Commission continues review of 56 Diane Lane plan amid design, tree and fence concerns

The Larkspur Planning Commission on Jan. 14 continued PLN 24‑15, a design‑review application for 56 Diane Lane, after lengthy discussion about the project’s size, design details, heritage tree removal and a fence‑height exception requested by the applicant.

Staff presentation said the applicants seek demolition of the existing single‑story 1,454‑square‑foot house on what staff described as “one of the largest” lots in the Heather Gardens neighborhood (staff cited the lot as “11,000 and 12 square feet” in the presentation). The project proposes a new two‑story, 4,556‑square‑foot residence including a two‑car garage; the application requested design review, heritage tree removal, and a fence‑height exception to allow a 7‑foot fence plus a 1‑foot lattice along side and rear property lines.

Staff raised several subjective design concerns despite finding many objective zoning standards met (setbacks, maximum height, FAR at the proposed 0.40). The report flagged the front elevation’s inconsistent fenestration, a heavy entry privacy wall and significant front‑yard hardscape as elements that make the design feel “massive and bulky” compared with existing Heather Gardens patterns. Staff also noted the project proposes removing two large rear fir trees; the applicants submitted an arborist report asserting the trees cannot be removed without taking the trees down to extract an abandoned, rusted car on a mound in the rear yard. Staff included a condition requiring replacement trees if the heritage trees are authorized for removal.

Neighbors who spoke at the hearing described the home as out‑of‑character for Heather Gardens and urged the commission to prioritize compatibility and reduced massing. Frank Greco (60 Diane) told the commission the project “doesn’t fit the neighborhood” and urged the commission to focus on bulk over minor details. Other neighbors echoed concerns about the proposed concrete privacy wall at the entry and potential visual impact of a metal roof — staff noted this would be the first metal roof approved in the neighborhood.

Architect Heather Foy said the courtyard plan and limited side glazing were intentional design moves to protect privacy for neighboring properties; she said windows on the inner courtyard would be frosted and that the applicants removed a second‑story balcony at the request of neighbors. Neighbors and commissioners suggested additional softening of the front elevation, reduced hardscape in the front yard and alternatives to a solid concrete privacy wall.

Given the outstanding subjective design issues and neighborhood concern, the commission voted to continue the application to a date uncertain and directed the applicant to return with revisions and additional outreach. The continuance passed with three yes votes, zero nos, one absence and one recusal.