Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Development Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues steep‑slope, Williamson Act compatibility proposal on La Barranca Road for more study
Summary
A complex site‑development permit and multiple variances for an unaddressed La Barranca Road property — including a Williamson Act compatibility determination, grading exceptions, and an MDA variance — were continued after extensive technical review and strong neighborhood comment; the Commission requested additional analysis from staff and the Open Space Committee before rescheduling.
The Planning Commission extensively reviewed a proposed site development permit and several variances June 8 for an unaddressed lot on La Barranca Road (file SD25‑0072). The project would build a two‑story 4,711 sq ft single‑family residence with a 793 sq ft ADU and an approximately 999 sq ft SB 9 unit on the lower level; requests included a variance to exceed the maximum driveway width, a variance to exceed the maximum development area by roughly 540 square feet, a grading policy exception (cuts exceeding the town’s usual 4‑foot maximum in limited locations), and a Williamson Act compatibility determination for a parcel reportedly subject to a rolling Williamson Act contract dating to 1972.
Staff noted technical constraints: the 1.106 net‑acre lot has an average slope of about 33.3% and a nearly 70‑foot elevation change across the site; a county/town slope easement constrains where driveway and building access can be placed. The application includes light agricultural features (a greenhouse and a small chicken coop) the applicants say support a farming business plan; staff emphasized that any open‑space easement or Williamson Act compatibility findings could materially affect what portions of the property are available for development.
Neighbors raised multiple concerns: potential removal of heritage oak trees, visual impacts, noise from nearby SR‑280, the volume of grading and excavation, septic design and pump noise, and uncertainty about whether the parcel’s Williamson Act status is valid and what that means for entitlement and tax consequences. Several speakers urged staff to consult county assessor records and a land‑use attorney; commissioners emphasized the need for the Open Space Committee’s recommendation before making final findings on Williamson Act compatibility or approving variances.
Given the unresolved technical and legal questions, commissioners voted to continue the item to a future date uncertain so staff can integrate Open Space Committee recommendations, clarify Williamson Act documentation and compatibility findings, and refine grading, tree‑protection and MDA/MFA calculations.
