that historical report already and they are just pending receiving that report. So I don't know if you guys have the findings. We don't have it. We've been pursuing it for quite a few months now. So we hope to have it soon. I don't I don't have any expectation that there be any historic merit to that structure. But it was something we wanted to get. We had hope to have it in hand by now. But yeah. No, I actually just returned from Palm Springs and the Monarchs and doors. It gives me that feel. I think it's a beautiful design and I love it. It's my style as well. I have a hard time visualizing what it really will be at night. I love the design, but I do caution what, like you mentioned, the neighbor behind you, but what's down, what they might see versus the two neighbors on the side that you've reached out to and don't have any concerns. So I mean, not really, I don't really know and I'm not wasting it as a concern. It's just I'm having a hard time really visualizing what it's going to look like. Yeah, the neighbors behind are, I don't know, probably I would guess 50 feet below us. The hill just goes straight down. So they won't see anything for sure. And Brian was just telling me about the disputes on the other side. What are you saying? This is Brian. I'm Brian Duhop, one of the owners. You could picture this on top of a knoll with this big beacon of light with windows. But if you're on site, what you realize is both behind, there's actually no immediate house as it drops off. It drops all the way down to Possum in the road that runs into it, which has huge soaring redwoods. And so you can't actually see up it. We can't see the structure from the backside. You could also picture it being this beacon of light from the park. But the reality is there is such a large Oakland grove at the bottom of the property and the park drops off that you can't actually see the current structure, which by the way our roof structure, our roof line will be lower than the current structure until you get to the other side of the soccer field. If you can picture the park, you have to go to the other side of the soccer field, which is where the park ends and go up on top of the wall, then you can just see the current roof structure. So it sounds like it's this exposed beacon, but it's a remarkable site because it's actually hidden on almost every side from anyone who could see it. Yeah, I can confirm that I had that same experience and I was trying to find the roof. I could thank you. What about the neighbor that's to the left side? So if you go up the current driveway and you go to the left, pass the side of the pool, you could see their home and it looks like your pavilion would be kind of up above them there. So the way I describe it, so the house to the north is actually a very, very large two story. So if you were looking for a beacon on the hill, it would actually be that house, not the current structure. And they're, they're quite a bit away from us. The house to the south of us, where we'll be a little bit closer to, it's a single story structure, but it actually starts to drop off. It's a unique site and then it drops off both directions. It starts to drop off. And if you look at our structure, that's towards where the primary bedroom is. And there's very little, there's very little activity and glass on that side compared to the main pavilion, which is more of a east west orientation. So I don't, I don't see them really being impacted at all. We've reached out to them. We've spoken to them directly. It's a very thoughtful design. We've reached out to them. We've spoken to them directly. It's a very thoughtful design. Oh, thank you. Thank you. You'd see it, but a lot of time. Thank you for being just studying this. Thank you very much. Okay, just a couple of quick comments for me. And then I think we've created move on to a motion. First, I want to commend the applicants for being so proactive for anticipating a lot of the questions that would come up. So it was great to see that. Specifically, the cohesiveness of the design, I think is really great. The consistency of materials throughout the property, the way you've thoughtfully elevated different elements and brought all of it together. And we don't have like a purple house here and a white house there and a greenhouse there. We've seen that before, maybe a few times. But I also think that the putting up story polls really helped for me. So thank you, as always. For me, the only thing I would want to make sure we're aware of with staff going forward would be just really locking in a very specific, whatever you wanna call it, shading or glazing or something. The opacity of that glass, I think, is going to be really, really important just to put any concerns to rest. And I'm full confidence given just how transparent and thoughtful you've already been. That's an easy issue to work through with staff, but that to me is just like I want to be really careful just because you just don't know. I am comfortable that the people down in the rear will never see the light of day from that house. I could I couldn't even see it through the trees right now but I do think about the front of that property especially that is the gathering point not just a corridor but but honestly it's a fantastic project. I had no idea that little gem was up there and it's wonderful to see what you're doing with it. So thank you very much. Thank you. Let's move to a summary hopefully, sage and then some motions or some options. And the applicant was committed for providing the indoor outdoor design with minimal massing and well-proportioned structures with low-building profiles. The applicant was also commented for proactively looking into potential impact questions such as light emission, tree removal, and neighborhood outreach. The one recommendation or really comment noted for such as Lighty Mission, Tree Removal, and Neighborhood Outreach. The one recommendation or really comment noted for the applicant to carry through to formal designer view is to ensure that they do use low Lighty Mission glass. The architects noted it would be around 50% low emission glass And so those details could be further provided at the next stage. Those were all the comments? Is there anything else you'd like me to add? Sure, yes. The lighting plan was included as part of the site. And we can review it closer, but yes, they will. It was the sheets LP00 and LPA that towards the end. But we will ensure that it's included as part of the formal design review. So story polls are installed. The SRB has the ability to have staff complete the formal design review with reviewing the recommendation and insurance that the assurance that the applicant will include the low mission glass. With that, it could come back to the ASRB for formal design review or to staff. I would like to move that we move this to staff for formal review. Second that. Chair apple. Yes. I sure Lindsay. Yes. I'm rid of you. Yes. I'm Rick Comra. Yes. Motion moves. Thank you very much. We're now about an hour and 20 minutes in. I think we're going to unfortunately call for a brief comfort break. Sorry for those waiting online. So long meeting tonight. Which I believe is 3985 Woodside Road. Yes, thank you. So I'll be introducing the project at 3985 Woodside Road. This is a conceptual design review and the project includes demolishing and existing barn and constructing a new barn. So the property is currently developed with a main residence, some accessory structures, as well as two ADUs. This site has some open building permits associated with the second ADU. That is under construction or almost near completion. And that's this say to you here. So the new barn will be located in the same location as the existing barn. So that's this shaded structure here. It will be approximately 2,600 square feet. The applicant indicated that the barn will be used for sheep and or goats and is not proposed to be a horse barn. The barn will be a typical barn design with vertical wood siding and standing seam metal roofing. The livestock and equestrian heritage committee reviewed the proposed barn and provided comments and recommendations on the proposed design and functionality. The committee commented on the amount of glass, the storage spaces for tack and feed, the stall sizes and other comments related to the safe keeping of livestock, and the applicant submitted a response letter and an updated floor plan with some additional information about how the barn will be used. So there was a desk item and it was the updated floor plan from the applicant. This updated floor plan shows different areas for equipment storage, feed storage, goat, milking, washing and grooming and modular pens. The formal design review plans will need to provide some additional information and details to support the barn use and to meet the minimum requirements. The applicant is in attendance and available for questions, but that concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Do any members of the board have questions for staff? Yes, I have a process question, perhaps Sage can address. This has to do with the stated use of the structure versus potential future use of the structure and how we in interpreting its appropriateness might anticipate that future use. The boards should focus on what the stated uses, potential future uses that might be stated by the app. They are not what's currently being reviewed. So it really should be focused on the bar and the definition of a bar and the use is currently being proposed. I'm going to need future thought that may be converted to something else. It really, that would need to be evaluated at that time. So can I sorry can I follow up this similar question just to expand on that. Is it relevant at all what the use of the barn is or are we looking at it from a purely aesthetic point of view? It's the use as with all structures are important so single family home needs to be a single family home a barn needs to be a barn and so uses also sometimes Instruct form and design and so with regard to The animal use we do not expect the SRB to be experts in that field. The livestock and equestrian heritage committee has provided initial comments. This project will be required to go back to them with formal design review application, which will show some, maybe additional details, the applicant can work that through with the livestock committee in terms of ensuring the safety of the proposed livestock in that barn. I see, more or less, but I'm still, I don't say confused them, I'm directionally having trouble like trying to, like a single use home, you understand if families going to live there, but it's actually an interesting question. A barn needs to have livestock, and as Ansler uses that are typical, there could be other items related to agricultural uses on site. have livestock and as ancillary uses that are typical, there could be other items related to agricultural uses on site. You see a full bathroom in a barn. That is not entirely uncommon, especially for larger barns. We've had applicants fully functional livestock barns. They put in the full bathroom just to wash up before bringing back their barn Use back to the house. So that's not uncommon and Other things noted here in terms of areas for equipment storage, milking, washing Those things are ancillary to the livestock use The upper floor has not been indicated on the plan and speaking with the applicant, they've noted they proposed that for storage area. Any storage would have to be stuff stored for the use of the barn. I see, and I don't wanna describe bad intentions, but are we... I'll withdraw my point. Any other questions for staff? I had one follow-up question regarding the exterior lighting on the structure relative to the orientation to Woodside Road. You could, it's known if you could point that out on the, on the plan. So I believe this is right. Applicate can confirm it. So this is the elevation that would face wood side road, this west elevation here. So the exterior lighting that they have proposed is just this one mixture here. It's very minimal, it looks very minimal to me. Yeah, in that elevation, it's just that one fixture. And those doors would open, I know this is probably best for the applicant, again, we're on the topic. But the main doors in the front of the ones that open and those windows also slide open so interior light could. Okay. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Oh, just one last question. Just like go to, do we have a material board on this? Or is it matching the house? We don't have a material board at this time now. Will we get to know the placement of the upper storage areas in advance of proving the use of the upper story? Or where they are when I look to, this is just one floor. Yeah, let me show you. So this is the floor plan kind of like the lower level. We don't. This shows kind of the reflected ceiling plan, but it shows these like lofted areas here on both sides. So these are indicated for storage, this loft area. These were the plans that were included in the plan set with the packet. The additional plan was just provided by the applicant response to the livestock committee review. Any other questions from staff? Any other questions from the board for staff? Okay great then I would like to invite the applicant to make a presentation to the board. Good evening my name is Adam Biddle from Architecture. I'm the architect of the project. A lot of your questions you just threw to sage. I've been peppering Sarah and sage for months now. There's a lot of this one is new territory for me a new barn versus used to being up here in front doing new homes. I have threads going back from 2017 with Corinne when she was the planner initially on this project. So I won't take too much time. I'll give you a quick history on it. The owners have been there over 10 years. They've now raised two kids there. They've slowly progressed in developing the site as they've lived there. They have not moved off. I took over the project back when an ADU, I think went to ASRB, was going to start permit drawings. That's the larger one in the middle of the site. I did a rework of it and then they actually built that one. Then the owners moved into that one and then they did a remodel of the main house. Then during after the end of that main house, the new ADU laws came into effect, so they built the little one next door. And so now we're working to the front of the site. And so the existing barn is a prefab structure. And so they aren't going to just demolish it. They're looking, they already have someone who's going to deconstruct it and It is going to be used. So they have a strong sense of aesthetics and an interest of doing something that looks nice. So we took inspiration of the existing barn and just a traditional barn form. I mean across from one of the main horse areas of woodside. There's an equestrian trail running you know, one of the main horse areas of woodside, there's an equestrian trail running on the north side of the property. And trying to not displace the footprint of the existing barn. I mean, the net addition is under a thousand square feet. The total addition in footprint is under a thousand square feet. It is trying to make use of the volume exception for a barn. And the use of livestock, they don't have a need for equestrian, which has been some of the questions I've been throwing to staff. That's just not their intention. However, in terms of future use, I have designed the barn and working with the spatial plans of the keeping horses and woodside from the livestock and equestrian committee, the perimeter and the lofts actually use the sizing and volumes in that document. If someone was to in the future, why use that for horses and I know I know we can't project down the road that another conversation. For the use for them is going to be goats and potentially milking low density livestock here. And then just overall farming of the lot which I threw in the narrative. We just got those comments from the committee a couple of weeks ago. So I put together some responses and then just a graphic floor plan. So we have not had the chance to actually talk in detail with any of the committee members. That was our first back and forth. So I'm not quite sure the level of questions. That's going to be more technical for them, but for you, um, the visual from the Senate corridor, which is the reason we're here. The barn is over 250 feet away from Woodside Road, from the property line. So it has a massive setback. Woodside Road, the elevation of the actual road from the public realm is equal to the ridge of the new barn, if you can believe that. The site drops off 30 feet from Woodside Road to where the barn is. It's a gentle slope. It's a very long gentle slope but you can see there's a lot of padding between there in the public which actually affords the clients quite a bit of privacy being right across from the park all the traffic and parking on the weekends they've dealt with over the years but they love it there. We're looking to change the current pre-fat barn has kind of a lighter paint color you can kind of see pretty pretty pretty starkly right in the redwoods there in the oaks. We're going to go with a very dark palette. We want to hide that be subordinate to the surroundings. The volume of the barn actually is going to help conceal some of the other built environmental behind it that we've already achieved. You know, from there, it's probably best just for some Q&A here. I don't know if we're going to get into the actual use in the poor plan of the barn, but just the exterior. Trying to plan for flexibility, whether it's climate, the future use of horses for someone else, access to the site. But yeah, let me know if you have any questions. Are the owners present? They weren't able to attend the hearing tonight. Okay, any other questions for the applicant? Thank you, by the way. One, I'm familiar somewhat with the Yaku-ugi. What is the fire retardancy on that? From what I understand, it's actually pretty decent from the way it's treated, but as far as building codes concerned, we're going to be protected at the sheathing level, so the finished level just no different than any other, you know, home structure. We're not going to be counting on the finish to be our fire-produactive layer. But durability and the treating process do have some fire retardant properties. Let's go back to the face of the barn. Can you just explain as it's going to be feed or what kind of materials are we going to feed? So there is a material image board on that. If you go to, might be the cover sheet, and that should give you the pallet. Yeah, I was. Yeah. Yeah. And so we're trying to tie in with the main house. I will not say we're tying in with the ADU. Again, that was predated me, the white board and batten. The main house has, if you see, we go back to that material board. It's okay. But we took the metal roof that you see on the ADU and the main house. We're replicating that onto the barn and then some of the accent stained woods that you see will match the main house but we're taking a darker this charred treated wood as the overall sighting which is kind of a fun, you know, modern play versus the traditional, let's say red barn, right? The doors and windows are going to be, match the main house more black and steel aesthetic. I know the comment has come up on doors and windows. If you notice, they are pocketing systems mainly. So this barn can be left in the open position and we can make use of the barn doors. We can close up from the west if needed whether it's rain wind we can open up on the the home side so the idea of just flexibility for access whatever the enclosures may be right now the existing barn has enclosures on two sides. I'm the is the idea. Sorry, I said again. Except for two mandors, every opening has a shutter or barn door or covering that can operate with or without the window. Okay, so I did look at that correctly. I just wanted to make 100% sure that when I was looking at it was a shutter. Again, flexibility, it sounds good, but I know it brings up a lot of questions. And I do look forward to eventually meeting with the livestock or equestrian committee. What do you say is under the light? So that's raising the glass off the ground. So it's just a solid panel. Pretty. So if you go to the floor plan, there's multiple ones and goats, I'm not sure if they're very domestic. They're almost, you know, it doesn't take too much, but I'm assuming the driveway side, if we go to the plan, floor plan. Okay. So this is a new thing that our animals need to have glass enclosures. If you went down Woodside Road right now, which I did just to go peak at the story poles again, I counted about three or four barns that have glass or is an enclosure. So it's not a new concept. The idea is also to protect the structure. So whether and when and the flexibility, especially on that western side, we also have, you know, right across the street, it is mountain lion territory as well. And so I've heard many of stories with, uh, in that area. But it's just, it's flexibility, right? It's a new structure. Any other questions for the applicant? Remember Lindsay? Nope. Just a question because it is pretty close to Woodside Road. What was the neighbor outreach? So it's it's it's over 250 feet from Woodside Road and setbacks 50 feet. You see it. Yeah, you can see it, but there's no one across the across the way and the two neighbors on either side are pretty private. So a barn that's in the same spot as the existing barn, we have not pursued any outreach besides the mailers that went out with this. It's not our traditional, you know, high use impact project. Is the next floor that's further, I guess, east that, and it's their house and vessels down into that second, into the driveway. Explorer. I think there might be a new owner or new home to the south. And then to the north, I do know that's a very private property, I believe. I'm going to ask the question that I withheld when I was talking or asking staff. Sure. Yeah. I'm just reading through the livestock letter. And the sentence this barn in quotes is suspicious to the subcommittee as a functioning barn. And they kind of jumped out at me. And again, I don't want, we're not here to pass judgment. That's the use. That's exactly why I asked those questions. But how do you, my question is how do you and how does the applicant sorry plan to address those suspicions? So I tried to address it in comment but we have not had the direct one. Their comments reviewed this as an equestrian barn. So that was one of the narratives that I'm not sure was. I've been forthforth right with Sarah and Sage from the beginning of when we pursued this. This is not going to be they they have no intention of horses. They love horses, but that's not for them. So the Equation Committees letter and comments do reflect a review that is geared towards horses. Goats, an open pen in the middle in the high volume spot for ventilation, air, smell, everything. That is a common goat barn location. And I know they laugh, but I can speak from experience. I actually had goats as a kid. And so I have not had horses. The horses would be in the perimeter as designed on the low ceiling portions of the project if someone wanted to. So structurally it could easily be converted in the future. I know that that's not the review process here, but it is designed to be that. Thank you. I know that this is an ongoing process, but I obligated to at least call it out and give you the opportunity. I saw the same thing and you know had this discussion as well. So we have not had a chance to have a direct, I think they just reviewed on their own calendar. Understood. Okay, we're done with questions. We want to open it up for public questions and comments. I know we still have a few people online. People in the room. No hands raised online. Okay, with that, let's move to board discussion. Who would like to go first? I'll go first. I can go first. Oh, OK. I know you showed us a picture of the materials. You have a new obviously. It's a chart. Well, that's good. It's not the existence of pre-bout. Oh, OK. I'm I'm a stag. Yeah. Layleek is. Material. Maybe they're they're they're required with formal design review. Um, so they definitely would be submitted then they have not been submitted yet. I will say every material is on the main house right now. If you were able to make a visit to the site, except the charred wood would just be a hint darker than what you're seeing on the main house. It was more of a quality. I actually what I was looking at. It was because it is. You can't see. We've seen the material on other houses provided in Woodside and it's what it sounds like. It has the wood grain and it's not charred like it's a charcoal and a fire but or it's going to be brittle and start to scratch away but it just you see the wood grains and it's a darker colored charcoal colored. Okay, any additional word discussion on this project? I guess the only other comment I have is when you look at the main house then you look at the center, the center building and then you look at this one they don't feel like they really flow and maybe it's just because I can't get a grip on where the finishes are on the particular on this building. I had one just comment to that one. So, and Woodside Road is elevated in the gentle sloping site. The cohesive element is the metal roof. It's the same metal roof from all the structures, which is the most visible portion from Woodside Road. So that was that was one way we we did try to tie it together. But they're not intended to to be the same. I heard you that without raising the all the other properties as well or all the other buildings. That's how you would get that level of consistency, right? Correct. I mean, we're minus the ADU in the middle, which I will say was not my necessarily control. The main house, I'd say, is the feature of the property probably most in lines with the design guidelines. And then we are working to try to be a little subordinate as we get away. We're not trying to match the main house. Okay. Member Lindsey, any comments or feedback for the applicant? Yeah, I think from an assessment standpoint, it's less than ideal to visit each structure independently. It doesn't allow us the opportunity to provide feedback as a cohesive set of structures towards a single goal. Clearly, this will be a property that will evolve over time. So, yeah, my sense is that, I mean, I have no reservations about this project as it relates to. Our design guidelines within the town and I do feel we need to defer largely to the livestock committee to ensure that given proper understanding of its use that they can do an accurate assessment and provide accurate feedback as to its utility and its desire to support that utility. So thank you. I have a few quick comments. First, I definitely want to commend the applicants on a barn. I mean, you know, that is a pretty big value for our community and it's very much noted and appreciated. I think it is important and thank you for clarifying that those that the street facing openings have shutters or or ways to block. I think not only from a lighting point of view, but from just an aesthetic point of view, that'll go a long way if there are lights on and things happening inside there. So I definitely commend the applicant for that. The burnt wood seems really promising as a material, but I do think that it's important to see since it's so dominant in that design. There's so much of it and it's a pretty, the massing is fairly significant with the second story. For me, I'd probably want to get a look at what that actually looks like in the real world, even though the renderings are fantastic for this stage. And then the other thing I would say is, I think to Don's point, there's going to be some education required, I think, for the Livestock Committee about the intended use, how that fits with what they might be thinking in terms of the question and focused. But I would really urge you to do that, and you've already said you would, but I would urge the applicant to do that, and to really take that feedback to heart and incorporate it, because I think they are the experts at least on what these structures mean around town and having that feedback incorporate I think would go a very long way. So thank you for offering to do that and I'm very hopeful that you'll follow up and really take that feedback to heart because I think it's important given the nebulous use of this structure. That's all I have. Can we summarize and move to decisions? So the ASRB, Commander, the applicant for proposal to include a new livestock barn, noting that barn doors can be closed in front of the the post-glast doors in most locations, which can help reduce lighting mission if it's necessary. And the ASRB noted that they would like to see the materials for the project. So story pools have been installed. ASRB may forecast that the applicant bring the entire formal design review back to the ASRB with the formal design review back to the ASRB. With the formal design review process, that will include review by the live stock, review committee, the live stock and equestrian heritage committee, prior to any decision being made. So the ASRB could ask that it comes back to the ASRB for entire review or could, for the formal design review staff allow the story polls to come down and just bring back the materials for consideration by the answer B. And the applicant could do that prior to submitting the formal designer view application. Do we have a motion? I would like to make a motion that we because I agree and in this case usually I go for the darker but since it's so prevalent and there's so much I would like to see the lighter so I would like to see the materials for it I would like to see it come back before formal with the life stock committee report as well. So we have a full picture of what we're dealing with. And is there additional fencing that's required? So the votes and sheep don't get out on what side row, you know, those kinds of things that, you know, maybe the livestock committee might bring up. And so I think it's nice if we combine them together. Okay, so definitely for the materials, yes, that's something that was raised by staff that, and I believe the last stock can be as well, but any outdoor turnout areas for the livestock on that fencing would be include formal designer view. So if the S or B would like to see specific items for formal design of you, i.e. materials feedback from the livestock committee. and potential out. Potential outdoor fencing. Those could be items that would come back. That would have to be with the formal design or view application. Since the livestock committee will not review it until that application is complete. Or bring the entire project back to the S or B with story polls included. The entire formal designer view project with the story polls and the items, responses from livestock committee, it would also include the materials board with that submittal. That's the motion to bring the project back to ASRB for formal design review. And have a second. I'll second that. Chair, at full. Yes. What's your Lindsay? Yes. Member D'Legavio. Member Comra. Yes. Motion moves. Thank you very much. Now we're on to our last item of this evening. Thank you to everybody who is waiting in the room and online. The agenda item is 176 hard cross. So just a note, I have to recuse myself from this agenda item given the proximity of my own home to this project. Your question regarding the director's reports, do you want me to return to this meeting to do that agenda item or do you find with me dropping an off through the remainder of the meeting? I think you can drop off the remainder of the meeting if you do have any questions or comments. You could email those to me directly. All right. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am member Lindsey. Great. Hello. Thank you everyone for hanging in there. Really appreciate your time here tonight. I will be introducing the project at 176 Harcross Road that includes a revision to the town approved fencing plans on a 32 acre site. The revision's concern staff since the proposal did not follow the residential design guidelines directly in terms of minimizing fencing to the greatest extent possible specifically perimeter fencing and it is not considered wildlife friendly since the fences are proposed to be about six-foot tall welded wire fence and lastly the revised proposal barely provides any wildlife corridors along the property aside from the forage openings at the bottom for smaller wildlife and a few corners of the property shown here over on the left side in the rear as well as the front corners of the property shown here over on the left side in the rear, as well as the frontage of the property off of Harcross Road. Therefore, the planning director recommended that the project come to the ASRB to be reviewed for a fence design. We received about 14 desk items today before the meeting. They're all letters from the Woodside residents that do not support the revised project primarily due to the impacts of the enclosed perimeter fencing of the 32 acre site since there was no or specifically that it would impact the wildlife in the area, which the town staff is also concerned with. Okay, the property is approximately 32 acres and in the RR zoning district, the property has one existing main residence accessory structures and a pool. There is currently some existing venting on the property, which is shown in green on this first slide here along the rear of the property along this right side towards the rear. Some intermittent down here along Harcross Road and then following up along here where Los Pogas Drive kind of meets Harcross Road. And then again over here on the far left side of the screen. And then there's also a conservation easement where there is currently no fencing. The property is slightly sloped downwards, but overall where there is development, it is relatively flat in those developed areas. It does have slopes that are greater than 35% on site, which you can see here in the darker gray shades kind of going along the center of the site going from left to right on the screen. It is adjacent to Redwood City's Stulfest Park over here on the left side of the screen on the north. And then like I said that 100 foot conservation easement is not on property located in this area. So up on the screen we have what is currently already approved by the town. It was approved in 2022. It includes visually open double fencing. That's kind of in set into the property between 50 feet along the property lines in some areas and then kind of going providing some relief from that perimeter fencing and some opening entering the conservation easement about 150 feet providing some access along this ditch where there's water that can, you know, it's a drainage ditch where water can enter and kind of reside for temporary time. The proof fencing came with the detailed fence and wildlife movement assessment report, which was one of the attachments in the staff report, and that was evaluated on the direction of the previous planning director. The assessment described the double fencing with varied height, which would discourage larger animals from jumping over the fence, and it would provide a safe passage for smaller animals and medium sized animals. It also provides a orange gap at the bottom of both sides of the fence for smaller animals to get under. The fencing material was proposed to be brown, welded wire mesh fencing with two different heights. This outward fence being four feet and this back one being six feet and then also having this angled stainless steel angle to kind of further deter animals from jumping over and keeping them out of the property. And then the space between the fences is approximately three feet. Up next we have the revisions from the town approved plans. So this is what we will be focusing on tonight in terms of design review. The applicant submitted the revision about five months ago and it's been staff-reviewed, gave recommendations and it seemed that the applicant wanted to pursue this so we recommended it going to the ASRB for Fence Design Review. They are proposing to remove that double fencing and moving the location of the fencing further out on the perimeter to kind of connect to the existing fencing to enclose most of the 32 acres on the property. So really, there's only this front area where you can enter from the exterior of the site and kind of get in and then have this small section right here, which seems to be the area of relief, as well as the opening from the conservation easement going into that drainage ditch here seem to be the two areas that provide that relief for the property. So once again the green lines show the existing fencing and then the highlighted areas is what's being proposed tonight to kind of fill in those gaps. The applicant is proposing three different variations of visually open six foot tall welded wire fencing, two of which proposed black cables on the bottom, which staff has been concerned about because it looks like maybe smaller animals or younger, larger animals have the potential to kind of get stuck in that area. And then also it does have that four inch gap at the very bottom where it is considered a small wildlife corridor for those smaller animals to get through on and out of the property. So and then the last one, this is the Wilder wire fence that's currently proposed over that drainage ditch area. So adjacent to the conservation easement. The other two types of fencing are proposed on the sides of the fencing. So this is the only different one and it doesn't have any openings at the gap for smaller wildlife. The applicant is here with their team in person and they're also online. I understand they'll be sharing some contents online as well. So they'll also be here for questions for you all. That concludes my presentation and thank you so much. Thank you Melody. I'd like to invite members of the Board to ask questions for staff. I know I have a lot. Maybe these are more appropriate for the applicant. I'm just going to fire away. Have any elements of the original fence design been actually constructed? Or do they stop on all construction and now are proposing a revision before they start? I'm just trying to parse out what's been done and what hasn't. You want to say that question for? Okay. I'll save it. When you say the town approved the fence in 2022, was that approved at the ASRB level, at the planning commission level, at what level, that's a town question, I think, right? Like how? Yeah, that was approved at the staff level through a couple rounds, if not more, to get more details regarding the fence, including requiring that wildlife assessment biology report, but it was approved at the staff level with the direction of the previous plan. Sorry, sorry, it wasn't a town council. Correct. Didn't elevate to that level of complexity. Correct. Thank you. Are we to consider the impact of the park nearby? Is that designated? Again, I'm on seeing a corridor today for some reason. Is that, does that change things other than the actual scope of the project that is in front of us? The park doesn't necessarily change anything. It's just whatever surrounding the property with regards to wildlife passage. With the design guidelines speak to wildlife friendly designs, being close to a park that might have more areas for wildlife to pass through is something that could be considered in relation to how the fence is on and corporates any wildlife passage. Thank you and one final question for giving me if I missed it. What's the is the property zone residential? Yes. That's all I have for now. Any other questions for staff? that back to the line and kind of go to the search that I put in. So, General, before she let me drop you, you'll be able to talk about the four of those students at the end. Okay. Only if it was much closer to the road, it would have to drop to four feet. So, a six-foot tall fence with a wooden wire, only needs to be at least 20 feet back from the driving surface of a road. This fence is well set back from there. Seeing no other questions, I'd like to invite the applicant to make a presentation. Good evening. My name is Stefan Tvilo, which is Tvilo Associates. We are the landscape architects with this project. So the previous fence, oh sorry. Okay, thank you. You can hear me now. So Stefan Twillo with the below associate, we are the landscape architects on this project. So here on us direction, we simplified the fence. It became just prohibitively expensive to create this too layered, fencing near or on the property line or all the way around. There's definitely a very strong desire for a driveway gate and some adjacent fencing because at the moment the property is accessible by anyone and Occasionally mountain bikers entering the property In regard of the remaining fencing the desire is to keep belief deer out But it's also a security measure and As you noted there's three different type of fences. I just realized that the fencing that's on the far left side should really be the same fencing as we have in other areas in where there is a 4-inch gap at the bottom. It could be six inches if that would help the situation. Well, it's a full fence from top to bottom. There's no gap and it's it's a welded wire. Anything else you like to say before questions? I think this is all I have to share at the moment. I wanted to make sure. Do we have questions for the applicant? I can just appreciate the need for fancy, particularly to keep mountain bikers on the property. I recently had some mountain bikers. Little suspect claiming to be birders and that they had a right to the open space there. So I do appreciate that. I would probably, you know, I'm not an expert on pencil. I will. I have a bunch. So, so my first question was what I asked or tried to, or originally asked and then withdrew from staff, which is have any elements of the plan, of the approved plan been implemented yet? No, no efforts have been underdone in regard of fencing. Understood. And is there a... I guess what's the motivation behind the change in plan from something that was approved two years ago, a year and a half ago? How is the thinking evolved as to why what was originally there is no longer sufficient? Well, it would be very sufficient. You mean the proposed fencing plan? Well, you had, yeah, you woke up. Why would you? I guess what I'm trying to understand is there's some fencing there. Yes. Then there was an approved plan. Correct. And now there's a revised plan, and I'm trying to understand how the applicants thinking evolved to make those revisions of something that had been approved previously. Yeah. So the previous proposal was extremely labor material intense and therefore very costly. scale in scope and this is just a more economic option to the owners. I see. Okay. And as the applicant considered, I've heard about mountain bikes and I truly understand trespassing as an issue. I live off a street with a lot of bikers too. Has the applicant considered maybe just putting off fence around the house and leaving the rest of the property if safety is a concern? Has the applicant considered that? I'm not saying the applicant should. I'm just curious that the applicant has considered that alternative. This is a consideration, yes. But it may be that they want a second layer of fencing. They're very protective of their privacy and security. OK. That's only questions I have. Thank you very much. You all part of the questions? So you've got all the fence that's along the side of the driveways. I mean, that's the top of the valley, but probably even moving or replacing all that. Is it almost with the metal? Or is this just the perimeter of the road? So the excess road does not have any fencing. And there will surely not be any fencing along that road. Okay, so the fencing processes stream on the far left. And if you move to the yellow fence line, right there. Yes. And then there is another fence crossing, but the creek becomes a chiver that would be to the far right. I mean, you see the creek bed accessing the property. But that is an existing fence. No, it would be a little bit up above. Sorry that I don't have the control here. So the creek bed horizontally crosses the property and the very far side of the property accesses the creek accesses the property that's an existing fence so we are not modifying anything there there is a secondary creek that runs between the long yellow new fence line where the driveway gate is and Harcross Road and no fencing is crossing that particular creek. And you're the questions for the applicant. I think we're going to have open comment. So I think you have folks can folks in comment as they choose. So that's a perfect segue since the board has no other questions. I would love to invite members of the public both on in the room and online to make comments given the late nature of the meeting. We'd like you to the mature comments to two minutes please. We and also please state your name if you can just for the record. Perfect. Thank you. Hi, my name is Donna how I am a direct neighbor of the property. I live at 470 Las Pulgas Drive. My property is the one on the left with the conservation easement. And these conservation easements were established when Lesbogas Estates was subdivided about, I don't know, 20-some years ago. There's a conservation easement on the far right as well, which is not shown that one of our other neighbors will discuss. I would just like to read my comments. The general plan and municipal code explicitly encourage the use of open and wildlife-friendly fencing to mitigate the adverse impacts of local wildlife. It's imperative that any proposed fence design on a property of this size, 32 acres, takes into account the needs of wildlife and adheres to guidelines. It's evident from wildlife trails that follow the intermittent creek across this 32 acres. That's pretty much how horizontal line across there. That this land is extensively used by wildlife as corridor. The proposed fence design will obstruct wildlife movement and fragment wildlife habitat. While the proposed fence states that it provides safe passage for small and medium sized wildlife, larger wildlife are completely excluded. The four inch gap under the fence will exclude all but the smallest wild animals, I mean like mice and rodents. The proposal states that the fence line will not cross or reduce any wildlife movement along the intermittent creek, along which the open space easement is located. However, the fence shown on section F, which is that far left side, clearly crosses the creek. Additionally, no language is provided on the proposal for how the fence will be installed over the deep channel of the intermittent creek. These are very deep channels. This is not a flat property, so you can't just put a flat fence there over a really deep channel. You've got to show us how how is that going to fit. There's nothing here that says that currently sections F section E and section D are unfenced. While life can move freely on trails along the intermittent creek between existing conservation easements to the north and south of Las Pugas Drive and along Harcress Road along with property that the town of Woodside owns on Harcress Road that is also in addition to that conservation easement. The proposed fence will block movements between these areas by all but the smallest animals. Conservation easements were put in place by the town of Woodside when less bluggish was established already told you that in light of these concerns. I implore the town of the town council to deny the fence permit for 176 hard cross road and less or until significant modifications are made to ensure compliance with the woods and municipal code in general plan. Specifically, we urge the Council to consider leaving the entire intermittent creek unfenced to allow for the continued movement of wildlife into Exploral Trinitive Fencing Designs that are compatible with wildlife corridors. We're solid fencing to be confined to the living or house side of the intermittent creek. And while I friendly to include deer and coyotes, fencing installed at sections FD and E. So while I friendly fencing is in those sort of yellow areas, then the homeowners of 176 hardcrust would not block corridors or fragment habitat and their outdoor living areas would remain wildlife free. We have no intention of trying to like stop these neighbors from fencing their property. I understand the need for privacy and I also understand the need for security and keeping your landscaping and your living areas free of wildlife, but this is 32 acres. It is extremely unusual. There is no other piece of property to this magnitude that's owned by Woodside on that side of 280. And wildlife really need this area. They use it dramatically. I have pictures in my letter to the town from my trail cameras that were just from this past weekend. Bobcat, coyote, pregnant deer, turkeys, they're there all the time every day we see them. So we really implore you to think critically about approving a plan that takes this habitat away from our local wildlife. Okay thank you. What are the members of the public want to make a public comment on the project? Please try to keep it to two minutes. Thank you. Hi, my name is Sanjay Chanda. Can you hear me? Okay. Thank you. My name is San border the fence. So the basic question I have is, if we all try to fence in our 32-acre property, which not a lot of us have, I think Woodside would lose his character of conserving the wildlife. So that's I think is what is up for discussion here because in the in the reports here, both the biologist reports, it clearly says that the deer could cannot enter through that. So and I live there and there are many deers and as Donna mentioned there like we see pregnant deer and coyotes and things like that all the time. And do we want to exclude them from entering this property? I mean, the reason people want to move to outside is because of wildlife. If you're scared of wildlife, you probably should not be in good sight. And speaking of of intruders by the access from from last pulgas is a gated community. There are intruders and I have to admit to that. And I don't think we would have any problem if the fencing is around the living quarters, right? I mean all of us would like to be safe and secure. So that I think is something that would be acceptable. So I would really urge you guys to look at this application seriously and think about the wildlife corridor, think about the heart of good side, right? That's what we are. That's why we live here, is that wildlife thrives here. And do we really want to fancy in a 32-acre property with a six-fid-high fence that they won't be able to enter? And as their environmental report, the deer specifically mentioned both the time that deer cannot enter. Why are you excluding the deer? So anyway, I'll stop there and hopefully it's within two minutes. Thank you very much. I'd like to ask the applicant online, Kim, can you please stop sharing? Please. Thank you. Are there other members of the public who wish to comment like and you barely speak? Sorry. Hi, I'm one noise. I'll keep my comment short. In general, on the Woodside Hills area, we have all the housing kind of near the tops of the slopes. And then we have a lot of gullies that go all the way that water runs down intermittently. And to my knowledge, no one else has fenced across those areas. Those gullies are where the wildlife can freely circulate throughout the entire area. Many people have fenced around their houses toward the top of the hill. And I think what we're all saying is, if we avoid fencing across the gullies, across the waterways, then the wildlife can continue to circulate throughout the area. If people start fencing all the way across, then really it just becomes kind of broken little pieces where where wildlife can't move in. So that's our primary concern in this area. Thank you very much. I also have a couple comments. I'll keep it really short and safe. I hate name and address releases for the record. Thank you. My name is Emma Louisa. I also live at 470 Las Polgues Drive and I think all of you can tell that my family and neighbors are really concerned by this renting proposal and there's a couple things that I wanted to draw attention to. One is that a four-inch gap at the bottom of the fence doesn't help with anything other than rodents, rabbits, squirrels, raccoons. All of those things can easily navigate over a fence anyway. And those also aren't really the wildlife that we're focused on protecting in the natural woodside area. All of those animals can be found into the urban areas with no issue. But things like coyotes, deer, bobcats, wild turkeys, things like that are really what we enjoy and love seeing in our area. And I've lived there at this home since 2006. And I can say that I've already noticed less deer and less wildlife as I've gotten older. That's really sad to me and disappointing because I hope to live in this area my entire life and I'm still very young and I can't help but think that closing off this 32-acre habitat would completely remove the homes from all of these animals and just leave them with nowhere to go except into the suburbs. Well, where they'll be hit by cars and we'll just lose those animals and that's really, really sad. So I know that you guys have heard all this information so I just hope that you'll consider all of our thoughts. Thank you. Thank you. Hello everyone. I'm Anne Lane of Antivore, 1475 Portola Road, Woodside, California. ASRB Committee. It's my first time meeting you guys. It's a real pleasure to meet you. My comments are more towards town and new town employees. As I said, my name is Elena Vandivort. I am the Vice Chair of the Climate and Sustainability Committee. I work closely with the town of Woodside Environment Committee, which I'm happy to see many members of here today, as I was three years their chair. I want you to know that I'm also a Harvard grad certified in natural resource and sustainable ecosystems. Are you all aware that prestigious universities across America, such as Stanford, Harvard, MIT, and Cal Berkeley, have acknowledged the importance of nature conservation by establishing multi-billions of dollars in new schools under climate and sustainability. This is signaling the critical role of environmental stewardship within our society's future. Today I stand before you to discuss a matter of a single property that is of a much more profound subject of ecosystem fencing and its importance to our beloved community of Woodside. As custodians of this rural gem, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The decisions we make now will dictate the legacy we leave for generations to come. Our commitment to the town's guidelines of open fencing, open watersheds, and habitat connectivity is just a policy. It's not just a policy. It's a testament to our values, our vision, and our deep rooted connection to the natural world, which is the very reason in why we all live here. It has been made clear to me that the owners of 176 Harcross Corps are interested in maintaining this 32-acre property in a park-like state. And we are and are looking to preserve this land. This is a wonderful reason to preserve the land. And I highly doubt that the goal of this owner is to raise such a high and unusual level of disagreement, not only from its direct neighbors, but of many of its community members and town members. ASRB today, it is your job to ensure that these applicants are supported within that. We are thrilled to see that so many efforts have been made to make plans change that were not initially forethought from double fencing down to single fencing. I am also aware that the environmental solutions agency that put together this proposal is based in Australia. Discussions of wires being added to a fence that are four inches from the ground in order to keep up wild pigs, which is stated in this eco solutions form form is not only irrelevant to California, it is an action that is detrimental to the connectivity of our local wildlife. Furthermore, the permit requests and disrupts stream corridors. I would like to remind you all today in case you are not aware of our town guidelines that are very specific to this site. Number one, maintain or establish wildlife corridors throughout the property with particular emphasis on connecting to wildlife corridors on adjoining properties, especially in riparian areas. Number two, avoid habitat fragmentation as it was brought up earlier, the natural park right next door, 32 acres we're talking about. By maintaining or establishing natural areas adjacent to similar habitats on adjoining properties. So thank you for your comment on that, Matthew. Number three, avoiding fencing types and locations which negatively impact wildlife corridors and habitat. Number four, protect stream corridors, ponds and wetlands. They all must be kept, must be kept free of structures and maintained in natural conditions. Must be kept free. This has become obvious to me that perhaps everyone here that it like this homeowner has had many good intentions, but did not know where to go for guidance and achieving wishes and rights offencing of her 32-acre park in a sustainable way. This was just an ill assigned project. They obviously have good intentions, but don't know where to go in order to get proper guidelines. Woodside with its unparalleled beauty has long been a sanctuary for both people and wildlife. Our town has done a commendable job in creating valuable guidelines that reflect our commitment to preserving this unique environment. However, it has become evident that our landowners require further guidance to protect their land in ways that support the essence of woodside. It is crucial that we maintain the delicate balance of our local ecosystem, and for this, we need not look very far. We have at our disposal a wealth of knowledge and resources within our community, our environmental committee, and our sustainability and climate committee, composed of well-educated and dedicated members, stand ready to assist. These committees have tirelessly sought to engage and offer their expertise, yet their potential remains underutilized. ASRB committee, you should know these plans have never come to the environment committee nor the climate or sustainability despite our requests in order to do so. It is time we leverage their insights to guide our landowners ensuring our actions foster a sustainable coexistence with nature. While the town appointed committees dedicated, these have not been engaged from the town on the stensing permit. I stand before you to ask that you consider the greater impacts of removing the enormous ecosystem, those 32 acres of woodside with fencing that does not match our town guidelines or interests of the state of California Fish and Wildlife Department. So that you know, California's Department of Fish and Wildlife has empathetically stated on their website in broad terms, habitat connectivity is critical for maintaining viable populations of wildlife species, particularly in the face of the anthropogenic pressures and changing climate. This assertation underscores the urgency for a mission in Woodside. Let us unite in this endeavor. Let's work together. Let's empower our local experts and committees to lead in a way who are helping guide our landowners to make proper decisions. Together, we can ensure that Woodside remains a haven for Woodside and a beacon for its environmental stewardship by acting responsibly and harnessing the collective wisdom and passion of our wonderful community. We can safeguard the essence of the future of Woodside if we can work together. Thank you for your time today. Thank you. There are any members of the public online who would like to comment? See 10 people in the Zoom rooms. Any hands raised? I don't see any hands raised. If anyone online would like to speak, please virtually raise your hand. No hands are raised. Okay, then I'd like to end public comment and open up board discussion on this matter. I have a question probably you said, are we here to decide the design of the fence and the gates or where it goes. All of the above. So these are the residential design guidelines. So with every project, a wildlife corridor is fencing. All of that is for ASRB to reviewed. And so with this particular project being fencing, it was forwarded to the ASRB for consideration in relationship to the residential design guidelines in the general. All right. I'm sorry about where neighbors could be there with sign effects, everyone. We've got a scene to be able to fold, sound and say, who has the rest of that for, is already on property. And given that, our governor is trying to agree and to be preset out satch, but that's in the next unit, it seems that we should actually be disconcernded as well as everyone's here. Is it possible that we suggest that they speak to the wine and the next state of the early communities and come back after such exploration. If that can be a recommendation from the ASRB, we talked to the town manager and I spoke, we've looked at fences are typically reviewed by the ASRB, which is, which why it was decided to send it to the ASRB. That's the recommendation of the board. That would be the recommendation. I have some comments. Okay. So the first thing I want to say is, the ASRB has been, I would say, very supportive of fences historically, at least in the time that I've been a member. I don't think we've ever, I know we have never rejected offense. There have probably been a couple of materials changes and a couple of small tweaks and adjustments to design that were all almost all taken care of at staff level. So I don't think, I think the record speaks for itself that we're generally very supportive offenses and understand the need for it, especially with security. That said, there are three areas of concern that I have here. And the first is the change. As I understand it, there was an approved fence. And now the applicant wants to significantly alter that design. And for me, the reason is still unclear. And to be candid, that calls the intentions and motivations into question for me. So that's concern number one. My second concern is just the sheer scope of the project. As I said before, we've been quite supportive of fences as a body and we've literally never rejected a project. I've since I've been on a fence project inside been on the A-SARB, but the sheer size of this gives me a lot of concerns and also not just the size, but the very restrictive manner to that public court or the nature court or the creek running through the center. convinced that a four inch hole at the bottom of events will make any difference at all to wildlife. In fact, you could argue. I'm not an expert, but you, logic says you could argue that it actually might cause peril to animals trying to get them to there. It's almost like an attractive nuisance in a strange way. And I also think that the height is, is, is also quite imposing and not out of scope, but massive compared to other fences that you'd see around town. So for those reasons, I would vote to reject this project, this application outright right now. I would ask the applicant to come back, to scale back Mod as proposal that takes this feedback into consideration. And as I was listening to the comments, I came up with I think four or five different ways you could go that would be my recommendations. First, you could build a full fence around the entire home. It seems actually very nicely situated. I remember driving up there right around that bend. You have just a really, really great area where you can do a fence to the max if you'd like, if security is the goal. And for me, it's not clear what the goal is, but if that is the goal, that's the place to do it. Second option you could do is you could do a lower scale fence as I suggested, maybe a higher minimum than four inches that won't impale an animal or a lower maximum. I would point you to the fence for the horse park on Whiskie Hill Road that actually has breaks in it and has places where the high fence gets lowered. It's very clear that animals can get in and out of there and that's a massive property that I happen to live close to so I'm familiar with it. The third thing you can do is you can leave it as is. It seems like there's lots of openings in places for animals to come and go. And then the fourth is I would really look carefully on those sides about maybe leaving just openings where those creeks, where the creeks come and go, making that your scenic corridor, if you will, or your animal passage corridor, any one of those directions or revisions, I think we would take, or I would take very seriously, I don't want to speak for my colleagues. And then the fifth is just understanding that if we do vote to reject this, you have the right to appeal, right? This is an advisory board, but I for one, I don't think I can approve this project at all, given the scope and given the design and given the circumstances of this application. So I think we're done with board discussions. Do we have options now? So yes, you have options. So I will know that the applicant does have an approved permit. They could pursue that permit as an option. And then the board with regard to the current application, as noted, it could be recommended to be rejected. And that would be, I'll want the applicant, they could appeal that decision if they wanted to, or they could come back with a different fence in brief conversations with the applicant prior to the meeting. If noted, if they came back with a fence in the same location as the approved fence, it's that something that would be considered as a revision. It's likely that staff would consider that as a revision. If it's a single fence instead of a double fence at the same location, it's already approved. That's something that would be considered. But the ASRB today could either reject the application as the final decision. They could continue the item and request additional information or they could recommend changes to the proposed design. I'd like to move to reject the application as presented. Is there a second? Right. Chair apple. Is it yes? I guess it's yes to the app to the motion. Yes. Yeah. I'm riddle gov you. I'm Bracomra. This is the three out of a total board of five is a quorum. So the majority of the quorum would be the decision. So at this point, two votes. Yes. Yeah, I have a little sympathy for regardless whether it's fenced, you're still the owner of property and what goes on in that property is your responsibility. So I feel, but I think some of the solutions that were offered were wonderful, like the horse park and how they might do it or maybe a lower fence. And so I'm okay if we go back to the original fence that they had or maybe if we lower it. So if this is denied and they don't pursue appeals and at the end of the conversation, they do have the right to build the permanent fence. It's already permitted. So yes, we're just waiting for your vote. Excuse me if we could just finish up the board discussion and have their vote and they could have discussions after the public comment. We're on the vote now. So there were two votes in favor of the motion. The motion carries two to one. I'll line to the applicant and any interested parties that signed the sign-in sheet. That will be out in the next day or two. Thank you and I really do hope the applicant considers some of the suggestions we made that might be much more suitable and probably pass very quickly but thank you. Okay, that's the last agenda item. I think we do have or sorry, it's sage. We do. Oh. Okay, that's the last agenda item. I think she and we do have or sorry, it's sage we do oh The items over yeah, yeah, so the average directors report this evening sure So we just have the director's reports from November and December and Nothing significant to report there. I know it's late if there's questions or comments that any members have. Definitely feel free to email me. Or if you have any now, I'd be happy to answer for it. I had no questions. So I think we're gonna adjourn at 7.16 PM. Thank you. And just we'll note we are adjourned just for you. We will have a meeting next Monday. There will just be one item on the agenda