Woodside planning panel approves design review and grading exception for 170 Fox Hollow Road

The Woodside Town Planning Commission on Monday approved a formal design review and a grading exception for a proposed redevelopment at 170 Fox Hollow Road, allowing demolition of the existing residence and construction of a new main house, an attached studio ADU, two detached ADUs, a trellis, a pool and related site improvements on a 3.013‑acre lot.

Staff told the commission the project requires two exceptions: a maximum main‑residence‑size exception and a grading exception because the proposed site grading (about 2,560 cubic yards) exceeds the municipal 1,500‑cubic‑yard threshold. Staff recommended the commission find the proposal meets the findings in section 151.22 of the municipal code and recommended several extra conditions to address unpermitted improvements discovered in the equestrian trail easement and to coordinate remaining landscaping in the public right‑of‑way with Public Works.

The project team described design and site details to the commission. Staff and the applicant said materials include weathered wood siding, stone veneer and standing‑seam metal roofing in an earth‑tone palette; the design team emphasized breaking the building into component masses rather than a single monolithic facade to reduce apparent bulk. The architect, Ken Lindstead, said the intent was to "break up the building into several component parts so you're not looking at one massive structure" and to make grading and massing restorative to earlier site conditions rather than reshaping the entire lot.

Civil engineer Jim (Braves Engineering) told commissioners the grading figure is driven by multiple on‑site constraints — existing trees, septic footprint, required fire‑truck access and a bioretention area for stormwater quality — and that the team aimed to balance cut and fill across the 3+‑acre site. He said the project team prioritized preserving larger oak specimens and that "the majority" of the trees planned for removal are smaller, generally under 14 inches in diameter.

Commissioners probed the grading‑exception findings and asked how the code’s constraints test treats tree removal, septic, existing topography and trail easements. Staff said tree retention measures and an arborist monitoring plan will be required for grading near significant trees, that trail easements are generally to be kept clear and that encroachment permits and signage are tools Public Works can evaluate to address improvements in the right‑of‑way.

No members of the public spoke on the project during the hearing. After deliberation, a commissioner moved to approve the amended draft resolution as provided by staff; the motion was seconded and passed on a roll‑call vote: Chair Gar — yes; Vice Chair Tobert — yes; Commissioner Weaver — yes. Staff noted the commission’s decision may be appealed to the Town Council within a 10‑calendar‑day appeal period.

Next procedural steps: the approval is final pending the appeal period; staff indicated the approval will include conditions addressing encroachments in the trail easement, arborist requirements during grading, and standard stormwater and septic conditions required by town and state rules. The commission also heard staff updates that the ADU ordinance will be presented to Town Council on June 28 and that a tentative ruling in unrelated litigation (Kinyatta Corners) is under further briefing.