334 Riviera Circle teardown waits again — but the neighbors got their say

The biggest item on Tuesday's special agenda never got heard. At 334 Riviera Circle, owners are seeking Design Review to demolish a 2,586-square-foot, one-story house and build a 4,526-square-foot, two-story replacement. The hearing had already been continued once from May 12; on Tuesday, with only three commissioners in the room — Chalmers, Campbell and Swisser — the panel lacked the quorum to take it up and continued it to June 9.

“if it's built the way they're proposing to build it, they have windows that are going to look down onto our patio, our deck, which has a hot tub where we enjoy privacy.”— Sheila Marowitz, neighbor of 334 Riviera Circle, during public comment

The neighbors who showed up were heard anyway, under general public comment. Sheila Marowitz, who lives next door, led with water: "I'm adjacent to the house at 334... the reason I'm concerned is the drainage issue... their water might want to come our way," she said, asking whether that's something the commission examines. Her second concern was what a new second story would look down on.

Her husband told commissioners that a large office shown in the renderings faces their house — the highest point of the build, in his telling, and space he said had been described as bedrooms. He also said he is recovering from pancreatic cancer, and that a year of nail guns and hammering would be especially hard to endure.

Because the item wasn't heard, there was no staff report, no findings and no conditions on the record — the substantive fight is still ahead. Watch for it June 9.

Six feet stands: commission grants a setback exception for a turret on Elizabeth Circle

The night's one genuinely contestable question came from a small project. At 14 Elizabeth Circle, homeowner Matt Sandberg asked to add 154 square feet to an existing second-story turret, bringing the house to 3,273 square feet. The lot is a corner parcel in the Cape Marin planned development, and the addition would hold the home's existing 6-foot setback instead of the 10-foot corner-lot standard in R1 — so the commission had to decide whether to grant an exception under Section 18.55.020(C).

“When in Cape Marin PD, do as the Cape Marin residents do... I think it leads to a more desirable outcome; it's a really nice design and improves your house.”— Commissioner Chalmers, voting to grant the setback exception

Staff laid out the fork in the road: find the exception warranted and approve with findings, conditions and a Class 1 CEQA exemption, or continue the item and send the design back to meet the setback. Sandberg argued the gap is wider than the paper says. "There's an HOA common area that separates my home from Ladderman Lane, which actually creates a total space of 12 feet, over the 10-ft minimum if you include it," he said, adding that he had Cape Marin HOA approval and sign-offs from immediately adjacent neighbors.

Commissioner Campbell reframed the debate away from strict-versus-loose code reading and toward whether the exception simply applies — and noted the alternative had costs of its own. "If the turret had been shifted back to meet the 10-ft setback, we might have design review questions because it would be a funny looking building," he said. The commission approved the design review and granted the exception, 3-0, with two members absent.

Short-handed commission is also short of applicants — and bracing for a fuller summer

Tuesday's quorum trouble wasn't a one-off inconvenience. Staff told the three commissioners present that the window for Planning Commission applications closed the day after the meeting with only one applicant so far. A commissioner asked whether the city could simply return to strong applicants from a prior recruitment; staff was noncommittal: "I'm not sure what the procedure is for that... it's not typical practice because maybe people change their mind." Staff said they would check with the city clerk.

Commissioners also worked through the calendar. Commissioner Wagstaff's term was discussed as likely ending with the fiscal year on June 30 rather than May 30, and the panel checked availability for the July 14 meeting. With the docket thickening, staff warned of extra sessions: "I am anticipating at least one [additional meeting] over the summer."

The practical consequence was on display all evening — a five-member body operating with three, one contested teardown pushed a month, and a June 9 agenda that now carries it.