[0:00] (people speaking indistinctly)
[0:04] - Good afternoon, everyone.
[0:06] It is Thursday, July 23rd at four o'clock.
[0:12] I am Michael Cass,
[0:14] the Acting Community and Economic Development Director,
[0:17] and I will be serving
[0:18] as the Zoning Administrator this afternoon.
[0:24] I'd like to start by reading a civility statement,
[0:29] which is included at the beginning of the agenda.
[0:32] So as your appointed Governing Body,
[0:34] we will treat each other and the public
[0:36] with patience, civility, and courtesy
[0:38] as a model of the same behavior
[0:40] we wish to reflect in Martinez
[0:42] for the conduct of all city business
[0:45] and community participation.
[0:47] This includes respect for everyone's First Amendment Right
[0:51] to voice their opinion on matters
[0:53] within the City's subject matter jurisdiction,
[0:56] even if that opinion is different from our own.
[1:00] The decisions made
[1:01] will be for the benefit of the Martinez community
[1:04] and not for personal gain.
[1:07] I'd next like to go into public comment.
[1:09] This is for public comment
[1:11] for items that are not on today's agenda.
[1:14] Non-agenda public comment is limited to matters
[1:17] which are within the subject matter jurisdiction
[1:19] of the Zoning Administrator,
[1:21] and which are not action items
[1:22] listed elsewhere on the agenda.
[1:25] If you'd like to make a public comment,
[1:27] please use the Raise Your Hand feature
[1:29] at the bottom of the screen.
[1:33] Okay.
[1:36] Hearing none, we'll now move on
[1:37] to the first public hearing item,
[1:41] which is the Variance request for 9 West Hayward Court.
[1:45] Salmana, if I could please have a presentation.
[1:48] - Thank you, Michael. I'm just going to share my screen.
[1:54] All right. Good afternoon, everyone.
[1:56] Today I will be presenting a request for a Variance
[1:59] at 9 West Hayward Court.
[2:05] The project is located in the R-10 Zoning District,
[2:08] which is a single-family residential zoning district.
[2:11] The general plan designation is residential low.
[2:14] The lot size for this property is 8,000 square feet.
[2:18] And currently there is
[2:19] an existing single-family residence on the lot.
[2:23] This lot is surrounded by other single-family residences.
[2:28] This project initially came in as a Code Enforcement case,
[2:32] at which time staff identified that the fence did not comply
[2:35] with the Martinez Municipal Code fence height standards.
[2:38] The Applicant then submitted a request
[2:40] for retroactive Variance
[2:41] to allow a five-foot tall fence and gate
[2:44] within the front yard and public right-of-way.
[2:47] The gate connects to the existing six-foot fence
[2:49] along the side property line,
[2:50] and is comprised of a two-by-four mesh wire
[2:53] and black steel posts.
[2:57] Here's a picture of the gate.
[2:59] So the Martinez Municipal Code limits fence height
[3:03] to three feet, six inches
[3:04] within 50 feet of a street intersection,
[3:08] so within a required front yard.
[3:10] This fence was built also within the public right-of-way
[3:13] along the cul-de-sac line,
[3:14] which is about 13 feet, 6 inches
[3:17] past the front property line
[3:18] and is contiguous with the front yard.
[3:22] The general intent
[3:23] of a reduced fence height in the front yard
[3:25] is to preserve a clear sight-distance area.
[3:28] This fence only exceeds the maximum height by 1.5 feet,
[3:31] and the fence is see-through
[3:33] and does not obstruct visibility.
[3:35] The Applicant has cited the need for the fence
[3:37] to maintain privacy and security on their property.
[3:44] So the project was routed to engineering, building,
[3:49] the police department,
[3:51] and then Contra Costa County Fire District.
[3:55] The Engineering Division has no immediate concerns
[3:57] with the fence encroachment in the public right-of-way,
[4:00] and has requested a number of conditions of approval
[4:03] to ensure the fence does not interfere
[4:05] with future public improvements or obstruct visibility.
[4:08] So these are that the fence, gate, landscaping,
[4:13] any materials placed within or adjacent to the enclosed area
[4:16] shall not obstruct required sight lines
[4:18] or interfere with the visibility of motorists,
[4:20] bicyclists, et cetera.
[4:22] And then the City reserves the right
[4:25] to request modification or removal of the fence
[4:29] if we find that it's a sight line visibility safety hazard.
[4:35] Secondly, approval of this Variance authorizes
[4:39] only the requested deviation
[4:40] from the applicable fence height standard
[4:41] and does not grant the Property Owner ownership
[4:43] or permanent right to occupy the public right-of-way.
[4:46] And then lastly, the fence and gate shall remain subordinate
[4:50] to the City's use and control of the public right-of-way.
[4:53] Upon written notice from the City,
[4:54] the Property Owner shall remove, relocate,
[4:57] or modify the fence and gate
[4:58] at the Property Owner's sole expense, if necessary,
[5:01] to accommodate roadway, sidewalk,
[5:03] drainage, utility, accessibility, frontage, maintenance,
[5:05] or other public improvements.
[5:10] We've also received conditions of approval
[5:13] from the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District,
[5:15] which is requiring the Property Owner
[5:18] to install a Knox Box at the gate
[5:21] so that the fire department has access to it,
[5:25] in case of an emergency, has access to the property.
[5:30] And then staff has placed other conditions of approval:
[5:34] one regarding fence maintenance,
[5:36] and one regarding vegetation and stored materials,
[5:39] just to ensure that visibility isn't obstructed
[5:42] by the gate or things around the gate.
[5:47] We've also received a public comment from a neighbor
[5:50] that cited concerns with sight-line visibility
[5:53] if the fence is permitted to remain,
[5:54] and that the materials and placement is not harmonious
[5:57] with the existing neighborhood character.
[5:59] And this was provided to the Zoning Administrator
[6:01] prior to the meeting.
[6:04] So the findings on the screen are required to be made
[6:07] in order to approve the project,
[6:09] and staff believes that
[6:11] with the conditions of approval imposed on this project,
[6:13] the findings can affirmatively be made.
[6:18] The staff is recommending
[6:19] that the Zoning Administrator conduct a public hearing
[6:21] and adopt Resolution No. 26-16,
[6:24] approving a retroactive Variance from Kirk Jennings
[6:27] for a five-foot tall fence and gate
[6:28] in the front yard and public right-of-way
[6:30] where the maximum fence height permitted
[6:32] is three feet, six inches,
[6:34] located at 9 West Hayward Court
[6:36] in the R-10 One Family Residential District zoning district,
[6:41] Assessor's Parcel No. 162-190-008.
[6:47] And I'm available to answer any questions.
[6:50] - Okay. Thank you very much, Salmana.
[6:53] I don't have any questions at this point,
[6:54] but I will likely circle back with you.
[6:58] I do want to reflect on the record that I did review
[7:02] the additional public comment that was forwarded to me
[7:06] after the Staff Report and agenda were published.
[7:09] So I have read through that.
[7:12] I'd now like to offer the ability
[7:14] for the Applicant to make a presentation.
[7:21] - Sorry, I think that's the wrong Kirk.
[7:23] And I don't see my applicant here actually.
[7:26] - So I'll ask the question,
[7:28] because we're not seeing the Applicant in attendance:
[7:32] If there's somebody here who is representing the Applicant,
[7:34] please use the Raise Your Hand feature
[7:36] at the bottom of the screen so we know who to promote.
[7:44] Okay. I'm seeing none.
[7:46] We'll now open it up to members of the public.
[7:50] Any member of the public who wishes to speak on this item,
[7:53] please use the Raise Your Hand feature
[7:56] located at the bottom of your screen.
[8:04] Okay.
[8:07] We do have one hand.
[8:09] Ronnie, please go ahead and make a public comment.
[8:13] - [Ronnie] Yeah, I live at 5 West Hayward Court,
[8:15] and the fence is hideous looking.
[8:18] They tried to skirt the law by putting up a tall fence.
[8:22] They didn't get a permit, and now they want to be revised.
[8:26] It's ugly, and it doesn't fit our neighborhood,
[8:30] and it lowers my property values.
[8:32] So, they got wire around the whole yard.
[8:36] It's not just the gate.
[8:37] It's the wire around the whole thing too.
[8:40] The five-foot tall-- - Stakes.
[8:42] - [Ronnie] And green stakes.
[8:47] So my question is:
[8:48] can I put gates up in front of my house then?
[8:54] - Okay. I appreciate the comment, Ronnie.
[8:56] Just for context, you said you're at 5 West Hayward Court?
[9:01] - Yes. - Can you orient me
[9:02] where that is in relationship to the subject property?
[9:05] - Next door. - Next door. Okay.
[9:10] So if I'm facing it, you're to the right then, correct?
[9:13] - Left. No, I'm to the left.
[9:15] I'm in the corner of the court.
[9:17] - Okay.
[9:20] Okay. Thank you for that. - Mm-hmm.
[9:24] - Okay. Any other comments you'd like to make, Ronnie?
[9:28] - [Ronnie] I just don't want the fence.
[9:29] - Understood. - Yeah.
[9:31] I mean, it's going to lower our property values.
[9:33] It makes it look like we live in a prison.
[9:36] If they want to put up something and get permits
[9:39] that fits the neighborhood and makes it look nice,
[9:41] that's a different story, but that's hideous.
[9:46] - Okay. Well, thank you, Ronnie.
[9:48] Appreciate your comments.
[9:50] - [Ronnie] Okay.
[9:51] - Are there any other members of the public
[9:54] who wish to speak on this item?
[10:03] Okay. I'm hearing none.
[10:07] Now want to just give one more opportunity.
[10:10] If the Applicant wishes to make any comments,
[10:14] please use the Raise Your Hand feature
[10:17] at the bottom of the screen.
[10:19] - I think he's here now,
[10:20] so I've gone ahead and allowed him to speak.
[10:27] - Hello? - Hi.
[10:29] - [Kirk] Hi, Kirk Jennings.
[10:31] - Good, you can now make a presentation on the item
[10:34] or make any comments that you wish to make.
[10:38] - [Kirk] We were unable to get into
[10:41] the Zoom launch on the computer.
[10:43] We've been struggling with that. So what did I miss?
[10:49] - So Salmana made a presentation
[10:54] consistent with the Staff Report that was published.
[10:59] - [Kirk] Uh-huh.
[10:59] - She then also indicated
[11:02] there was an additional public comment that was received
[11:05] after the Staff Report was published, which she went over.
[11:09] And then we had a public comment
[11:13] from Ronnie, the next-door neighbor,
[11:17] in opposition of the request.
[11:20] So you can make any comment
[11:21] that you wish to make at this time.
[11:24] - I'm sorry I missed what Salmana had to say.
[11:29] We just... We need the fence for security purposes.
[11:33] All the events and police incident reports
[11:40] that have gone on for two years,
[11:42] they just require this fence and the security gate.
[11:47] So, it's a very nice-looking fence, and it doesn't,
[11:53] as the City noted in their photographs,
[11:56] it doesn't preclude any vision, sight,
[11:59] with the fire department saying there's no problem,
[12:01] and we're going to get the Knox lock.
[12:04] And PG&E and the City noting
[12:07] that there's other six-foot fences
[12:09] right up close to the street or the court.
[12:14] We feel that we've done a nice job,
[12:16] and we just really need that fence and gate
[12:22] for our security.
[12:25] - Okay.
[12:27] - [Kirk] We're glad it's been permitted.
[12:30] - Well, a decision has not been made yet.
[12:32] I do have a couple questions for you.
[12:35] - Oh. Okay, yeah. - The gate--
[12:37] - [Ronnie] I wish I could have heard everything.
[12:41] - Okay.
[12:41] I do have a couple questions. - Go ahead.
[12:43] - The vehicular gate, do you normally leave it open, closed?
[12:51] I do know that it moves inward rather than outward,
[12:55] so it moves inward into the driveway.
[12:58] How is that normally kept?
[13:01] - [Ronnie] My habit has been to open the gate at 6:00 AM
[13:07] and close before I go to bed each evening,
[13:10] so 10-ish, 11-ish is when I close the gate.
[13:14] And the same thing happens again.
[13:18] When we go away on a vacation, we've kept the gate closed.
[13:23] - Okay. And--
[13:25] - [Ronnie] But daily, that's the way it's been kept.
[13:27] - And you open it manually, correct?
[13:30] So you actually open it.
[13:33] There's no electricity or anything to power it
[13:35] or no intention to do that?
[13:38] - No, that's correct. - Okay.
[13:40] - [Ronnie] Just a simple couple of gate latches
[13:42] that go into the concrete, and then one at the top,
[13:46] like a normal gate you'd have on your backyard.
[13:50] - Okay.
[13:53] Second question that I have:
[13:55] there also is a low wood post-style fence
[14:02] that runs along towards the edge of pavement.
[14:05] Is that intended to remain,
[14:07] or is that intended to be removed
[14:10] since there's, in essence, two fences
[14:12] immediately adjacent to one another?
[14:15] - [Ronnie] Well, that little guy has been there
[14:17] since probably the '50s when the house was built in 1956.
[14:22] So what I did
[14:25] was make sure that I was certainly on my property.
[14:32] So at this point, I don't plan on removing it, no.
[14:37] Mm-mm. - Okay. And I wanna clarify.
[14:40] The fence is on public property, not on private property,
[14:45] based on the Staff Report that was received?
[14:49] Okay.
[14:51] - It's not-- - So, I don't--
[14:53] - Any other final comments that you wish to make on this?
[14:57] - [Ronnie] Yeah, I don't believe
[15:00] the little tiny fence is on public property.
[15:03] - Sorry, the tiny fence is as well as the new fence.
[15:10] - And how are they measuring? - How did they measure that?
[15:12] How did the staff measure that?
[15:16] - So the architectural plans that were provided
[15:19] indicated that the fence was outside of the property line
[15:23] and along the cul-de-sac line.
[15:26] So there's 13.5 feet between where the fence is placed
[15:30] and where the property line is,
[15:31] and then Engineering also confirmed
[15:33] based on those architectural drawings that were submitted.
[15:38] - [Ronnie] 13.5 feet, huh?
[15:40] - So any other final comments that you wish to make?
[15:45] - [Female Participant] I don't think that's right.
[15:46] - [Ronnie] Yeah, I don't know if that's right or not,
[15:49] so no, I don't wish to make any final comments.
[15:52] - Okay.
[15:53] So I'm now going to close the public portion of this item,
[15:57] and I'm prepared to deliberate.
[16:03] This one I'm definitely torn on.
[16:07] I don't take kindly when people do work without permits
[16:11] and then ask for permission after the fact.
[16:14] And that's something that I want to discourage
[16:17] from happening in the future.
[16:22] Saying that,
[16:26] I found myself largely agreeing
[16:30] with the comments that were made
[16:33] by staff associated with this item
[16:36] in that really the intention of height requirements
[16:41] of structures in this zoning district
[16:45] is to ensure that there's transparency
[16:48] and to avoid potential conflicts
[16:51] when vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists
[16:54] are in, entering, exiting, or near the property.
[17:03] And given the transparent nature of the fencing,
[17:09] I can make the findings
[17:12] as outlined by staff in the attached Resolution.
[17:17] And so I'm prepared to adopt the Resolution No. 26-16,
[17:24] approving the retroactive Variance
[17:26] subject to conditions of approval as recommended by staff
[17:30] with a few additional addendums.
[17:35] First, I want to make sure that the record reflects
[17:39] that this was a Code Enforcement case.
[17:42] And so I'll be adding a whereas clause
[17:44] reflecting the Code Enforcement complaint
[17:47] associated with this item.
[17:51] Secondly, I will be adding a condition of approval
[17:57] because the property, excuse me,
[17:59] because the fence encroaches onto public property
[18:04] that a retroactive encroachment of permit
[18:07] and encroachment agreement
[18:08] are required from the Engineering Division.
[18:12] And I'd like to specify that that happens within 90 days.
[18:19] Third, I am prepared to add a condition of approval
[18:26] that specifies that if 50% or more of the fence
[18:32] is proposed to be repaired or replaced,
[18:36] then it needs to be shifted back onto private property
[18:41] and outside of the public right-of-way.
[18:45] Next, for condition of approval number 10,
[18:49] which talks about the ability that the City can remove
[18:54] and have the Applicant be responsible, excuse me,
[18:58] having the Applicant be responsible
[19:00] for removal of the fence upon written notice,
[19:04] I would like to add that failure of the Applicant
[19:07] to remove the fence in a timely manner
[19:10] may result in the City removing the fence
[19:13] at the Applicant's expense
[19:15] plus a 25% administrative surcharge.
[19:21] And finally, that small fencing
[19:24] that's in front of the new fence,
[19:26] requesting that that be removed
[19:29] within 60 days from the approval date.
[19:37] That's it.
[19:39] My decision can be appealed
[19:42] by anyone wishing to appeal my decision
[19:44] to the Planning Commission.
[19:47] That needs to be done within 10 days.
[19:51] If you're interested in doing so, please contact Salmana
[19:55] and she can walk you through the process.
[19:57] Thank you.
[20:00] I next am ready to move on
[20:03] to item number two on today's agenda,
[20:08] which is for 1170 Arnold Drive.
[20:14] Imanol, if I could please have a Staff Report.
[20:23] - Thank you. And let me just share my screen.
[20:31] Okay.
[20:33] Thank you, Zoning Administrator Michael Cass.
[20:36] Hello, everyone. My name's Imanol Tovar.
[20:38] I'm the assistant-- - Imanol, if you wouldn't mind
[20:40] speaking up a little bit louder.
[20:42] I'm having trouble hearing you.
[20:45] - Is this better? Okay.
[20:49] I will be giving a presentation
[20:50] for 1170 Arnold Drive, Suite 110,
[20:54] and this is for a Conditional Use Permit for alcohol sales.
[21:00] A little bit about this property.
[21:03] 1170 Arnold Drive consists of two buildings.
[21:07] Highlighted in red is Suite 110.
[21:10] The zoning for this district is neighborhood commercial.
[21:14] And the existing use is a restaurant
[21:18] as well as the surrounding land uses
[21:21] being retail and restaurants.
[21:26] So the proposed project, like I mentioned,
[21:28] is a request for a Conditional Use Permit for alcohol sales.
[21:32] The proposed business is going to be a liquor store
[21:37] operating alongside a takeout food
[21:42] proposed Krispy Krunchy Chicken.
[21:45] This will all be within the Suite 110,
[21:48] and they are requesting a Conditional Use Permit
[21:51] and also an ABC Type 21 Alcohol License.
[21:57] And shown here is the existing floor plan on the left side
[22:01] and the proposed floor plan on the right side.
[22:08] So for census tract and ABC,
[22:14] there is a certain amount of alcohol licenses
[22:18] that are permitted per census tract.
[22:20] So highlighted in red and outlined in black
[22:23] is the census tract
[22:24] that is where 1170 Arnold Drive is located at.
[22:30] In the census tract,
[22:31] it allows up to one offsite alcohol license.
[22:36] We currently have three off-sale licenses,
[22:41] and those are going to be Walmart, Lucky, and Liquor Lane.
[22:46] None of them are within the same shopping center
[22:52] as 1170 Arnold Drive.
[22:57] So because there is an excess
[23:02] of ABC licenses within that census tract,
[23:07] we would have to make the positive findings
[23:10] of public convenience or necessity
[23:14] for the off-sale liquor license to be approved.
[23:18] And those findings are found in the Staff Report.
[23:22] In addition, staff's findings for this is that
[23:25] the proposed project will offer Martinez residents
[23:28] a wide range of beer, wine, and liquor.
[23:31] And the liquor store and takeout restaurant will provide
[23:34] a service different from the existing grocery stores,
[23:38] like Lucky and Walmart
[23:40] that sell liquor for offsite consumption.
[23:43] So this will be slightly different,
[23:45] providing different services.
[23:48] Some notable recommendations.
[23:50] Some notable recommended conditions of approval
[23:54] are listed here.
[23:55] These were provided
[23:57] and discussed with the police department.
[24:02] So this is coming from them
[24:04] in relation just to handling alcohol.
[24:09] So with that,
[24:10] the recommendation is to conduct a public hearing
[24:12] and adopt Zoning Administrator Resolution No. 26-17,
[24:18] approving a request from Raji and Tirath Sahota
[24:22] to consider a Conditional Use Permit
[24:25] for alcohol sales of distilled spirits,
[24:29] and for a new liquor store with a takeout restaurant
[24:32] at 1170 Arnold Drive, Suite 110.
[24:36] And with that, I can answer any questions.
[24:44] - Great. Thank you very much, Imanol.
[24:47] Just want to confirm, because they are serving food,
[24:50] but the food that they're serving is to-go as well.
[24:52] There's no dining interior to the space, correct?
[24:56] - That is correct.
[24:57] No dine-in seating, just takeout food.
[25:00] - Okay. Thank you for clarifying.
[25:04] I can have the Applicant make a presentation.
[25:15] You can unmute yourself and go ahead.
[25:17] - [Raji] Hi, good afternoon. My name is Raji.
[25:20] And I'm the Applicant along with my husband.
[25:24] And we have been long-time residents of Martinez,
[25:30] and we have multiple stores within the East Bay,
[25:34] and so we just wanted to do something
[25:36] here in our own community.
[25:39] We have owned Subways in,
[25:41] actually, let's put it this way,
[25:42] the Subway downtown Martinez, but that was many years ago.
[25:47] And so now we just want to
[25:49] bring something else into our community
[25:51] since we've been here for 30 years or so,
[25:55] and our kids grew up here,
[25:56] and now they're coming back home after schooling and stuff.
[25:59] So we just wanna do a little something
[26:02] in our own neighborhood.
[26:07] - Great. Well, thank you, Raji.
[26:10] Is that the rest of your presentation?
[26:12] - [Raji] Well, my presentation is.
[26:14] That was just an introduction of myself and my family.
[26:17] But now we want to open up a small liquor store
[26:20] that's going to carry a wide variety of high-end liquor,
[26:25] beer, wine, spirits, et cetera.
[26:28] And then we're going to open up a small takeout restaurant.
[26:32] It's a Krispy Krunchy Chicken franchise,
[26:34] and it's all going to be takeout.
[26:37] Food will be prepared fresh in store
[26:40] and then sold right there inside the store
[26:43] for just takeout purposes only.
[26:47] And we'll have snack items and cold beverages such as sodas
[26:52] for people not purchasing the liquor products.
[27:02] - Thank you.
[27:03] Any other comments you wanted to make?
[27:08] - [Raji] We would just greatly like this opportunity
[27:11] to be able to open here in our own neighborhood.
[27:15] And we would do our best to be good business owners
[27:20] and do our part in safety and cleanliness
[27:24] and providing good customer service
[27:27] to our customers and our community.
[27:30] - And then question for you. - Yes.
[27:32] - For Krispy Krunchy Chicken is,
[27:37] you mentioned that you own some businesses
[27:39] in other communities.
[27:41] Are they the same franchise? - Yes. We do have--
[27:44] - Same franchise in other communities?
[27:46] - [Raji] Yes.
[27:47] - Are you comfortable sharing one or more
[27:50] other close locations that you do own and manage?
[27:54] - [Raji] Yes. We have one in Antioch off of Fitzuren Road.
[28:00] And it does very well there.
[28:03] And it's a Southern-style chicken franchise,
[28:09] they've been up and growing.
[28:11] They have other stores but nothing close here.
[28:15] I think they have one in Bay Point or something.
[28:18] And then we have our location in Antioch.
[28:21] - Okay. Okay.
[28:23] - [Raji] And that's also within a liquor store.
[28:26] And it's also takeout.
[28:27] - And is that customary?
[28:28] I apologize, I hadn't heard of this chain
[28:31] before the item was coming forward.
[28:33] Is that customary for all of the chains?
[28:35] - [Raji] Mostly. Majority of them are.
[28:38] - Yes. - Okay.
[28:40] Okay. Any other comments?
[28:43] And then I do have a couple more questions.
[28:45] - [Raji] No, I think we're good.
[28:47] - Okay.
[28:48] So in looking at the floor plan,
[28:52] and Imanol showed that as part of his presentation,
[28:55] it shows that you're relocating the door,
[29:01] so it will be on a different facade.
[29:04] And then he showed sheet A1.0,
[29:10] but A2.0, read my mind, Imanol,
[29:14] is on the screen now.
[29:16] And it's showing a large refrigeration area
[29:21] that's being put right along the window frontage.
[29:25] - [Raji] Mm-hmm.
[29:26] - So I just wanted to chat to see
[29:29] how locked in the floor plan is,
[29:32] because I do have some concerns
[29:35] with having those improvements obstruct the window
[29:40] and not having transparency into the store.
[29:44] Is there feasibility
[29:47] of working with the architect and planning staff
[29:51] to rework the interior floor plan
[29:53] so that the transparency isn't impacted
[29:56] the way the current proposal is?
[30:00] - [Raji] The reason for the blockage,
[30:04] because we have our coolers on one side of that wall,
[30:09] so pretty much, that's why we're relocating the door
[30:12] because the door used to be on the side
[30:13] that we're going to close off now.
[30:16] And we're going to put the door on the front now,
[30:19] which is the front that you see
[30:21] where they have the front door relocated to.
[30:25] - Yeah. - So that's the only reason.
[30:28] And there will be a portion at the top of the coolers
[30:32] that's going to be transparent,
[30:35] but I think a lot of it, even for safety and security,
[30:39] it's good to have one side of the windows blocked off
[30:43] because there's just way too many windows.
[30:48] - Okay, and what are you planning to do
[30:50] to modify the exterior facade, if anything, rather,
[30:56] because the windows are majority being blocked?
[31:05] - [Raji] We're planning to just black them out.
[31:08] We could put some kind of art or some kind of pictures
[31:15] if that's what you guys would require,
[31:18] but we were just thinking of blocking them out.
[31:21] - Okay. And then-- - Just on that side.
[31:24] - And then for clarification,
[31:25] there's the service area that's shown.
[31:28] - [Raji] Mm-hmm.
[31:29] - For the service area,
[31:30] is there food preparation that's happening there?
[31:34] Is it sales? What is that actually?
[31:36] - [Raji] That's the sales part of it.
[31:37] And the food prep happens behind in the kitchen area.
[31:42] - Which is not shown on the screen, correct?
[31:44] - [Raji] Which is shown right back here.
[31:47] So behind where your cursor is.
[31:49] - Okay. - Yeah, right there.
[31:50] That's the kitchen area right there.
[31:52] - Okay. So I'm going to ask the question.
[31:56] Could you relocate the refrigeration area
[32:01] to be where the service area is
[32:04] and have the service area be under the windows instead?
[32:08] - [Raji] No, it won't work for the layout
[32:11] because we've been working with our architect
[32:13] who's been kind of planning this all out
[32:16] with the size of the space,
[32:17] and he said there's no way we can move those there.
[32:20] We've already asked.
[32:23] - Okay.
[32:28] That's something I would want to dive into further.
[32:33] So, I do have concerns with blocking the windows.
[32:39] So I appreciate that, though.
[32:43] I do want to now open it up to members of the public.
[32:49] Anyone who wishes to speak on this item
[32:53] can do so at this time.
[32:59] If you'd like to do so,
[33:00] please use the Raise Your Hand feature
[33:02] at the bottom of the screen.
[33:07] Okay.
[33:12] Great, thank you so much. No comments.
[33:15] I will now close the public comment portion of the meeting
[33:19] and deliberate.
[33:23] So Raji, thank you so much for the information
[33:25] and your interest in opening a business,
[33:28] and Martinez is very excited about that,
[33:32] and particularly since you also live here,
[33:35] and that's what we love to see.
[33:40] In terms of the actual request before me today
[33:48] for the Conditional Use Permit for alcohol sales,
[33:52] I found myself agreeing with staff
[33:56] and the conclusions that were made,
[33:58] and can support that application.
[34:02] There are a couple of conditions of approval
[34:05] that I'd like to make some very minor changes with.
[34:10] Namely condition number six,
[34:12] I'd want to reference also the Property Owner
[34:16] and Business Owner as part of the indemnification.
[34:20] And then condition number nine, change planning manager
[34:24] to assistant community and economic development director.
[34:27] And same thing for condition 10.
[34:31] I'd also, in the approval of the resolution
[34:34] as drafted with those amendments,
[34:36] what I'd also like to do is add a condition of approval
[34:42] for the Applicant to work with staff
[34:45] on potential revisions to the floor plan
[34:49] to minimize the obstruction of the window;
[34:53] and that if the windows continued to need to be obstructed,
[34:59] then design review is required,
[35:02] which can be done at a staff level for any changes
[35:06] that will affect the exterior of the building,
[35:11] even if they are interior to the space.
[35:13] So we can work with you, Raji, on some solutions
[35:16] to address the concerns that we talked about today.
[35:21] - Okay. Thank you. - Okay.
[35:24] Other than that, no additional items that I want to add.
[35:29] And anyone can appeal my decision
[35:32] by filing an appeal within 10 days from today.
[35:36] If you're interested in appealing the decision,
[35:39] please contact Imanol
[35:40] and he can walk you through that process.
[35:42] - Thank you. - Thank you so much, Raji.
[35:44] And we're glad to have you
[35:45] as part of the Martinez community.
[35:46] - Thank you. - Thank you.
[35:49] - Now ready to move on to condition of approval, excuse me,
[35:56] application number three,
[35:58] which is the project at 103 Escobar Street.
[36:02] Imanol, if I could have a presentation, please?
[36:05] - Yes. Thank you.
[36:08] This is going to be a presentation for 103 Escobar Street
[36:11] requesting a Variance
[36:14] for this single-family residential addition
[36:18] that they're going to add to an existing home.
[36:21] It's on a corner lot on Escobar Street and Bay View Drive.
[36:25] The zoning is R6.0, which is single-family zoning district.
[36:30] The lot size is 5,220 square feet,
[36:34] and the surrounding land uses
[36:35] is also single-family residential.
[36:39] A little bit about the project.
[36:41] The proposed project is a 1,782 square foot addition
[36:47] to the existing single-family residence.
[36:50] It is adding a garage, two bedrooms, two bathrooms,
[36:54] and a little bit of square footage, and other rooms as well.
[36:58] Here's the existing on the left side
[37:00] and the proposed site plan.
[37:03] In the Staff Report and in the Resolution,
[37:07] there are in-depth plans that show this as well.
[37:13] Here, we have the front and rear elevations.
[37:16] So at the top, we have the existing.
[37:18] At the bottom, we do have the proposed elevations.
[37:24] And then here are going to be the side elevations,
[37:28] the existing is on the left side,
[37:29] and on the right side are the proposed elevations.
[37:38] So after showing the elevations and the site plan,
[37:41] I wanted to dive a little bit deeper
[37:43] into what the additions are, what the Variance request is.
[37:48] So with the Variance request,
[37:49] they're requesting a Variance for the front,
[37:53] the street side yard setback, the rear setback,
[37:57] increase of lot coverage, floor area ratio,
[38:02] and they are requesting a minor exception for the height.
[38:07] So as you can see, we do have an existing and proposed.
[38:11] So for the majority,
[38:13] so for the front and the street side yard setback.
[38:17] The existing is already existing non-conforming.
[38:22] So any addition that they would've made
[38:25] that they're proposing to do
[38:27] would not increase what's already existing
[38:32] in terms of the minimum side yard setback that they have.
[38:37] Again, it's existing non-conforming,
[38:39] but they are increasing the addition
[38:44] and expansion into the rear yard setback,
[38:47] as well as the lot coverage and FAR.
[38:50] One thing they are doing is because they are adding a garage
[38:54] where they initially had a zero covered parking,
[38:57] they are adding two covered parking spaces
[39:00] with that garage addition.
[39:04] So with the Variance,
[39:06] they do have to make specific findings,
[39:10] and staff believes
[39:11] that all the findings that are listed here
[39:14] can be affirmatively made.
[39:17] There are other neighboring properties
[39:18] in the vicinity of the subject site
[39:20] that are inconsistent
[39:21] with several other development standards
[39:23] in the R6.0 Zoning District,
[39:26] including floor area ratio, lot coverage, and setbacks.
[39:30] Another thing to note is that
[39:33] the minimum lot coverage for R6.0 is 6,000 square feet.
[39:38] As mentioned earlier, their lot is 5,277 square feet
[39:44] which does limit them a little bit with lot coverage
[39:47] and floor area ratio.
[39:51] With the minor exception findings.
[39:54] Here are the findings
[39:55] that should be made for the minor exception.
[39:58] The request for a minor exception is to increase the height,
[40:02] which was not included as a part
[40:04] of the public hearing notice
[40:06] since minor exceptions are generally not subject
[40:08] to public hearings.
[40:10] However, we did include the minor exception description
[40:13] and the increase in height into the Staff Report,
[40:18] and it was posted online,
[40:20] so it is available online and it's included there.
[40:23] Staff believes that the height increase
[40:24] would not pose a detrimental impact
[40:27] to the site and adjacent properties,
[40:29] and comply with the intent of the zoning district.
[40:34] Earlier today, not too long ago,
[40:36] we did receive one public comment.
[40:39] In that public comment they expressed appreciation
[40:43] for the improvement at the property,
[40:46] but they were concerned with the overall project expansion.
[40:49] In their email
[40:51] they didn't mention that they had reviewed the plans,
[40:53] but just respectfully asked that the reviewing body
[40:58] can carefully consider
[40:59] whether the proposed height and modifications
[41:03] would just maintain the compatibility
[41:06] of the surrounding neighborhood.
[41:10] Some notable recommended conditions of approval
[41:13] is going to be landscaping and screening
[41:17] especially because they're expanding
[41:18] on the side and the rear yard
[41:20] and increasing the height slightly.
[41:22] The Applicant shall require to prepare a landscaping plan
[41:25] with the intent to screen the side yard property line
[41:28] and increase privacy for the respective property owners.
[41:34] And that landscaping plan
[41:37] shall be submitted to the Planning Division
[41:39] and approved by
[41:40] the Community and Economic Development Director,
[41:43] or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
[41:49] With that, the recommendation is to conduct a public hearing
[41:53] and adopt Zoning Administrator Resolution No. 26-18,
[41:59] approving a request from Tony and Tiffany Chantri,
[42:03] to reduce the required rear yard setback
[42:06] from 25 feet to 20 feet,
[42:09] reduce the required side yard setback from 5 feet to 3 feet,
[42:13] reduce the required front yard setback
[42:15] from 20 feet to 5 feet,
[42:18] increase the maximum lot coverage from 40% to 45%,
[42:22] increase the maximum floor area ratio from 0.5 to 0.58,
[42:29] and a minor exception to increase the building height
[42:32] to 25 feet and 7 inches where 25 feet is permitted,
[42:38] and this would be to construct a 1,782 square foot addition
[42:43] to the single-family residence,
[42:47] totaling 3,037 square feet, located at 103 Escobar Street.
[42:55] And with that, I will be happy to answer any questions.
[43:00] - Thank you, Imanol.
[43:01] I had not had a chance
[43:03] to read the public comment that came in late.
[43:05] Could you please forward that to me so I could read it?
[43:07] I'd like to make sure I read it
[43:09] before making a decision on this project.
[43:12] - Yes, I can forward it right now.
[43:15] - And while you do that,
[43:17] I can allow the Applicant to make a presentation.
[43:30] - So I believe the Applicant might not be here,
[43:33] but the architect, Kirk, is here.
[43:36] And Kirk, are you available to speak?
[43:40] - Kirk, please feel free to unmute yourself
[43:42] and make any presentation.
[43:45] - [Kirk] There. It wasn't letting me unmute.
[43:47] But now can you hear me okay?
[43:48] - Yes. - Yes.
[43:50] - Hi, I'm Kirk Shelby. I'm the architect.
[43:52] I've been working with Tony Chantri
[43:54] for a number of years, actually.
[43:56] This home is his family home.
[44:00] He grew up in the home himself.
[44:02] He's in his 70s now.
[44:05] His mother lived in it up until recently.
[44:07] She's now in a care facility.
[44:10] And the house has remained empty since her absence,
[44:13] and I'm not quite sure how many years that's been,
[44:16] but it's been a long time.
[44:17] And so things have kind of gone.
[44:19] They've somewhat kept it up, but no one's been living there.
[44:26] Vegetation hasn't been taken care of for obvious reasons.
[44:30] No one's there.
[44:31] And general wear and tear
[44:33] of the various exterior components of the house
[44:38] are having an effect.
[44:39] And so Tony had asked me some time ago
[44:43] to look into improving it.
[44:47] At that time, he wasn't sure who the occupant would be.
[44:52] But since that time, his daughter, Tiffany,
[44:54] has expressed an interest to move into the home.
[44:57] And so at that point, we were able to kind of tailor,
[45:00] more tailor the designs of the addition
[45:04] to what we wanted to do.
[45:06] And so that is, in large part,
[45:09] the result of why we've got it.
[45:13] Original house was kind of, it was a 1950s-style home.
[45:17] So it had small living room, small kitchen,
[45:20] small dining room, a couple of bedrooms, a shared bathroom,
[45:26] a sitting area that was kind of adjacent to the dining.
[45:28] So it was... A covered porch.
[45:32] It had a number of items that worked well,
[45:34] I believe, at the early stages.
[45:37] But over time, given how things have changed
[45:43] with respect to what's anticipated
[45:46] and wanted in a home, that's changed.
[45:49] And so as a result, we've reconfigured it.
[45:53] The other thing that was taking place,
[45:55] excuse me for diverging a little bit,
[45:57] the roof design looks like it's been added on.
[46:01] I think the house has been added onto over time
[46:03] since its original construction.
[46:06] There was an 8 and 12 pitch,
[46:08] which was predominant in the major portions of the house,
[46:12] but there are some other 2 and 12 kind of things
[46:17] that are in there.
[46:18] And you can see that on the existing floor plan.
[46:21] It shows kind of how that was
[46:23] on the upper floor roof demo plan
[46:26] that we recently did for review.
[46:29] So we've revised the roof.
[46:32] We've taken down the pitch
[46:33] to what we consider the minimum pitch, 6 and 12.
[46:37] A 4 and 12 pitch could be done,
[46:39] but generally, the area has a variety of pitches,
[46:44] 4 and 12 being the least of them.
[46:46] And so the idea was to try to maintain
[46:49] the original character of the home,
[46:51] which has a little more traditional feel
[46:54] than just a ranch-style house.
[46:56] And the other thing that comes into play is
[46:59] there's a large section existing in the house.
[47:02] The living and dining area
[47:04] is intended to be one large cathedral ceiling
[47:09] connecting the two spaces.
[47:10] And so in order to accomplish that with roof trusses,
[47:14] we're going to do 6 and 12 exterior pitch
[47:16] and a 4 and 12 interior pitch,
[47:18] which allows us to get a significant architectural effect
[47:21] on the interior.
[47:23] So those are kind of the reasons why it is what it is.
[47:26] It's my practice typically
[47:28] to try to maintain the same roof pitch throughout,
[47:32] it creates some consistency with the elevations,
[47:35] rather than doing a whole hodgepodge
[47:37] of different roof heights.
[47:43] The garage was something that was clearly lacking.
[47:46] Parking was stacked up, was kind of tandem,
[47:48] or even, I don't know what you call three cars stacked up,
[47:52] along the side yard.
[47:53] And so this allows a more normal two-car garage
[47:58] with ability for two cars to park in the driveway
[48:02] without encroaching on the side yard.
[48:04] So I think it opens up
[48:06] and reduces vehicular impact to the side neighbor,
[48:11] where right now you run right against the fence.
[48:16] Tony Chantri is a builder
[48:18] and has had interactions with the City on other projects,
[48:23] knew people downtown.
[48:25] Originally, he wanted to be the one
[48:28] that would do the interface with the community.
[48:32] He's a lifelong Martinez resident,
[48:34] so it all seemed to make sense.
[48:36] So I can't really speak to what conversations took place
[48:40] between the City and them.
[48:41] All I can tell you is tell you
[48:42] what he told me in terms of direction.
[48:46] We pushed in order to accomplish a number of things,
[48:51] particularly the entry.
[48:53] Right now, the entry kind of comes in between the kitchen
[48:55] and into a blank wall.
[48:58] We wanted to change that a bit.
[49:00] We wanted to increase the kitchen.
[49:01] So we removed a portion of the interior kitchen area along,
[49:08] it would be along,
[49:09] I guess it would be the north side
[49:11] of the front of that appendage,
[49:13] that peninsula that sticks out,
[49:15] and conversely added some on the other side,
[49:19] on the south side that fronts the cross street,
[49:21] Bay Street, I believe it is.
[49:23] That allows us to get a little straighter circulation,
[49:26] allows us to get a little bigger kitchen.
[49:30] It also allows us to get access to the garage
[49:34] because currently the steps,
[49:37] the exterior steps that lead to the front door
[49:39] would encroach on that,
[49:40] which then wouldn't allow us to have a two-car garage.
[49:42] We end up with a one car, at least a one-car door.
[49:45] And so it seemed like
[49:47] all of those kinds of revisions made sense
[49:49] to improve the overall character of the building.
[49:54] - Great.
[49:55] - [Kirk] Any other questions I can answer,
[49:57] I'd be happy to answer.
[49:58] - No, I appreciate you giving me the history
[50:01] as well as the design intent
[50:04] and things you were trying to accomplish
[50:06] through the project.
[50:07] I do have one quick question.
[50:10] Want to confirm you had a chance to read through
[50:12] the draft resolution and conditions of approval,
[50:15] and see if you have any issues or concerns.
[50:18] - [Kirk] Do not have issues or concerns
[50:20] with respect to those conditions.
[50:23] They seem to be reasonable.
[50:25] The landscaping was always intended.
[50:27] We just don't, you know...
[50:28] Without knowing whether we would be approved or not,
[50:32] we didn't really tackle that,
[50:33] but it's always been the consideration.
[50:36] There is a lot of vegetation along,
[50:41] not Escobar, but the other street.
[50:43] You cannot see into the backyard
[50:45] or see the back part of the house.
[50:47] I had to poke through the fence
[50:49] to be able to get any adequate pictures
[50:51] to study that when I was trying to figure out the roof.
[50:54] But, so, it's pretty well taken care of there.
[50:58] But there are other areas along the rear.
[51:02] There's a shed that's going to be removed
[51:04] that is going to provide a lot of ability
[51:07] for additional landscape screening,
[51:09] as well as the south side where the current driveway is.
[51:15] - Well, I appreciate that, Kirk.
[51:16] Thank you for confirming and the additional information.
[51:21] I don't have further questions for you at this time,
[51:23] but I would like to open it up for any member of the public
[51:26] who wishes to speak on this item.
[51:28] You can raise your hand.
[51:31] I'm seeing Tim Farley.
[51:33] Dee Dee, if you could promote him, please?
[51:38] Tim, please go ahead.
[51:40] - [Tim] Hello. Can you hear me?
[51:41] - Yes. - Wonderful.
[51:42] Thank you so much Director Cass and Planner Tovar.
[51:47] I appreciate the opportunity to address the Zoning Board.
[51:51] First off, I'm excited to welcome the Chantri family
[51:55] back to the home.
[51:58] They've been part of this neighborhood
[52:00] for maybe even 90 years.
[52:03] And so we're excited about having them return.
[52:08] The house has been abandoned and neglected
[52:13] for 16, 18 years now,
[52:16] and so we are pleased
[52:18] that there will be some activity on the property.
[52:24] I am sitting here with Art Price.
[52:26] He is on Bay View, and he'll address you shortly.
[52:31] And then I do have some comments from Jamie Hilgendorf
[52:34] at 110 Escobar Street.
[52:37] So if you would indulge me
[52:39] to address both of their concerns.
[52:42] I'll address Jamie's,
[52:43] and then Mr. Price himself can address his own concerns.
[52:47] But as I said, we are eager to welcome the Chantries,
[52:51] and an improvement
[52:53] is better than the derelict house that we have.
[52:58] We've had homeless people there.
[53:00] I work from home.
[53:01] I've called the police a few times
[53:03] because of the nuisance that's present there.
[53:08] I did have a chance to review the plans.
[53:10] I'm not an architect. I'm not a planner.
[53:12] I'm not a contractor.
[53:14] I do think that it's a bit of an ambitious project
[53:18] to have such a large home.
[53:20] I think you're doubling the capacity, the square footage,
[53:25] or nearly doubling the square footage for that lot.
[53:29] And I have some concerns about that.
[53:31] The architect, the planners know better than I do,
[53:34] so I will leave that with you.
[53:37] My major concern, though, is the height.
[53:42] I think the height is just a bit much for the neighborhood.
[53:45] One of the things that we do enjoy here is our view shed.
[53:49] And I know that when a 50 Escobar was built
[53:57] they promised me that it would only be a certain height,
[54:01] and it went very high.
[54:03] So I would ask, this is Tim Farley,
[54:06] that we could get story poles
[54:08] so we could envision just how high it's going to be
[54:12] and what impact it would have on our views.
[54:15] So that's the request that I have.
[54:19] I don't want to slow the project down.
[54:21] I don't want to kill the project.
[54:24] I do think that it's important
[54:26] that we welcome Tiffany when she comes back to Martinez.
[54:30] But Tim Farley and Eileen
[54:32] are very concerned about the height
[54:33] and some of the massing that's going on.
[54:37] With that, I'm going to have Art Price from Bay View Street
[54:44] address some of his concerns.
[54:46] And then when he's done, I will read the statement
[54:50] from Jamie Hilgendorf at 110 Escobar.
[54:54] - Tim, before moving on to another person,
[54:56] if you could please just wrap up the comments you have,
[54:59] and then we can move on to the other individual.
[55:01] - Okay, so Jamie Hilgendorf at 110
[55:05] is on a flight right now or else he would be on the Zoom,
[55:09] but he asked me if I would read.
[55:11] I'd show it to you, but there's no camera.
[55:14] But this is what Jamie Hilgendorf prepared,
[55:17] and he's going to submit it later on.
[55:20] And he said, "I oppose the idea of a Variance
[55:23] "to the property located at 103 Escobar Street
[55:27] "Residential Zoning District for the following reasons.
[55:30] "Number one, this would set a new precedent
[55:33] "for zoning on Escobar Street,
[55:35] "as they are already close to Escobar Street,
[55:38] "than any other neighboring property.
[55:40] "Number two, I believe
[55:42] "that allowing the side and front yard setbacks
[55:45] "to change to what they are asking
[55:48] "would impair the view of oncoming traffic
[55:50] "from Bay View to Escobar Street or vice versa.
[55:55] "Three, looking at the request
[55:56] "from a hardship point of view,
[55:58] "the only hardship that they have
[56:00] "is they are trying to build too big of a house
[56:03] "on the size lot that they have."
[56:05] Again, these are Mr. Hilgendorf's comments, not mine.
[56:10] "I feel that granting the Variance
[56:11] "would be a bigger hardship for all the property owners
[56:14] "on this side of Escobar Street than it is worth,
[56:17] "and would ultimately be regretted by all.
[56:20] "Number four, please don't get me wrong,
[56:22] "I would love to see an improvement to this property
[56:25] "that has been the blight of the neighborhood
[56:27] "for over 16 years
[56:28] "with little attention or consideration
[56:31] "to the excess garbage that we have had to live with."
[56:34] And that's sincerely Jamie Hilgendorf of 110 Escobar Street.
[56:39] So those are Mr. Hilgendorf's comments.
[56:42] And I'm going to turn the screen over to Mr. Art Price
[56:47] and he can tell you his concerns and where he lives.
[56:50] - Thank you. - Oh, sorry.
[56:53] - [Art] Hi, my name's Art Price.
[56:55] I live at 534 Bay View,
[56:59] and I look directly over the 103 house.
[57:05] There are other ways to trim.
[57:08] I'm a superintendent for a large commercial company.
[57:13] Build high rises in San Francisco and so on.
[57:18] You can go with conventional rafting
[57:22] that takes away from the trusses.
[57:26] Trusses take a lot of room.
[57:28] To lower the roof, just to lower the roof down,
[57:30] get it down to 25 foot.
[57:33] That's all we're asking.
[57:38] - Do you have any additional comments?
[57:41] - [Art] I did.
[57:41] On the back, the Cypress have grown up way out of control
[57:47] and they're up into the PG&E lines.
[57:51] And constantly we have sparks flying down into his property.
[57:56] It's not so concerning to me because I'm across the street.
[58:01] But when he's going to build a new house,
[58:04] I've seen big buildings go up in flame and they go quick.
[58:10] - Okay. Appreciate the comments.
[58:13] Thank you so much. - Okay.
[58:18] - And now I'd like to invite Family, is what the name says,
[58:22] to make any public comments.
[58:27] - Hi there. Can you hear me? - Yes.
[58:31] - [Susie] This is Susie and John Gardnell.
[58:33] We live in 107. We're right below 103.
[58:40] Don't even know where to start.
[58:41] This house has been a nightmare for seven years.
[58:44] When we bought this house, we were promised by Tony
[58:47] that he was going to come back and rebuild.
[58:51] And it just sat there empty
[58:53] for homeless and some nasty people to live there,
[58:58] and animals galore.
[59:00] We've just had a dead deer laying there
[59:02] stinking up the neighborhood.
[59:04] But we are very excited that the house is,
[59:07] it's going to be redone because it's a total eyesore.
[59:09] And we hopefully--
[59:11] - And a fire hazard. - And a total fire hazard.
[59:14] I mean, it's been a total fire hazard.
[59:16] I'm surprised no one's,
[59:18] nothing's been done about this house
[59:20] because of the fire hazard.
[59:23] But in a few years, we will need to sell our house.
[59:28] And we're a little worried
[59:30] that we're going to have this huge house
[59:33] looming over our house.
[59:35] I don't know where the garage is going to go,
[59:36] so I'm not sure...
[59:37] I mean, we've been kind of lucky
[59:41] that we haven't had neighbors for seven years,
[59:43] and so then we're going to go
[59:44] and have this ginormous house on top of us.
[59:47] You know, I just...
[59:50] I don't know what else to say, but that worries us.
[59:55] Our fence, I'm not sure what...
[59:57] They're going to look down into our yard?
[1:00:02] I'm not sure how it's going to work.
[1:00:05] Just a little worried about this huge house.
[1:00:08] And the front being five feet
[1:00:11] or three feet, whatever, to the street,
[1:00:13] that's a little bothersome as well.
[1:00:16] It's just a huge house going on this property
[1:00:20] that doesn't seem that big.
[1:00:24] That's about it.
[1:00:25] Do you have anything to say?
[1:00:28] - [John] No.
[1:00:29] - [Susie] That's it. We're just a little worried that...
[1:00:32] I don't know what this house is going to look like.
[1:00:34] I can't really tell by the pictures and stuff,
[1:00:36] but just, like I said,
[1:00:37] we're going to sell this house in a few years
[1:00:39] and I don't want it to affect the sale of our house.
[1:00:45] - Okay. Well, thank you very much for your comments.
[1:00:49] I appreciate you attending and expressing them.
[1:00:53] I'd now like to invite Jeremy
[1:00:55] to make any public comments that you wish to make.
[1:01:01] - [Jeremy] Hi, thank you. Can you hear me?
[1:01:04] - Yes.
[1:01:05] - [Jeremy] Yeah. My name is Jeremy Guiley.
[1:01:07] Me and my wife and our family live at 14 Escobar Street,
[1:01:11] and we just have a few comments.
[1:01:14] So we appreciate the effort
[1:01:16] the property owners are making to improve a home
[1:01:19] that has appeared to be abandoned for many years.
[1:01:22] It's encouraging to see investment
[1:01:24] in revitalizing the neighborhood.
[1:01:27] Our only concern at this time is that
[1:01:30] we are interested in the proposed height of the home,
[1:01:36] with it being expanded, and the roof height specifically.
[1:01:40] We support updating the property.
[1:01:42] We just hope that the final design
[1:01:45] is going to remain compatible with the surrounding homes
[1:01:48] and preserve the character of the neighborhood.
[1:01:51] We respectfully ask
[1:01:52] that the reviewing body carefully consider
[1:01:54] whether the proposed height is appropriate,
[1:01:56] and if possible, encourage modifications
[1:01:59] that achieve the owner's goals
[1:02:01] while maintaining compatibility
[1:02:03] with the surrounding neighborhood.
[1:02:05] I also want to echo the comments
[1:02:06] about the corner there between Escobar
[1:02:11] and the traffic that comes around the corner.
[1:02:15] There's been several accidents on that corner
[1:02:18] with cars hitting each other or parked cars.
[1:02:23] And a view around that corner
[1:02:26] is, I believe, important for public safety
[1:02:30] as well as safety of pedestrians around Escobar.
[1:02:35] So if those could be considered,
[1:02:37] we would really appreciate it.
[1:02:39] Thank you.
[1:02:40] - Well, thank you very much, Jeremy.
[1:02:42] I appreciate you attending and expressing your comments.
[1:02:46] Any other members of the public
[1:02:48] who wish to speak on this item?
[1:02:52] Okay. I'm hearing none.
[1:02:54] I do want to put on the record
[1:02:57] the comment that was sent from Brooke Guiley,
[1:03:01] that was emailed to me during the meeting,
[1:03:05] I did have a chance to read it, so I just want to make sure
[1:03:07] that gets reflected on the record.
[1:03:10] I'd now like to invite Kirk, if you'd like to respond
[1:03:14] to the public comments that were received.
[1:03:19] - [Kirk] Sure.
[1:03:22] I can certainly appreciate everybody's concern
[1:03:24] with respect to the size of the home.
[1:03:27] But most of the expansion of the home
[1:03:32] occurs along the back property.
[1:03:34] That's where the lion's share of the area is
[1:03:37] that's been expanded.
[1:03:39] The upper floor area is like 2,000 square feet.
[1:03:46] So you're talking about 500 feet of the garage.
[1:03:49] And to clarify, the garage is underneath the living space
[1:03:53] in a space that previously was blank underfloor space,
[1:03:59] unused space.
[1:04:01] Yes, it projects out four feet from the lower level
[1:04:05] to allow for sufficient depth in the garage.
[1:04:10] The height of the building, what we try to do is,
[1:04:14] is try to utilize the same things that were occurring.
[1:04:17] I mean, the main living space,
[1:04:21] in fact, the entire living space is upstairs,
[1:04:24] as it's always been.
[1:04:26] It's always been at that floor level.
[1:04:29] So, the porch area that was converted into living space
[1:04:34] looks out across the view,
[1:04:37] and that really hasn't changed
[1:04:39] in terms of the number of windows
[1:04:41] and things that are going to occur along there.
[1:04:44] Yes, recessed from that facade
[1:04:48] is the step back where the master bedroom is,
[1:04:51] and there is a porch or deck off that.
[1:04:58] But it's only...
[1:05:01] I mean, I think it would be appropriate for,
[1:05:04] in the development of the home
[1:05:08] for the owner to want to get views
[1:05:10] that they currently have out those second story,
[1:05:13] if you want to call it second story,
[1:05:15] second story as it relates to the north property line.
[1:05:19] It's one story as it relates to the south property line.
[1:05:21] So, all those things have an impact on
[1:05:28] how the height of the house is perceived as 27 feet,
[1:05:32] because we're measuring from the lower end up to the top,
[1:05:35] not from the upper side to the top.
[1:05:39] That being said, anything can be done architecturally.
[1:05:43] The question is going to be is:
[1:05:47] is the resultant reduction of two feet,
[1:05:50] whether you lop off two feet of the ridge?
[1:05:53] Only one section of the roof extends
[1:05:56] to the full height of the overall height.
[1:05:59] It's a hip section that lies to the rear
[1:06:04] of where the living and dining area space is.
[1:06:07] And it hips up,
[1:06:08] it purposely hips up so there's not a gable there.
[1:06:11] It purposely hips up so it's not going to be as obvious.
[1:06:14] But it does get higher
[1:06:15] because that's the widest span for the roof to go.
[1:06:21] But there are ways to adjust that
[1:06:24] to go from 27 to 25, if that's a game break.
[1:06:30] In terms of the overall square footage, I don't know the...
[1:06:35] You probably know better than I
[1:06:37] what the range of floor areas are for that neighborhood.
[1:06:40] I have no idea what they are.
[1:06:42] But I know from experience
[1:06:44] that a 2,200 square foot living space
[1:06:48] isn't generally considered to be overwhelming.
[1:06:55] With respect, it's not like we're building
[1:06:57] a 5,000 square foot monster house next to smaller homes.
[1:07:01] So again, I don't know.
[1:07:04] I mean, I'm happy to talk to anybody on site
[1:07:08] to alleviate any concerns.
[1:07:10] But we've got 2,139 square feet on the upper floor.
[1:07:16] That includes three bedrooms, two baths,
[1:07:20] a kitchen, a dining room, and a living room.
[1:07:24] There's no family room. There's no nook.
[1:07:28] So, it is a fairly straightforward house.
[1:07:31] The additional square feet is a lower-floor guest suite
[1:07:35] that could be used as an ADU.
[1:07:37] We hadn't anticipated using it as an ADU,
[1:07:40] but it could be used as an ADU if it was allowed.
[1:07:45] It's removed from the rest of the house.
[1:07:47] You go downstairs to get to it.
[1:07:50] It's accessible from the garage.
[1:07:53] But the original intent was
[1:07:56] if Ms. Chantri had a guest that wanted to stay,
[1:08:00] it would give them the opportunity to stay,
[1:08:02] visit with her and have a modicum of privacy.
[1:08:08] Having had that experience with my in-laws,
[1:08:10] it's nice to be able to do that,
[1:08:12] to be able to take,
[1:08:14] to not constantly intrude upon your host's lifestyle.
[1:08:21] So, I mean, those are the rationale for the reasons.
[1:08:24] I think they're reasonable thoughts.
[1:08:26] I certainly can appreciate the concerns
[1:08:30] with respect to reduction of view.
[1:08:34] If story poles are the answer,
[1:08:36] then obviously that will take some time to erect and done.
[1:08:42] I think from my experience
[1:08:45] a story poll would be good to show
[1:08:47] not just what the proposed profile would be,
[1:08:53] but also how it relates to the existing profile.
[1:08:57] The problem with story poles is, how do you erect them?
[1:09:01] I mean, they're easy to erect
[1:09:02] when you have nothing on the property.
[1:09:04] They're a little more difficult to manage
[1:09:08] when you've got a building sitting
[1:09:10] where you're trying to erect story poles.
[1:09:12] So I don't know about that, but.
[1:09:16] - And Kirk, question for you.
[1:09:17] There also was a comment about concerns with the tree
[1:09:21] and how it impacts utility lines that are there.
[1:09:26] - [Kirk] Yeah, I don't think, you know...
[1:09:28] That is one of those...
[1:09:30] And certainly I can...
[1:09:32] I live across the street from a property
[1:09:34] that's been vacant, just sold last week.
[1:09:37] It's been vacant for 15 years,
[1:09:39] so I can certainly appreciate the concerns that go on.
[1:09:42] I had to go in the backyard and mow down all the weeds
[1:09:46] because it backs up to the park.
[1:09:48] And 4th of July, we were concerned
[1:09:50] it was going to light the whole...
[1:09:52] That an errant firecracker or firework
[1:09:54] would light the whole neighborhood on fire.
[1:09:56] So I can certainly appreciate those concerns.
[1:09:59] In talking to Mr. Chantri,
[1:10:01] and again, I can't speak to
[1:10:04] what's taken place over the years,
[1:10:06] but he's assured me that he wants to clean all that up.
[1:10:12] And so, I don't anticipate or see any problems
[1:10:19] with making sure that that hazard is dealt with.
[1:10:25] On the other hand, we want to...
[1:10:26] I think that the neighborhood would probably want to keep
[1:10:30] the screening ability of those trees.
[1:10:32] So maybe it's a maintenance thing
[1:10:34] where the trees don't need to be removed,
[1:10:36] but they need to be significantly pruned and kept pruned
[1:10:38] so they don't encroach on the power lines.
[1:10:41] - Okay. Appreciate that.
[1:10:44] Any final comments?
[1:10:47] - [Kirk] Well, we've tried to do our best
[1:10:49] in terms of creating a design.
[1:10:54] We've met with a couple of people
[1:10:56] and talked to a couple of people
[1:10:57] when I've been walking the site.
[1:10:59] Everybody seems to be wanting to have something done.
[1:11:02] We haven't had any real design powwows.
[1:11:05] I think, you know...
[1:11:07] I don't know if anybody had seen this plan previously.
[1:11:10] So I can certainly appreciate the concern
[1:11:16] that neighbors would have
[1:11:17] in terms of seeing something being built
[1:11:19] in the neighborhood.
[1:11:22] - Okay. Well, thank you, Kirk.
[1:11:25] I am seeing a raised hand, but I want to note that
[1:11:28] unfortunately the way that public hearings work
[1:11:32] is public comment period is actually now done.
[1:11:38] So I apologize for that.
[1:11:42] And it's now at the point
[1:11:43] that I will deliberate on the item.
[1:11:47] So first and foremost, I want to thank everyone
[1:11:50] for being just as respectful and neighborly as everyone has.
[1:11:54] It's a development project,
[1:11:56] and change in a neighborhood can be challenging.
[1:12:00] And so it speaks highly of everyone that lives there,
[1:12:04] so thank you.
[1:12:07] Second, it was alluded to
[1:12:11] in terms of concerns about square footage and height.
[1:12:16] From the square footage standpoint,
[1:12:19] I am not concerned with the project.
[1:12:25] I find that, generally speaking, it's well-designed
[1:12:30] and well-articulated to break up that massing
[1:12:32] and doesn't feel quite like
[1:12:37] what the square footage is representing.
[1:12:41] I also think it's important to point out
[1:12:45] that at the site, there is some topographic change,
[1:12:49] and as the architect alluded to,
[1:12:53] that definitely is a factor
[1:12:56] in terms of what the height number represents.
[1:13:02] Saying that, I do think it is
[1:13:06] a reasonable request from the neighbors
[1:13:09] to ask for some additional information
[1:13:12] so they can understand
[1:13:14] what the height of the proposed development is going to be
[1:13:18] as it relates to their properties
[1:13:21] and as it relates to the neighborhood.
[1:13:25] So what I am prepared to do,
[1:13:27] I actually am going to continue the matter,
[1:13:31] and I'm going to continue the matter
[1:13:33] to the meeting on August the 13th,
[1:13:39] that is Thursday, at four o'clock.
[1:13:42] And a note for the neighbors,
[1:13:44] the item will not be re-noticed,
[1:13:47] but an agenda and Staff Report will be posted,
[1:13:49] and you can always reach out to Imanol
[1:13:51] from a timing standpoint.
[1:13:55] In advance of that meeting,
[1:13:58] the Applicant in working with staff,
[1:14:00] what I would request is some additional information
[1:14:06] to represent to both the Zoning Administrator
[1:14:09] and to the neighbors about the proposed height.
[1:14:13] That does not necessarily need to be story poles.
[1:14:17] As you represented, I share a lot of those concerns.
[1:14:21] I actually think story poles oftentimes can misrepresent
[1:14:25] the height and massing of a structure.
[1:14:29] Other option might be a section through the property
[1:14:33] and potentially going into the street
[1:14:36] and the downhill property
[1:14:37] so there's a little bit more information,
[1:14:39] or extending the front elevations
[1:14:42] so that it is showing the adjacent property.
[1:14:44] I think that would go a long way.
[1:14:47] I also encourage, but I'm not going to require,
[1:14:51] but encourage in advance of the meeting on the 13th
[1:14:55] the Property Owner and the architect to meet with neighbors,
[1:15:00] maybe hold a neighborhood meeting
[1:15:02] to talk through the project
[1:15:04] and ideally work through
[1:15:07] some potential concerns that the neighbors have
[1:15:10] in advance of the item coming forward,
[1:15:14] coming back to me for consideration.
[1:15:19] And then finally, just to put it on the record,
[1:15:24] from staff's perspective, I would consider it an ADU.
[1:15:29] And for the betterment of information for the public,
[1:15:34] accessory dwelling units,
[1:15:35] when they comply with development standards,
[1:15:38] the City does not have any discretion over them.
[1:15:43] So that will be a component of the project.
[1:15:46] And then finally, assuming if the project is approved,
[1:15:51] I would like to see a condition of approval
[1:15:55] when this comes back
[1:15:58] addressing the vegetation's encroachment
[1:16:01] within the power lines, as part of this project.
[1:16:07] So again, continuing the matter
[1:16:09] to a date certain of August the 13th.
[1:16:13] If there's any questions,
[1:16:14] please reach out to the project planner, Imanol Tovar,
[1:16:18] and he can answer them.
[1:16:20] And at that, I am prepared to adjourn today's meeting
[1:16:23] at 5:16 PM.
[1:16:26] Thank you very much.
[1:16:28] (no audio)