[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6646129,"mediaKeyId","3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb","parentId",3396699,"title","Planning Commission reapproves three‑lot subdivision at 1000 Howard Hills Road","audioSeconds",1116,"startMs",12895505,"endMs",14012015,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb&start=12895&end=14012","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb/thumbnail_12895505.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6646129/Lafayette/Contra-Costa-County/California/Planning-Commission-reapproves-threelot-subdivision-at-1000-Howard-Hills-Road","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6646129-2f228b706b6c6e7db46109c8dee05040/orig.mp4?Expires=1770564445&Signature=RZHINqapMi3e9qE-rbeBESPUicU75wpwbnL1iPM4Yk6oidyEMGtXZr0o4VxBHk5OfDX5VVko1oWHl~gyynuwY3Xu8uBNZ1CQn5eyD8RFc4utvht7KWvb7wDC7DdFVO2SnFfec3Ly5MPcoE1ENVIqUMHCmfIzUx5VJWAWHafVeshMu~KTuoWRUHzLg3~1kxyOc8HAn2xbRBAFiKi7OTStorKrzdXLzS8idkLgRoFlSCfBKqQJmSRL-OhYK7hYTu2fnLDxI279wP2g8xnpkNgi8ESQONpNeBlyDl~y0TgHnd5~oH-gwm7eHX2bggP10qPsWkfFHTg5CX0ZTT29p8mDOQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Lafayette","date","2025-05-20T06:39:57.123Z","article","The Planning Commission unanimously reapproved a three-lot minor subdivision at 1000 Howard Hills Road (MS50325) after the prior approval expired before final map recordation. The commission found the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15315 (minor land divisions) and adopted Resolution No. 2025‑05, subject to updated conditions of approval, including revised language reflecting Contra Costa Fire District access standards.

Staff summary and project configuration

Assistant Planner Anna Toll explained the application was essentially the same as an earlier tentative map that expired in December 2024. The property contains an existing single‑family residence and former tennis courts; the applicant proposes three parcels: Parcel A (approximately 20,000 sq ft) containing the existing residence, Parcel B (approx. 37,200 sq ft) in the center flag portion of the parcel, and Parcel C (approx. 21,600 sq ft) to the east.

Parcel B would be served from Pine Lane by a proposed 16‑foot access drive; staff said that configuration minimizes tree removals along the longer Howard Hills frontage and produces a reasonably flat building pad on the middle parcel. Future residences on parcels B and C will require separate design‑review approvals and will be subject to tree‑permit and grading permit review if and when development occurs.

Fire, utilities and environmental review

Staff relayed referral comments from utilities and public agencies; Contra Costa Fire (ConFire) asked for clarified emergency-access dimensions and a guaranteed turnaround. Staff recommended amended Condition F‑5 to adopt ConFire’s minimum standards into the approval: a 20‑foot emergency access roadway or a 16‑foot width where only one or two residences are served, a minimum 13.5‑foot vertical clearance within 50 feet of dwellings, a structural capacity to support 37‑ton apparatus, and specified no‑parking/fireraid lane rules for narrower drives. Staff said the project was otherwise consistent with the R‑20 zoning standards and that the building pads shown indicate no variance will be required for future single‑family development on the new parcels.

Action and outcome

A commissioner moved to find the project exempt from CEQA and to adopt PC Resolution 2025‑05 subject to the conditions of approval (including the updated ConFire language read into the record). The motion passed 5–0. Staff will require the applicant to obtain necessary permits from utility providers and the fire district prior to final map recordation, and future home development on the new lots will proceed through customary Design Review and permit submittals.

Quantities and procedural notes

- Parcel areas: Parcel A ~20,000 sq ft (existing house), Parcel B ~37,200 sq ft, Parcel C ~21,600 sq ft.
- Access: Parcel B proposed to use a 16‑ft access drive from Pine Lane; Parcel C access proposed from Howard Hills Road and may require minor adjustments to satisfy Fire District standards.
- Environmental review: Staff found the minor-subdivision exemption under CEQA Section 15315 applicable.

Ending: The commission’s reapproval permits the applicant to proceed toward final map recordation and later design review for individual residences once ConFire and other referral agency requirements are met.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","The commission unanimously reapproved a previously authorized three-lot minor subdivision at 1000 Howard Hills Road (MS50325) after the prior approval lapsed; the project was found exempt under CEQA Section 15315 and conditions included updated ConFire standards for emergency access.","taxTitle","Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California","taxId",77659,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6646136,"Planning Commission approves Oak Hill Place subdivision plan with conditional fallback over neighbor easement",6115,6721065,12837025,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb&start=6721&end=12837","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb/thumbnail_6721065.jpg","/articles/6646136/Lafayette/Contra-Costa-County/California/Planning-Commission-approves-Oak-Hill-Place-subdivision-plan-with-conditional-fallback-over-neighbor-easement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6646136-799154e766a8185488ca476531146404/orig.mp4?Expires=1770564445&Signature=DHQbaIF1jI2rO5LtV786DURJjcK55ji8QGk7FP76bfsRMR3k0VrG2otW5Pm0U65Mxel6YWrECoC1R5BM01dyQbKiEiA1RTObB5D7uXa~IgkvDTwyGFv~357HFKok-ze478pJDj6caGCqYZbsTGNV9cabuOsr35OTAF9uN~CKRMfx38-x3QfJSaH37UVZL3iunUbuVjkNvHM2T-UL1Fd2eoj9w3KwrFGZ4DYjJJgxpi9S08UpIurjICBbbRhv5x6nWHe5iHe4JqQPfGkAsVgIrTppi2hiJRHgw9m1Cx4L5uni4wSmrH7bGlKOW0TWOkiaNSVRygdZ0T9rcBt7pm03Rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lafayette Planning Commission voted 5–0 to approve a revised plan for Oak Hill Place (project TR9707), a 17-unit subdivision with three accessory dwelling units on Oak Hill Place near Highway 24 and the BART station, subject to conditions and a conditional fallback if a sewer-easement relocation with a neighboring property cannot be finalized.

Staff presentation and project scope

Senior Planner Stephanie Cervantes summarized changes made after an earlier March hearing: the developer moved the main driveway south, increased the unit count from 15 to 17 under a density bonus (25% density bonus requested), enlarged several unit footprints, increased parking from 30 to 34 spaces (two spaces per unit), added a public sidewalk along Oak Hill Road, and reworked grading so the site would require a net import of fill rather than off-haul.

“Under the general plan land use designation the site is allowed a maximum of 14 units; with the density bonus the site can accommodate up to 18 units,” Cervantes told commissioners. The project team requested 1 concession (to be reviewed under the city’s new tree preservation ordinance) and several waivers for development standards including a waiver to allow some parking in front-yard setback areas, r10 lot width/depth exceptions, and limited height exceptions for a small number of units to read as three stories in parts of the terraced site.

Why it mattered: the project repurposes a 3.19-acre parcel into a cluster of smaller single-family homes intended to provide a “missing middle” housing type near transit. It drew strong neighborhood engagement because of its location atop a ridge, a prominent valley-oak to be retained in a central community park, and questions about privacy, grading and tree removals.

Applicant response and neighborhood concerns

Developer and architect Laura Duto described design revisions intended to reduce height and visual massing along Oak Hill Road, preserve the site’s central valley oak, add a public, ADA-compliant sidewalk, and address stormwater management with new bioretention basins. Duto said she moved building footprints and lowered roof pitches to respond to neighbors’ privacy concerns and that the project was carefully re‑graded to balance cut and fill.

Neighbors said concerns remain about privacy, light and noise. Dan Leonos and Roy Cripps — owners of adjacent properties most directly impacted by units 4–7 — said the change in driveway and building mass helped but remains stressful. Cripps said the retaining wall level near his property and the proximity of bedrooms to his living room remain significant quality-of-life concerns.

Easement and hybrid fallback

A central unresolved item is a sewer-easement relocation (described by staff as “Parcel E”) that the applicant proposed to abandon in exchange for a new easement alignment; the relocation requires neighbor cooperation and a legal easement exchange. The applicant said she provided a cooperation agreement to the neighbors and proposed a limited timetable to finalize it.

The commission’s action included a conditional approval to allow a fallback (“hybrid”) plan if the neighboring owner does not execute the easement relocation. Staff said the fallback would revert the footprints and certain massing features of units 4–7 to the earlier March plan while keeping other revised elements (for example, the relocated driveway). The commission required the applicant to present a clear plan prior to Design Review and included directions that the project must present a single, agreed design for DRC review.

Formal action and waivers

The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2025‑O4, found the project categorically exempt under CEQA Class 2 (infill exception), and referred the project to the Design Review Commission for architecture and landscaping. The developer requested waivers and concessions related to the city’s density-bonus rules and the new tree-preservation ordinance. The final motion recorded by the Commission included: adoption of the resolution, a CEQA finding, referral to DRC, and a conditional approval mechanism tied to the sewer-easement exchange. The motion passed 5–0.

Quantities and technical items recorded in the staff presentation

- Unit count: 17 single-family homes with 3 attached ADUs; one on-site unit designated as the required affordable unit under the city’s density-bonus rules.
- Parking: 34 spaces total (two per market-rate unit); the project benefits from proximity to BART (within 0.5 mile), which the city noted limits local parking requirements under state rules.
- Trees and landscaping: the revised plan proposes removal of 96 trees (80 of them protected under the city’s new tree ordinance); staff said replacement will follow the new ordinance.
- Grading and drainage: about 19,000 cubic yards of total grading with a net import of about 1,450 cubic yards of fill; stormwater would be managed through two bioretention basins and conversion of a man‑made swale to a storm drain.
- Waivers and concessions requested: approval to review under new tree ordinance; waivers for 2.5‑story to 3‑story reading on terraced lots (within the 35‑foot height limit), parking within front setbacks on some lots, R‑10 lot width/depth exceptions, and limited fence-height exceptions in required yards.

Next steps

Staff and the applicant will prepare final materials for Design Review. The conditional fallback language requires the applicant to finalize the easement exchange or revert specific footprints, and staff indicated the matter could be decided by City Council if unresolved by the time of final entitlements. The applicant and neighbors indicated they would continue discussions to complete the easement exchange; the applicant told commissioners she could provide design-review materials on an accelerated schedule if the agreement is executed.

Ending: The commission approved the project 5–0 with the conditional fallback and sent architecture and landscaping to Design Review for final consideration.","The Planning Commission approved the Oak Hill Place subdivision and preliminary design (17 single-family homes, three ADUs) and referred architecture and landscaping to Design Review. Approval includes a conditional fallback (‘hybrid’) in case a proposed sewer easement relocation between applicant and neighbors cannot be executed.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6646140,"Sunflower Hill, SAHA present 48-unit supportive housing study session for Lafayette site",4821,402185,5223710,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb&start=402&end=5223","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396699-458bb44bcd1e8ac23695d2bec556b7fb/thumbnail_402185.jpg","/articles/6646140/Lafayette/Contra-Costa-County/California/Sunflower-Hill-SAHA-present-48-unit-supportive-housing-study-session-for-Lafayette-site","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6646140-ad2f26d876a151eaed884a85aee93010/orig.mp4?Expires=1770564446&Signature=m1x1OSF8jcmGJZEOEPoFZc4KwvzoUZDLEei1FP9M38EqB2i5Xj~eh1FRVAIFyTq~xdaQgRgVjrejKFNfnu2fzk6mGj20FC~dninEGRq-W5DW-mSsrOrpV3F4Gg3xEexjBZBnFzLAt4za4n-NLUEPjdwpN8o9-vJtqPQf9ze~LsvyTetR0wZVn3LilYeoHNe-efde7Ek10cO7tutEGA9AlrdNfmgs9v~VvxFWCuRc8nD-tRsnjOf7pKNzKE~qe~8gIo20tk1OkElURDci8uHhLABw2ilYBs93T8O81oLIfnh0qklK-6y1aphO-K7k0ssIWbgB0k2cb0Ej7eCCz~CO7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sunflower Hill and developer Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA) presented preliminary plans at a Planning Commission study session for a supportive housing building proposed at 949 Moraga Way that would contain 48 affordable units intended for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

The project team said the building footprint sits on about 0.74 acres zoned MRO and would provide roughly 50,000 square feet of mixed-use residential space. “The First Floor is reserved for resident services and admin and support, which then leaves all the upper floors for the actual residential units,” architect Paul Ferrell said as he described a lobby fronting Moraga, staff offices, a multipurpose room, an on-site teaching kitchen, fitness space and two primary outdoor amenity areas.

The study session was intended to collect Planning Commission feedback on site design, massing, circulation and landscaping; staff emphasized that no formal approvals would be taken at the meeting. “We are asking the commissions to provide direction on the overall site design, building siting, and circulation, as well as provide direction on the project's architecture, massing and scale,” Senior Planner Stephanie Cervantes told the commission.

Why it matters: project proponents say the building would create permanent, deed-restricted affordable housing tied to supportive services for an underserved population in Lafayette. Sunflower Hill representatives said their Irby Ranch project in Pleasanton—developed with SAHA—filled its waitlist quickly and that the model combines housing with on-site programming and connections to regional supports.

Details from the presentation and public comments

- Units and use: The team said the proposal would include 48 units made up of one- and two-bedroom apartments, with ground-floor resident services and staff spaces. One presenter described caregiver “nooks” and a caregiver break room intended to support overnight or intermittent staff and to allow residents greater independence. The project will be deed-restricted for 55 years, the applicant said.

- Developer and partner: Sunflower Hill (nonprofit) is the program sponsor; SAHA (Satellite Affordable Housing Associates) was named as the affordable housing developer and property manager.

- Parking and circulation: The applicant described tandem parking primarily intended for staff rather than residents; the team said most residents are expected to rely on shared paratransit and on-site shuttle arrangements and that guest parking would be provided. Staff said a formal traffic study has not yet been submitted but will be considered when a formal application is filed; staff noted state rules (including potential VMT-related exemptions) may affect whether a traffic impact analysis is required.

- Accessibility and building code questions: Commissioners asked whether the building would require multiple elevators and how laundry and amenity circulation would work for residents who use mobility devices. Staff said those are building-code and design details to be addressed with formal application materials; the applicant and architect said they would refine plans to reduce barriers and provide clearer circulation for mobility devices.

- Neighborhood context and privacy: Staff described adjacent uses as a religious assembly and preschool to the north, apartments to the west, an office to the south and Lafayette Elementary School across the street. Commissioners and neighbors raised privacy and view concerns for the apartment buildings to the west and asked for additional elevation studies showing the view from adjacent properties.

Public reaction and services

Sunflower Hill and SAHA representatives emphasized the programmatic model—on-site activities, vocational support and partnerships with the Regional Center of the East Bay for individualized services. Sunflower Hill board member Rosemary Kerbach described Irby Ranch, the Pleasanton project, as a local precedent that she said has high demand, and she encouraged commissioners to consider the model’s service elements in addition to the physical design.

Several residents and advocates spoke in favor, citing need for affordable, supportive housing close to transit and services. Neighbors and others urged the team and staff to examine traffic impacts at school drop-off/pick-up times, ensure clear emergency service access and study sidewalk width and curb/pedestrian circulation.

What did not happen: Because this was a study session, the commission provided feedback but did not vote on or approve entitlements or any permits. Staff and the applicant said they expect a formal application to follow; staff noted the use is permitted in the zoning with potential ministerial review under state density or streamlining laws if the applicant pursues that route.

Next steps

Staff and the applicant said additional technical studies (traffic, detailed grading and building code reviews) and design refinements will be provided with any formal application. SAHA said it would continue coordinating with city staff and that project partners are available to answer technical questions as plans mature.

Ending: The commission did not act on the proposal; commissioners asked the team for additional elevation views, clearer accessibility and service plans, and engineering details that would accompany a formal application.","Sunflower Hill and Satellite Affordable Housing Associates presented preliminary plans for a 48-unit, 100% affordable supportive housing project at 949 Moraga Way. Planning staff framed the discussion as a study session; no formal action was taken. Commissioners and neighbors asked about traffic, parking, accessibility and site details.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Commission reapproves three‑lot subdivision at 1000 Howard Hills Road

Planning Commission approves Oak Hill Place subdivision plan with conditional fallback over neighbor easement

Sunflower Hill, SAHA present 48-unit supportive housing study session for Lafayette site