PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 1
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
TOWN OF ATHERTON
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
80 FAIR OAKS LANE
ATHERTON, CALIFORNIA
MAY 28, 2025
6:00 P.M.
This meeting was held in person with the option for staff and the public to join online.
1. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Eric Lane, Chair
Bob Polito, Vice Chair
Paul Tonelli, Commissioner
Sandy Levison, Commissioner
Jerome Leugers, Commissioner
Town Planner Brittany Bendix, Senior Planner Tom Ford, and Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton.
Chair Lane called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
A. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
I. Election of Planning Commission Chair
MOTION to nominate Eric Lane as Planning Commission Chair:
M/S Levison /Polito Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 II. Election of Planning Commission Vice Chair
MOTION to nominate Bob Polito as Planning Commission Vice Chair:
M/S Tonelli /Lane Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Chair Lane opened the public comments period.
There being no public comments, Chair Lane closed the public comments period.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held on December 11, 2024, as presented.
M/S Tonelli/Levison Ayes: 4 Noes: 0 Abstain: 1 Absent: 0 ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 2
4. PUBLIC HEARING
a. General Plan Consistency Determination for the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2025/26 Through 2029/30.
Senior Planner Tom Ford presented the staff recommendation that the Planning Commission find the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal years 2025/26 through 2029/30 consistent with the Atherton General Plan. He explained that the CIP supported City Council’s budget planning, with specific projects identified through Council priorities and adopted master plans.
Senior Planner Tom Ford summarized the three major CIP categories: Streets and Transportation; Drainage; and Town Buildings, Parks and Facilities. He also identified the relevant General Plan elements that support the CIP: Land Use, Circulation, Community Safety, and Open Space and Conservation. Each of the proposed projects aligns with multiple goals and policies within these elements.
Senior Planner Tom Ford elaborated on specific examples, including five transportation projects supported by the Circulation Element, two drainage projects tied to the Community Safety and Open Space Elements, and civic accessibility and park upgrades linked to the Land Use and Open Space Elements.
Chair Lane clarified that the Planning Commission’s role was limited to determining whether the CIP was consistent with the General Plan and not to approve budget decisions or project selections, which were under the Town Council’s authority.
Commissioner Tonelli stated that budget planning sessions, including reviews of capital projects, were typically joint meetings between the Finance Committee and the City Council. He recommended that the Planning Commission be invited to participate in those sessions.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix agreed, adding that the upcoming inclusionary housing study session may serve as a test case for further collaboration.
MOTION that the Planning Commission find that the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2025/2026 –2029/2030, including the projects in that program, is not a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is consistent with the Atherton General Plan for the reasons noted in the Staff Report.
M/S Levison /Tonelli Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 b. Accessory Structure and Fencing Variances (VAR25-001) at 2 Dinkelspiel Station Lane (APN 060-321-220).
Town Planner Brittany Bendix clarified that the applicant for the variance request was the library, with the Town serving as the property owner. She reported that staff recommended the approval of the variances requested under Atherton Municipal Code Sections 17.40.0440 (accessory buildings and structures) and 17.46.030 (fencing standards). The garden design included ADA-accessible features, a willow hut, branch tunnel, mirrored posts, a boulder climbing mound, a sculptural tree stump, landscaping, and good neighbor fencing.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix stated that a variance was required due to deviation from uniform design standards along the property line. The proposed eight-foot-tall, good neighbor fence would replace and ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 3 extend an existing fence, designed in consultation with adjacent neighbors to address visibility and noise concerns. She outlined the four required variance findings, including special circumstances, no special privileges, no adverse public impact, and consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Code.
Staff concluded that all findings were met, citing the uniqueness of the property’s public use, collaborative efforts with neighbors, and alignment with local planning policy.
Commissioner Tonelli supported the project, inquiring about feedback from neighboring residents and any measures to prevent the public from entering the area outside of library operations.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix clarified that only two adjacent residential properties were directly affected, and that no neighbors had reached out following the project’s public notice. New gates would be installed at both ends of the garden area to secure it during off-hours.
Landscape Architect Jeffrey Miller noted that the Children’s Garden project had previously been presented to City Council. He described extensive outreach and collaboration with neighboring property owners, including multiple site meetings. The proposed good neighbor fence would extend from one end of the library building to the other, with a portion involving the addition of lattice to an existing fence to ensure continuity.
Landscape Architect Jeffrey Miller emphasized that the project was not a playground but a naturalistic children's garden featuring no play structures, and that accessibility was achieved through a zigzag ramp designed around existing underground utilities and that the existing redwood trees on site would be protected. No new trees would be planted, but native plantings were proposed in the understory. A decomposed granite area near the building would be replaced with pavers to prevent water splash damage.
Landscape Architect Jeffrey Miller outlined access points, including gates at both ends of the garden and connections to the library through the Makers Room and staff areas. The garden would include an artist-designed bench and additional stump seating, with drainage directed into the landscape.
Chair Lane commented that any future noise concerns would likely be addressed by the library through adjustments to programming, access control, or usage guidelines.
MOTION that the Planning Commission approve the Variance at 2 Dinkelspiel Station Lane to allow the construction of new landscaping and play structures within the required side yard setback based on the findings enumerated in the staff report.
M/S Levison/ Leugers Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 c. Front and Rear Setback Variances (VAR24-003) and Tree Protection Zone Exceptions (PTPZ25- 00002) at 94 Palmer Lane (APN 060-163-290).
Town Planner Brittany Bendix presented a request for front and rear yard setback variances and a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) exception at 94 Palmer Lane, noting a typographical error in the staff report, correcting the provided rear setback from 17 ft 4 in to the actual 37 ft 4.75 in. She explained that while the strict application of R1-A standards would leave only 185 sq ft of buildable area, the applicant had drawn from an existing R1-A provision allowing setback reductions based on parcel age and length.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix clarified that the applicant opted to pursue a traditional-style singlefamily home with an ADU, rather than the SB9 option of two 800-square-foot units with four-foot setbacks. The resulting challenge was compliance with R1-A development standards, including the ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 4 required 60-foot front and rear setbacks, which severely restricted the buildable area. She presented the project layout, which included a 2,961-sq-ft residence, 800-sq-ft attached ADU, and detached garage, with access from a driveway along the flagpole section. The site’s allowable floor area ratio was just under 3,000 sq ft, which the applicant had not exceeded.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix recommended approval of both the variance and TPZ exception to facilitate the construction of a new single-family residence, detached garage, and attached ADU. She explained that the 0.32-acre flag lot, located in the R1-A zoning district, was created in 2022 through an SB9 urban lot split. She also noted that the home complied with height and side setback requirements and provided separate external access for the ADU via a patio, consistent with code. She also clarified that Junior ADUs (JADUs) were limited to 500 sq ft, had shared bathroom allowances, and included ownership restrictions.
Chair Lane questioned whether future SB9 applicants could be provided with clearer guidance on potential building footprints during the lot split processing, emphasizing the need to evaluate impacts such as tree preservation early, rather than after the split.
Senior Planner Britt noted that under SB9, applicants may not be subject to TPZ or heritage tree removal requirements, similar to how ADUs are treated. Under SB9, applicants may construct either two 800- square-foot SB9 units or a main residence with one ADU, but not both.
Architect Kelly Johnson appeared on behalf of the applicant, Andrea Magozo, the owner of 94 Palmer Lane. She explained stated that the lot was split in May 2023 and that she began working on the project shortly thereafter. She held her first meeting regarding the need for a setback variance in April 2024.
Over the past year, she has worked closely with multiple planners and the planning department, submitting revised plans and additional information as requested.
Architect Kelly Johnson emphasized that the design was developed thoughtfully and respectfully, maintaining appropriate scale and setbacks consistent with the Palmer Lane neighborhood. She noted that the project team collaborated with the Town Arborist and fire department to ensure the protection of heritage trees while maintaining site access and emergency response readiness.
Town Arborist Sally confirmed that, given the applicant’s cooperation and proactive efforts to protect the trees, she was comfortable recommending approval of the TPZ exceptions.
MOTION that the Planning Commission approve the requests for Front and Rear Setback Variances (VAR24-003) and Tree Protection Zone Exceptions (PTPZ25-00002) to construct a new single-family dwelling with detached garage and attached ADU at 94 Palmer Lane (APN 060-163-290) and categorically exempt the project from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under AMC Section 15.32.100 and CEQA Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land).
M/S Lane/Polito Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
d. Heritage Tree Removals (HTR25-001) at 18 Faxon Forest Road (APN 070-180-360).
Town Planner Brittany Bendix reported that staff recommended approval of the removal of two coast live oaks but denial of the removal of three trident maples. She noted that the Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton supported removal of only one oak due to confirmed foundation damage, while planning staff extended support to both oaks based on proximity to hardscape and foundation concerns.
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 5 Town Planner Brittany Bendix provided background that the 1.33-acre R1A-zoned lot was located at the terminus of Faxon Forest Road, under common ownership with two adjacent vacant lots, and included a single-family home built circa 1995. Recent landscaping renovations were driving the tree removal request. The two coast live oaks proposed for removal were in good to fair health and located within the footprint of new pathways. The three trident maples were also in good to fair health, with removal attributed to aesthetic landscaping changes. A total of 15 replacement trees were proposed.
Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton found no structural or health issues necessitating removal for any of the five trees, except for tree No. 1, which showed hardscape and foundation impacts supported by engineering reports. Tree No. 2 lacked such evidence but was still supported by staff due to its location.
Both staff and the Town Arborist opposed the removal of the trident maples. The applicant confirmed the request was part of a broader landscape redesign.
Chair Lane questioned how the new concrete pathway was approved given its proximity to one of the oaks, implying that it had been poured with the expectation the tree would be removed.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix clarified that tree removal had not been approved as part of the landscaping work.
Commissioner Polito asked whether a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) exception had been required for the hardscape, noting the work appeared professionally executed.
Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton responded that the applicant had applied for several permits and had her conduct a site review prior to beginning work. She confirmed she initially denied the oak removals, but supported the removal of tree No. 1 once engineering reports confirmed foundation damage. Tree No. 2 had no such documentation, only hardscape impacts.
Applicant Nasrin Hashemi described his long-term residence and ownership, stating that the two oaks near the house were mistakenly planted during the original landscaping in the late 1990s and had since caused hardscape damage and encroached on the structure. He explained the aesthetic motivation behind removing the trident maples as part of a broader landscape redesign, noting that numerous heritage trees would remain and four 16-foot redwoods would be planted. He reiterated his commitment to preserving the property’s wooded character, with no plans to expand or build additional structures.
Chair Lane maintained concerns about approving the removal of the trident maples solely for aesthetic reasons, given their healthy condition and the limitations of the ordinance.
Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton reiterated that the final decision rested with the Commission, though she cautioned against setting a precedent for future aesthetic-based removals.
Chair Lane questioned what justification, beyond aesthetics, the Commission could rely on to approve the removal of the healthy trident maples, stating that the ordinance offered little flexibility in such cases.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix explained that the Commission could weigh other factors, such as the overall number of heritage trees on-site and the owners’ track record of stewardship, when shaping future policy or giving direction to staff.
Chair Lane proposed separating the vote.
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 6 MOTION that the Planning Commission approve the Heritage Tree Removal Permit (HTR25- 001), at 18 Faxon Forest Road for the removal of two (2) coast live oaks, trees No. 1 and No. 2.
M/S Lane/Polito Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
Commissioner Polito noted that the two trees near the entryway were likely problematic in the fall, expressing greater concern about the rear tree’s interference and asking about the proposed location for new redwoods.
Nasrin Hashemi indicated that the redwoods would be planted on the left side of the property, as viewed from the front, near the only adjacent neighbor.
Commissioner Polito then asked about the location of the architectural multi-trunk maple trees and referenced the difficulty interpreting the landscape plan.
Nasrin Hashemi responded that there were 26 heritage trees on the lots and 12 on the specific parcel, adding that the shedding from maples could impact the water feature planned near the front entrance.
Chair Lane cautioned against placing new trees too close to existing oaks.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix clarified that the approved replacement list included eight ornamental cherry or Japanese maple trees, two architectural multi-trunk maple trees, four redwood trees, one pine tree, and ten ficus trees. She confirmed the ficus trees were mentioned in the applicant’s letter but were not part of the conditions of approval.
Town Arborist Sally Bentz-Dalton noted that although code typically required oak tree replacement with other oaks, she approved redwoods at the applicant’s request due to the high number of oaks already on the property.
Commissioner Polito supported removing two trees in the front due to maintenance concerns and commended the applicant’s stewardship, noting their efforts supported environmental preservation.
Commissioner Levison also commended the applicant’s responsibility and proactive approach, noting his commitment to preserving the property’s wooded character and respecting the ordinance process.
MOTION that the Planning Commission approve the Heritage Tree Removal Permit (HTR25- 001), at 18 Faxon Forest Road for the removal of three (3) trident maple tree Nos. 3, 4, and 5, subject to the draft conditions as listed in the Draft Heritage Tree Removal Permit Certificate.
M/S Polito/Tonelli Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 e. Heritage Tree Removal (HTR25-003) at 98 Maple Avenue (APN 060-331-250).
Chair Lane noted that two letters of opposition from Paul Quinlan at 49 Maple, referencing concerns related to the tree ordinance and project design, and another from Darren and Amy Torre at 57 Maple with similar objections. Both letters would be included in June 2025’s meeting packet for consideration.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix confirmed that she had responded to both emails, acknowledging receipt and noting that the project would be continued to the following month’s hearing.
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TOWN OF ATHERTON, MAY 28, 2025 P. 7 Chair Lane highlighted that public comment and previous Commission feedback, such as during the December hearing, often strengthened staff’s position when requesting additional information from applicants. He cited this as an example, where the Town Arborist had requested further cavity testing of a tree, and the continuance would ideally allow time for that testing and documentation.
MOTION that the Planning Commission approve the requested continuance of the Heritage Tree Removal Permit (HTR25-003) at 98 Maple Avenue for the removal of one (1) coast live oak tree, to the June 2025 Planning Commission meeting.
M/S Lane/Polito Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
5. STAFF REPORTS
Town Planner Brittany Bendix announced the coordination of a potential study session with City Council on inclusionary housing policy now that the housing element had been certified and requested that the Planning Commission respond with its availability so that quorum could be reached.
Commissioner Polito expressed concern that during joint meetings, the City Council often had access to significantly more information through regular one-on-ones with the City Manager, which left Planning Commissioners at a disadvantage.
Chair Lane agreed, stating that the lack of access to background discussions made the Commission appear uninformed during meetings.
Town Planner Brittany Bendix offered to work with the Chair and Vice Chair on a strategy to improve information flow, confirming that communication would be frequent ahead of the upcoming meeting and that any non-confidential insights would be shared to assist with preparation.
6. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
There were no reports at this time.
7. ADJOURN
M/S Polito/____ Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
ATTACHMENT 2