Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parking Pad Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ADR backs recommendation to council for 313 Upper Toyon parking-pad design and variance

3300768 · April 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The applicant at 313 Upper Toyon asked for design review, a hillside permit and a variance to construct a parking pad within the side-yard setback; ADR members accepted planting and screening revisions and voted to forward a recommendation to the Town Council, though several members said findings for a variance were marginal.

The owner of 313 Upper Toyon asked the Ross Advisory Design Review for a recommendation to the Town Council for design review, a hillside permit and a variance to construct a parking pad within a side‑yard setback.

Alex (planning staff) told the ADR that the applicant had increased the side‑yard setback for the parking pad from a proposed 24 feet to 30 feet and added screening beneath the parking pad to conceal mechanical equipment. The applicant said they had planted four mature Indian laurel fig trees to screen the deck and that the neighbor supports the project.

Members said the reorientation of the deck and the added screening were improvements. Several members said they could not clearly find the legal hardship required for a variance because the site already has above‑average parking compared with many Ross houses, while others said the parking pad could improve maneuverability and emergency access and therefore could support a variance. The ADR voted to forward a recommendation to the Town Council; members who supported forwarding often described their votes as conditional or cautious.

The applicant noted they had pursued an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) separately and had paused that work after fire/life safety review requested a turnover/turnaround requirement and driveway widening; the ADU discussion did not result in a council action during this meeting.