July 7, 2025
Ms. Elizabeth Lewis, Mayor
Ms. Stacy Holland, Vice Mayor
Ms. Diana Hawkins-Manuelian, Council Member
Mr. Rick DeGolia, Council Member
Mr. Bill Widmer, Council Member
Town of Atherton
Planning Department
c/o Brittany Bendix, Consulting Town Planner
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
Re: Applicant / Owner Response to Appeal of Planning Commission’s May 28th 5-0 Approval of Front and Rear Setback Variances (VAR24-003) to construct a new single family dwelling with an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at 94 Palmer Lane (APN 060-163-290).
Via Email
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
As the applicant of the above referenced project, we respectfully request that you follow Planning Staff’s recommendation and uphold the Planning Commission’s May 28th unanimous 5-0 approval of the above referenced setback variances. This approval was appealed by Mr. Michael Templeton of 80 Palmer Lane via email dated June 9th, 2025. For the reasons set forth in this letter, we respectfully request that you deny his appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s unanimous approval of the setback variances.
The Design Challenge
The parcel at issue is 0.32 acres and was created by an urban lot split approved in 2023 by the Town pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 9 and Atherton Municipal Code (AMC) Section 17.53. It is situated at the edge of the Town’s boundaries in a neighborhood of comparably sized properties that range in lot size from 0.12 to 0.77-acres. The parcel is zoned R-1A which requires 60 foot front and rear setbacks and 26 foot side year setbacks. Applying these setbacks would result in a buildable area of approximately 185 square feet which is hardly big enough for a single room let alone a single-family house.
Carefully Designed Solution
We began working with the Planning Department in April of 2024 to discuss the process and the requirements to submit for a front & rear setback variance for 94 Palmer Lane to allow for a single-family home. Throughout this 15 month process we have made multiple submissions and have been assigned and reassigned to multiple Town planners. At each step in the process, we were required to provide additional information before we were granted the opportunity to go before the Planning Commission.
ATTACHMENT 6
We listened carefully to the Planning Department. We worked diligently and spent many, many hours and resources designing a solution for this property that would be compatible with the neighborhood and respect the privacy of the immediate neighbors. We worked with the Town Arborist and the Fire Department to provide the maximum protection for the Heritage Trees and still allow the property to be accessed and protected in a disaster.
The solution that we presented to the Planning Commission is respectful to the neighbors in scale and in its distance from the property lines. It is a good fit for this community and is in line with the development standards along Palmer Lane. The project complies with all R-1A development standards with the exception of the front and rear yard setback requirements from which we are seeking a variance. The proposed front and rear setbacks are 37 feet and 4.75 inches which equate to 30% of the lot depth of 124.78 feet. This corresponds to Section 17.32.040(D)(1) which provides that “for lots of record prior to adoption of Ordinance No. 146 (April 16, 1946) with a depth of less than two hundred feet, the front and rear yards shall each be thirty percent of the lot depth with a minimum of thirty feet.”
It is important to note that although the appellant complains of the 26 foot setback facing his property, we are not asking for a reduced side setback and this 26 foot setback is allowed without a variance. The side setbacks we have used are standard for R-1A development in this neighborhood and respect the privacy of the neighbors. We located the attached ADU to the North side of the property because the North Fair Oaks neighborhood currently has this type of density and it is a better fit in that location. It should also be noted that the front face of the designed house is more than 180’ from the edge of the street. Each time we made design decisions, we focused on respecting the neighbors and fitting into this community. This project is a common sense solution. And the Planning Commission supported us 5-0.
Proposed Additional Concession to Address Appellant’s Privacy Concern We have carefully read Mr. Templeton’s letter and looked for ways to address his concerns, most of which we note do not result from our requested variances from the front and rear setbacks. The owner of 94 Palmer Lane, Mr. Magozo, and Town Planner Brittany Bendix met in person with Mr. Templeton after he submitted his letter. Together they brainstormed some possible solutions that might make Mr. Templeton more supportive of this project. Although we feel that the current tree canopy is very dense and will shield the sightlines, we would be willing to obscure all of the glazing in the lower portion of the 2nd story windows that face Mr.Templeton’s property. The attached diagram shows where we would include this window treatment.
We thank you for your consideration and invite each of the council members to take the opportunity to visit the site before the City Council meeting. We trust that you will find that the requested variances meet all of the findings set forth in Atherton Municipal Code Chapter 17.16 and California Government Code Section 65906, including that the granting of the variance will not “adversely affect the interest of the public or the interest of the residents and property owners in the vicinity of the premise in question.”
Sincerely,
Kelly Johnson, Zak Johnson Architects
Andre Magozo, Owner of 94 Palmer Lane
ATTACHMENT 6
ackack
Proposed Setback
37'-4 3/4"
8'-0"
12 5
Proposed Setback
Proposed Front Setback
Distance btw. Main house
and detached Garage
Standing Seam Metel Roof on 1st floor roofs
only. Ribs to be 12" o.c. typ. Color to be
approved by Architect.
Ptd., smooth troweled, stucco finish, typ.
Texture samples to be approved by Architect.
1 x 6 T&G vertical, stained cedar
wd. siding with "square" reveal
Alum. Clad Exterior, pnt. wd. interior, dual glazed
windows with simulated divided lights, Typ.
Weathershield Contemporary Collection or
Approved Equal.
Composition Shingle roofing on 2nd floor roof only.
12 5
12 5
Provide Obscured Glazing in Lower portions
of windows.
ATTACHMENT 6
94 Palmer Ln
Aerial view to 80 Palmer
2nd story - Office View
16 Feet High
Fence
Height
ATTACHMENT 6