The Planning Commission continued its public hearing Jan. 9 on a large estate proposal at 23 Crest Road East that would create a multi-pad development with a main residence, guest house, accessory dwelling unit (ADU), a mixed-use building described in the submission as a stable/mixed-use structure and associated corral and substantial grading.

Planning staff summarized the proposal (zoning case 23-070): the 6-acre property was the subject of prior approvals and extensions; the current application proposes a new main residence, an 800-square-foot guest house, a roughly 1,940-square-foot stable/mixed-use building, a 2,000-square-foot corral and approximately 28,930 cubic yards of grading with about 5,200 cubic yards of nonexempt export. Staff pointed out several items requiring further detail or correction before a final decision: discrepancies in grading calculations (an ADU shown with “no grading” on application materials but with fill on plans), portions of decks/patios that appear to be above allowable grade limits and would require variance, and the need to re-notice because the stable was presented in the original notice as a standard stable but the application submitted during the noticing period describes a mixed-use building.

The project team — principal architect Frank Escher, architect Frank’s partner (project architect), civil engineer Dan Bolton, wastewater engineer Kevin Poffenberger, and landscape designer David God (TeraMoto Landscape) — presented design intent and technical approaches. The applicant and architect said they sought to place the main building largely within a buildable contour (shown as the 1,291-foot contour in drawings) to minimize intrusion into the ravines and natural terrain; they also proposed a low “mound” near Crest Road aimed at visually screening the house from the street. Kevin Poffenberger described a plan to manage wastewater with subsurface drip irrigation dispersal and to capture stormwater in large cisterns for on‑site reuse (landscape irrigation and toilet flushing where allowable), saying the team aims to reduce runoff by treating and reusing captured stormwater. Dan Bolton said the team sized cisterns and drainage to capture the site’s 85th‑percentile storm and to store most of the developed drainage volume, and that stormwater would be filtered and conveyed to cisterns for reuse; he added that in hillside settings engineers generally avoid infiltration because it can destabilize slopes.

Neighbors and commissioners raised multiple concerns: whether the knoll/mound will appear manufactured or block views if trees on the mound mature; the proximity of an 800-square-foot guest house to the canyon and whether it encroaches into a blue-line stream corridor; accuracy of grading and cut/fill figures (staff noted discrepancies between plan tables and grading maps); how and where cisterns will be sited and supported so overflow does not affect adjacent properties; and whether the stable’s program (a mixture of storage, small office and animal uses) requires separate noticing and review. Neighbors who attended the field trip and the hearing emphasized past and current drainage impacts in the downstream slide plain and asked that the city coordinate with county agencies, the HOA and the applicant to ensure the design does not add flows to the slide area.

Commission members had several specific requests to address in a next submittal: correct and reconcile all grading/export calculations and demonstrate how cut and fill will be balanced on-site or show export volumes; move or redesign the guest house so it does not encroach into the canyon/blue-line stream; provide detailed drainage and cistern sizing and overflow routing so runoff will not exacerbate downstream slide-plains; restake and reflag the mound height and location on site so commissioners and neighbors can judge its visual effect relative to the house ridge line; and re-notice the public hearing now that the stable is described as a mixed-use building. Commissioners also called for a planting plan that avoids tall, view-blocking species on the mound (staff and applicant discussed planting lower, native coastal chaparral species and limited small trees such as fern‑leaf ironwood rather than large coast live oaks).

The commission unanimously voted to continue the item and directed staff and the applicant to address the technical and noticing items listed above. Commissioners and the applicant’s team agreed to coordinate additional field staking and a follow-up field trip so commissioners and neighbors can assess the mound’s height, the relationship of retaining walls and the driveway to the existing eucalyptus trees, and proposed cistern locations. Staff will re-notice the project to reflect the mixed-use stable description and to provide corrected plan and grading information prior to the next hearing.