Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lafayette planning commission approves lot-line adjustment and Phase 1 hillside permit for Spring Hill Road parcels

City of Lafayette Planning Commission · February 17, 2026
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 Planning Commission unanimously approved a Phase 1 hillside development permit and a lot-line adjustment for 3535 and 3533 Spring Hill Road, allowing an 8,837 sq ft main house and a 1,200 sq ft detached ADU to proceed to Phase 2 design review with conditions; neighbors raised drainage and narrow-road concerns.

The City of Lafayette Planning Commission on Feb. 17 voted to approve a Phase 1 hillside development permit and a lot-line adjustment for two parcels on Spring Hill Road, clearing the project to move to a Phase 2 design review subject to conditions and a 14-day appeal period.

Nicole Zettle, the city project planner, told the commission the lot-line revision would increase parcel 3535 from 27.1 to 28.8 acres and decrease 3533 from 16.1 to 14.4 acres. Zettle said the owner proposes an 8,837-square-foot two-story main house and a 1,200-square-foot detached accessory dwelling unit; the ADU height was described as roughly 17 feet and the main house about 27 feet. Zettle recommended the commission find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopt Planning Commission resolution "20 26 0 1" approving the project subject to the conditions in the staff report.

The applicants and design team described efforts to minimize cut-and-fill, tuck the house into an existing flat building pad and preserve surrounding trees. Designer Markie Becker said the team planned a low-profile design and natural materials (stone, stucco, wood and a slate roof) so the home "fades into the background." Civil engineer Angelo Hubertello described existing drainage features and mitigation plans: "we've integrated, I think in total of 5 different basins" plus swales and check dams to treat and detain stormwater so flows do not increase off the property.

Neighbors who spoke raised practical concerns about the project's potential effects on a narrow, private access road and local drainage. Carlos Roig, who said he has lived on Spring Hill Road for seven-and-a-half years, described damaged pavement near past projects and asked who would be responsible for road repairs and where construction staging would occur, saying "the road is in horrible condition" in a specific spot. The applicants' contractor, Scott Smigielski, said the developer's standard practice is to document the road condition before work and "if there is damage done, we're responsible for making the needed repairs." He added the property has room to stage materials on-site. Staff and the team told the commission the current grading design projects a balanced earthwork operation of about 1,100 cubic yards of cut and fill.

Commissioners asked whether the adjacent parcel could be developed later; staff said the lots would still meet LR-10 lot-size, width and setback requirements after the adjustment but that any future development would require a separate application. Commissioners also discussed fire-resilient building assemblies after the designer noted the team is evaluating thermally modified materials and one-hour rated siding systems for a fire-prone area.

After commissioners indicated they could make the required findings for both the lot-line adjustment and the Phase 1 hillside permit, Commissioner LaBonge moved to find the project exempt from CEQA and adopt the planning commission resolution approving the project subject to conditions; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote with no recorded opposition. The chair noted a 14-day appeal period for the decision. The project will return to the design review process in Phase 2 for final design and site-impact review.

Assistant Planning Director Stephanie Cervantes reminded commissioners of a joint meeting with the Design Review Commission on Feb. 23 to discuss an unrelated project at 949 Moraga. The meeting was then adjourned.