Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lafayette panel approves revised design for 2 Dallas Park Road after privacy concerns
Summary
The Design Review Commission approved a revised hillside development permit for a three‑story house at 2 Dallas Park Road, requiring landscaping and minor design changes after neighbor complaints about privacy. The project was found exempt from CEQA and approved by unanimous vote.
The Lafayette Design Review Commission on March 10 approved revisions to a hillside development permit for 2 Dallas Park Road, finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and adopting Resolution 2025-3 to approve the project subject to conditions.
The project, identified in staff materials as HDP 15-202 (GR 14-204), is a redevelopment and enlargement of an existing house on a 0.16-acre lot. Staff and the applicant described reductions to the first and second floor footprints, adjustments to window locations, and new landscaping proposed along the western property line intended to reduce privacy impacts raised by neighbors.
Nicole Zittel, the project planner, told the commission the applicant revised the first-floor plan by pulling the western wall back about 4 feet and removed a closet on the southern elevation to push that wall back roughly 4 feet as well. The applicant also shifted and reduced some first-floor windows and altered roof lines to reduce perceived massing. Staff said the applicant proposed planting six columnar yew pines (15-gallon) intended to reach about 6 feet to provide screening along the western property line.
Adh Gupta, a neighbor at 1 Dallas Park Road, spoke during public comment and said the revised house would be “highly visible” from the outside living areas, master bedroom and upstairs, and raised concerns that the proposed 6-foot yew pines planted at the fence line would not provide effective screening. Gupta asked for a more appropriately scaled project and taller or larger‑caliper screening to protect privacy.
An applicant representative said the upper floor had been set back an additional 2 feet beyond the changes described by staff, and that windows had been pushed to the corners and in some cases increased in height for consistency with other upper-floor windows. The representative also said the house had been within applicable height, setback and coverage limits and argued the changes addressed prior commission concerns.
Commission discussion noted the tradeoffs between neighborhood privacy and the owner’s right to redevelop within zoning limits. Several commissioners suggested conditions: verify the installed plant sizes and growth expectations with staff and the landscape architect, consider listing the screening trees as protected under the city tree ordinance, and, at least one commissioner recommended restoring the upper west windows to the smaller sill height previously shown to reduce perceived overlook into neighboring yards.
Commissioners then moved to approve the staff recommendation. Motion language on the record found the project exempt from CEQA and adopted Resolution 2025-3 approving the project subject to the conditions discussed; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote (all present voted "Aye"). The commission cautioned the applicant not to begin construction until the appeal period and other approval steps were complete.
The approval includes standard conditions from the staff report, landscape verification with staff, and the window/screening clarifications discussed at the hearing.
