Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors’ privacy concerns lead Larkspur Planning Commission to approve 26 Baltimore house with window and fence conditions

Larkspur Planning Commission · September 10, 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 Larkspur Planning Commission on Sept. 9 approved a proposed two‑story home with a 691‑sq‑ft ADU at 26 Baltimore Ave, requiring frosting of two east‑facing corner windows and modifications to a proposed Monte Vista fence to address neighbor privacy and streetscape impacts; the motion passed 4‑0 with a 10‑day appeal period.

The Larkspur Planning Commission voted Sept. 9 to approve a design‑review application to demolish the house at 26 Baltimore Avenue and build a new two‑story single‑family residence with an attached 691‑square‑foot accessory dwelling unit (ADU), subject to conditions intended to reduce privacy impacts on adjoining neighbors.

Planning staff described the project as a 3,262‑square‑foot two‑story residence with a 356‑square‑foot garage and 620 square feet of below‑grade basement that does not count against the floor‑area ratio (FAR). The application sought several exceptions: a FAR exception to allow a proposed FAR of about 0.49, a lot‑coverage variance for 3,033 square feet where 3,000 is permitted, a slope‑use permit for roughly 400 cubic yards of cut and fill for a basement and pool, and fence‑height exceptions for an eastern property line fence and a Monte Vista street‑side fence.

Neighbor Frank Lobedon told the commission his backyard and primary living areas will face two very large upper‑floor windows that moved about 4 feet closer in the revised design. “These windows look directly down into our backyard, and they also look down into our dining area and our living room,” Lobedon said, urging smaller or clerestory windows, obscured glazing or other mitigation to preserve privacy.

Architect Jared Polsky, representing the applicant, said the team revised plans after earlier commission feedback to bring the primary residence into FAR compliance when the ADU is excluded; he said the house height was lowered about 6 inches, the second floor was shifted and materials were diversified on the east elevation. Polsky said the applicants are proposing obscured glass for two east‑facing corner windows and are willing to make the fence less monolithic and step it back from the sidewalk.

Commissioners pressed staff and the architect for specifics. Staff confirmed the second story shifted from about 15 feet 2 inches to about 11 feet 2 inches from the property line in the updated design. Commissioners asked for measures that preserve interior daylight while reducing direct sightlines — for example, clerestory windows, skylights or obscured glazing — and discussed the fence along Monte Vista, where a retaining wall plus a 6‑foot fence created a perceived 10‑foot vertical face at the sidewalk.

The motion to approve the application included two explicit conditions: frost or otherwise obscure the two east‑facing corner windows and modify the Monte Vista fence design by stepping it back approximately 2 feet and adding a more transparent upper portion or other visible relief to avoid a monolithic wall. The motion was moved and seconded by commission members and passed by roll call: 4 ayes, 0 nos, 1 absence. Staff noted approvals are subject to required permits (slope use permit, variance and fence exceptions), standard findings and conditions, and a 10‑day appeal period during which the approval may be challenged by filing the required form and fee with the city clerk.

Why it matters: The approval shows how Larkspur balances property owners’ redevelopment plans with neighborhood character and privacy concerns. The commission relied on design modifications and conditions rather than denying the project; staff also noted a pending local code change that would make ADU area count differently for lot coverage and FAR calculations, which the applicant said would help bring the project into compliance.

What’s next: The project approval is final unless appealed within 10 calendar days; if not appealed, the applicant must satisfy conditions and obtain building and grading permits and any slope‑use permits before construction begins.