Everyone, welcome to November 17, 2022, city of Napa, regular meeting for the Planning Commission. Could you all check your pages and cell phones and make sure there's no ringing dings coming out during our meeting?
Call this meeting to order and ask staff, please.
Conduct roll call.
Commissioner Uthado.
Here.
Commissioner Kelly.
Here.
Commissioner Shotwell.
Vice Chair Masato.
Chair.
President.
Thank you.
I'll ask you to rise and join me in the pledge allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the Republic.
For which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
Some day, some day.
The Planning Commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Ralph Brown Act and pursuant to the city's rules of order for planning commission meetings.
Are there any changes to this evening's agenda?
No changes.
Thank you, sir.
I'm from my colleagues on the commission.
Any changes?
Seeing none will continue.
We're just going to move right along to public comment.
Public comment provides an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the planning commission on items of interest, not, not otherwise noted on the agenda.
In other words, if you want to speak to something on the agenda now is not the time.
Each speaker's comments will be limited to three minutes, and we'll comply with the rules of order for planning commission meetings.
Do we have any members of the public who wish to provide public comment on non agenda items?
Lockword pause?
That's no.
Okay.
Very good.
Thank you.
Now we're onto the consent calendar.
These routine items may be approved by a single vote.
However, any member of the public or commissioner may remove an item for consideration during the public hearing portion of the agenda.
This evening, we are reviewing the Planning Commission regular meeting minutes of September 1st.
May I get a motion to approve?
May I have a second?
Second?
All in favor.
Aye.
Very good.
Under consent hearings, there are none this evening.
So we are onto item number seven public hearings appeals.
I think it's just public hearings, there are no appeals, so far as I know, or I haven't seen.
These are items that are formally presented to the Planning Commission and provided an opportunity for members of the public to comment.
Applicants or appellants are allowed ten minutes to present testimony at the beginning of the public hearing.
You don't need to use your whole ten minutes.
Five minutes will be presented.
We'll five minutes to present rebuttal at the end of the public hearing.
All other speakers will be limited to three minutes.
Tonight we have the loan oak subdivision.
Sounds so lonely.
The clay street care facility.
I believe the loan oak is first.
That's correct.
That's item seven A.
We're going to start with A.
Let's start with commissioner or disclosure starting with commissioner.
Nothing.
Vice chair.
Since the last meeting, I was a member of a two person subcommittee that met with the applicant and reviewed various design issues.
No other disclosures.
Very good.
Commissioner shot well.
So I don't need to read disclose the prior disclosures.
You don't have to disclose that you disclosed.
Great, but I will disclose that I spoke with Michael Allen this morning.
And I read through all of the email.
Very good.
Thank you.
Commissioner Kelly.
Thank you chair.
I also participated in the subcommittee with Vice chair.
Vice chair Massaro.
Communication was staff.
Thank you all and I met with staff this morning with the resume.
So now this would be the time to get a staff report.
Good evening chair.
Who are commissioners?
Kevin Payne.
I'm with municipal advisory services.
I'm a chair.
I brought my name tag.
Tonight.
Thank you.
Very much appreciate that Mr. Payne.
I'm the city's consultant for the loan up project.
And we'll provide you guys with a brief presentation.
Just as a brief reminder, this project has a number of different entitlements associated with it.
First of those being a tentative sub division map to the sub divide 2.97 acres
and to six single family lots.
A design review for the tentative sub division map.
And the architectural plans for the single family residential units that will ultimately occupy those sites.
And lastly, there is a use permit request in order to create three flag lots as part of the sub division.
Just for a matter of orientation.
This project is located at the west terminus of loan oak avenue.
Specifically at 2394 loan oak avenue.
It's currently surrounded by existing single family residential properties.
And is one of the cities evolving in fill properties.
The southern area of the site is occupied by Redwood Creek and its associated riparian area.
On October 22, the planning commission originally considered this request.
And during that meeting expressed a number of concerns and areas of interest.
Mainly focused on the project's ability and the individual lots to be able to provide for future development of accessory dwelling units on site.
Some of the building architecture was not amenable to the commission.
And the commission wanted to see what the solar alignment for the project might look like.
As part of the commission's action that night, the item was continued with a subcommittee being formed.
The was occupied by Vice Chair Masaro and Commissioner Kelly.
On November 3, the subcommittee met with the applicant to discuss the ADU issues.
The architecture and the solar alignment.
The remainder of this presentation is focused on the outcome of those discussions.
So emanating from those discussions.
The applicant has prepared an ADU site plan.
Per this site plan, the areas that are indicated in yellow are areas that would accommodate a future development of an ADU by the property owner.
Should they choose to do that.
These envelopes building envelopes have been established meeting the city's criteria as far as setbacks both side and rear and from the proposed building structures.
As part of the discussions that took place.
Both commissioners requested that the applicant consider preparing these sites for future viability by having them meet the compaction requirements for residential development.
And to provide stub utilities through the construction of the future units.
Those agreed to do both of these measures and conditions new conditions wanted to were included in your attached resolution that basically requires those two actions to take place as part of this development.
Moving on to the discussions as far as the architectural modifications.
One of the key elements that was discussed at the the past meeting was just the craftsman style elevation.
The prior craftsman style has been eliminated and now the project incorporates a new modern style style elevation, which we'll talk about a little bit.
The ranch elevation that was originally proposed has been modified so that it has a lower roof line.
The course has been modified to reflect more of a ranch style versus craftsman which portrait previously with a post and railing system that is more along a ranch style.
And there has been a change in the overall material applications associated with that elevation.
The applicant has also agreed to providing high definition 40 year shingles are better as far as the roofing material is concerned.
Our white vinyl windows are being proposed as part of the elevations white trim is being added in order to enhance those details.
And lastly, a solar array exhibit has been provided as requested by the commission and the subcommittee.
This slide really represents a street scape shot of the units that would front onto the proposed alleyway consisting of the farmhouse, the modern and the ranch all three different types of elevations.
Each slide has been programmed with a different elevations, so I want to talk about that programming.
First of all lots one and six reflect the updated ranch elevation.
Although they are the same plan each unit has a different color palette.
And the subcommittee input as I said as led to a lower roof line addition of the white window trim, new post and portrails that are reflective of a ranch style and a new brick veneer.
So lot three proposes to utilize the new modern design that replaces the craftsman plan.
It incorporates unique roof pitches that are reflected throughout the design and the materials include the use of a horizontal lap sighting and stucco elements on all elevations reinforcing that want modern look.
The floor plan itself for the unit did not change just the elevations.
This two story home has five bedrooms as originally proposed with an overall living space of approximately 2800 square feet and it has a three car garage and wide front porch.
Moving on to lots two and four they are proposed as farmhouse elevations.
This elevation has board and bat and sighting wrapping around the upper two thirds of the second story.
It has painted stucco base with white vinyl windows trimmed out and white and it also incorporates a wide front porch.
Lastly, a lot five is another rendition just on a different plan of the modern style and similar to a lot three.
The design incorporates that horizontal sighting elements mix stucco and dramatic roof lines.
Again the floor plan did not change for this plan just exterior elevations.
This two story allvation could be a two story plan could be either a four or five bedroom unit depending on the loft option.
And these units provide approximately 2,900 square feet of overall living area and three car tandem garage.
As discussed, the solar array plan has been developed showing the potential locations for solar to be installed as part of meeting the energy efficiency requirements for these units as was requested by both the commission and the subcommittee.
At this time I would just kind of conclude the presentation part by noting that we did receive corresponding light correspondence today.
We had three letters that were submitted one by Mr. Vega one by the neighborhood and one by the bike coalition all still requesting that the commission consider a bike trail connection from Grove to low note and some manner or fashion.
And then the last piece of correspondence was provided by Mr. Andrews requesting that all access string construction be limited to.
Grove Avenue and that prior to the construction starting that are permanent non climbable offense installed so those are the content summarized the contents of the letters that were received late as of late.
At this point in time staff is recommending that the planning commission determined the project is exempt from sequa and approve the tenant sub division map the design review permit.
Based on the fact that it conforms to the general plan and the standards and all other applicable cities standards.
And this really concludes my presentation I'm available Mike Allen from the city is available to answer the commission's questions and I know the applicant and his team are here and available.
Thank you thanks come.
Let's see who shall I ask you so since we had a have a subcommittee.
Would it be appropriate to hear a little bit about how that went now or after the applicants presented but I think the public would like to hear and so the non subcommittee members here.
How that went?
Yeah, I don't think it matters which way you do it, so it's your preference if you want to just keep the flow and
that the applicant come up and do their presentation and then you can subcommittee can start from there.
Or vice versa?
Really up to you.
Well since you said it that way, I'm going to go the other way.
Okay.
Commissioner Caler, Vice Chair of the Sard, do you want to give anything that you could share with us?
I'm sure we're going to hear it from different versions, ones from the staff and ones from the applicant.
But how about from you guys how that go?
Oh, these guys.
What's not that big of a deal?
Did it went with the applicant first?
It was, it was productive.
The applicant was receptive, staff was helpful.
We weren't there to make any major changes.
We were there to do fine tuning.
It was kind of late in the game to do major changes.
You know, we talked about scale, we talked about feathering from the neighborhood.
So really what we were trying to do there was come up with the best solution given the cards that we're already on the table.
The fact that craftsman was taken out was actually not our suggestion.
It was theirs.
And it had to do with Commissioner Shotwell mentioned that if you're going to do craftsman do authentic craftsmen,
which we agree was a great comment.
And so they prefer to take it out.
As far as the designs are concerned, the roof gives more dimension.
The white trim around the windows makes it look more like the white vinyl was planned.
I think that the modern version does give a little bit more variety.
I think Commissioner Kelly, I'm sure, has his viewpoint on it.
I think it was productive.
So I have other questions about the site.
I was, I did seek recommend onings or some sun protection on the south and the west side to diminish energy consumption,
but that didn't get into the design.
It's not necessarily a deal killer for me, but I do think it's going to mean that they're going to require more solar than perhaps they wouldn't necessarily.
Commissioner Kelly, what are your thoughts?
And maybe it'll prompt some more of mine.
Yeah, again, I want to reflect that, you know, the applicant was, you know, they were very helpful and willing.
And Mike Allen was very, you know, helpful and sort of facilitating the meeting.
One of the things that's not necessarily directly tied to this project is I think the issue that.
What what staff or what the city is looking for in regards to design and what the planning commission may be looking for.
You know, there seems to be a disconnect there that, you know, the applicant is meeting the requested standards.
And you know, if the planning commission after this whole general plan process is looking for something different, then.
That needs to be a conversation, I think, between, you know, the planning commission and staff to if we want to, you know, amend what we're looking for, you know, from the applicants.
You know, the other thing in it, and of course we mentioned at the meeting that.
The design on the tables really the design and it's, unfortunately, you know, it's a little far down the road to, you know, suggest major changes to it.
But again, that, that idea that if an applicant can come in doesn't need to do all the civil preparation can come in with a site plan and some elevations and come to the commission and say, what do you think they don't have to invest a lot of time.
We don't have to, you know, spend a lot of time giving feedback.
But with all that said, you know, I feel like, you know, they listen to us.
And, and I always look at projects and I think about ringing a sponge and how much can you get and I feel like we sort of wrong the sponge as much as we can do and get out of it.
So those are my thoughts.
I think that there was a important milestone here.
And that we asked the applicant to identify sites for future ADUs and it's one thing to identify them on paper.
It's another thing to actually do the prep and, you know, I'm a builder and an idea with real life situations all the time.
So one of the things that I looked at was it's one thing to draw the line on the plan, but it's another thing to get it prepped because once the houses are built,
if you haven't done certain things with grading and with utilities, it becomes almost prohibitive or cost prohibitive to do anything else.
So when the applicant agreed to actually essentially do the grading and the compaction for future pads and then stub out for the utilities, that was important because it goes back to the general plan goals of adding more housing.
And it also really frankly is a developer.
I think it makes the project more attractive because somebody who's going to buy this knows that they have a site for a future ADU whether or not they want to build it or not.
So I would think that as other housing projects like this come forward that have the room and this one did that I would like to see ADU sites identified and prepped.
And by the way the cost is very minimal to do this and yet in the in yet it does incentivize future buyers to build the ADUs knowing that they don't have to go back there with you know heavy equipment and building pads that the original builder has done that.
So I thought that was a very productive thing and I commend the applicant for actually not arguing with us on this it was it was a collaborative discussion.
So all in all I firmly support what commissioner Kelly is stated that this project and prior projects that have come before us in the past couple years and all of your years we need to look at the process so that we get them sooner.
And I think that would it would cut out a lot of a lot of grief and frankly I think it would help the applicants know early on what the commission's expecting.
You know we just went through the general plan so we have and we know what council is looking for so we've got the guide post so if if the applicant can come to a sooner we can do our best as a as a five person group to to make these suggestions early on.
So anyway I've got to commend chair Huther because it was his idea the subcommittee and it worked quite well so anyway that's my comment.
And one one more sort of comment to a pen to that again as you noted it was one thing to show.
The idea you pads but if I share you sort of push the envelope a little bit and you are sort of the inspiration to to get the pads created to get the stuff outs on site such that anyone of the buyers you know and this project they can come in later.
You know some prefab unit could you know be set down there and they just connect to the utilities and it's done and it's you know we've really made it simple and the builder is really making that simple for you know owners to do that and so.
A lot of that was was your inspiration and so I just you know wanted to note that for the record.
Thank you would the applicant that would be Eric are you feeling like a run out sponge.
Are you okay.
Good evening Mr. Chair members of the commission.
Eric's wide with Edinburgh charms and I am okay.
Okay very good just wanted to start in the right place.
I just wanted to thank Vice Chair Massaro and Commissioner Kelly for being part of the subcommittee.
And I hope with what we've done with the package here you all see that we don't view Napa as a community stuck in the past and that we are willing to take some risks with our architectural styles and do something different.
And also that we take the concept of alternative housing sites very seriously even though we are not an AD builder.
That we certainly in the planning of our main residences can provide the opportunities for those to be built by the homeowners at some future date.
We are in receipt of some of the later communications from our neighbors and I don't want to step in front of them but we are and remain very opposed to putting the pedestrian path through on this project and we would like to preserve the opportunity from a construction access standpoint to access the site from both sides.
And I think that's going to be the best way to protect the creek, get through the construction as quickly and efficiently as possible and mitigate some of the safety concerns that we've had with people accessing the site the way that they have when it's been unfenced.
But I would like to see most of my time tonight to our architecture of pots who is here and would like to talk in a little bit more detail about what we've done with the architecture package since the last meeting.
So you can see the thought that's gone into it so if it's all right I will invite Jeff up and let him take it away.
Good evening commission you will see if I can make this thing work once you get me back to the point where we were I don't want to take a lot of time but I feel we might have been remiss and not taking enough time last time to walk through the architecture.
So really just kind of backtrack on where we started and where we are now.
The house on lots one three and six was designed to be a mostly single story house for the purposes both of the neighbors and the design guidelines originally.
We've maintained that effort to do that with the removal of the craftsman house we felt and I felt that the ranch house was probably not quite.
Ranchy enough for lack of a better term previously with all the hip roofs and the higher pitches and things that you wouldn't necessarily ordinarily find our ranch house and you know those things were used on the craftsman so we were trying to differentiate some things.
In the case where the craftsman was removed we were able to you know greatly reduce the roof pitches of the main body of the house so we brought down that lower ridge line quite a bit.
You know introduced a you know popped out elements on the right hand side both in the ranch and the modern to sort of break up that longer.
Expans of roof and wall there and as you can see we've wrapped the siding at the second floor basically all the way around the the dormers on on both the front and the rear and down the sides you get that material kind of wrapping around the whole house.
While we were doing this we actually decided to reorient the bedroom in the corner because that corner face the creek in a couple of key areas.
We introduced a sliding glass door to that bedroom so that they could take advantage of those creek views a little bit better and it allows us to do some different things on the front elevation.
And as staff mentioned this house this elevation style is plotted on two lots on that one and lots six there about as far apart from each others and get within the development you don't really see them both at the same time.
But we did produce a secondary color scheme for that elevation so that they're not identical.
I figured it out and then as as mentioned we removed the craftsman and and you know maybe maybe we heard different things than.
Everybody has things we're going back and forth we felt there was more of a push to not include the craftsman so that's where we started I think we heard from the subcommittee that maybe that wasn't necessarily.
The direction but nonetheless that was the direction that that we had gone in and that we continued down with the modern style we were trying to you know create some somewhat asymmetrical forms introduce.
Some lap sighting and stucco forms and fine tunes sort of window trims to be thinner lesser details different garage doors different sort of column styles and blended that lower pitch roof all the way around.
As you can see again we've wrapped the wood siding around the entire house and made the similar changes to both the larger plane on the right hand side of the front elevation and the sliding glass door there at the rear or at the right.
So you see that plan the second floor you know encompasses a very small portion of the overall floor plan.
Plan to the farmhouse you know we opted to keep this it's a very well accepted style within many communities including Napa it's a little bit more modern than your typical farmhouse with them.
We did not do a lot of changes here except for at that rear elevation. We can't leave her that master bedroom out so that we can create that pop out in that shadow line and extend that roof element along the back.
And then we also did that along the side elevation based on some conversation with the subcommittee.
And again, the more modern style incorporated both of those buildouts. And again, somewhat roof pitches a little bit of asymmetrical skew to it and some different material palettes.
I passed the material colorboard around to you also that you could see the different window colors that were being incorporated where we weren't.
Didn't want to do white siding on or white trim on every window.
And so where we weren't doing that, we incorporated a couple of different shades of the window colors in those areas.
And again, when you look at this plan, the master bedroom was popped out to accommodate that rear and you can see that that whole side has been stepped in and so really the other side was where we needed to sort of add that pop out to break up that larger wall playing.
I think you guys have reviewed this order while we we laid it out so that it was basically on the west southwest side as best possible with the roofs facing the way they were.
And with that we're here to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Before we.
Maybe go to public comment let's see if there's any questions from the commission for the applicant starting with you.
Mr. Shuttle.
Two questions can you explain.
I don't understand this solar is it a is it a complete array stand alone separate array.
It is comprised of 10 solar panels placed on the roof there three by five panels.
Okay, you know, spaced closely together in one location on the truth.
So it's on each roof.
Yes sir.
I only labeled it on one as typical.
I see.
I don't know if there's a pointer on this but it's the one on the left that you've got I labeled it on the left but you should see that similar array on each roof as you maybe you're document that you haven't hand might be easier to see it on.
I can certainly point to it.
I understand I I I I misunderstood but I understand now so I don't have a question about that.
Thank you.
You don't have.
Okay about that or anything right now.
I do have a question of another question of the applicant.
And you you stated in I'm not sure if it's you where your colleague you stated very firmly that you don't want to do a pathway.
Can you explain why you're so opposed to it.
Sure, again, Eric with eating brochomes.
So I want to give the neighbors that have used the cut through there over the years because the site was unfanced the benefit of the doubt that they didn't know that it was private property and that that was an unauthorized cut through.
But for as many folks as we're using it innocently enough to get to school or to walk their dogs in the mornings we also had.
And just in the last year that we've been involved in this project.
People who took the opportunity to dump garbage in the creek to create.
Sort of make shift encampments down in the creek to graffiti the trees to have little bonfires and parties down there that the police had to break up and in our minds.
That sort of activity is directly related to the concept of a path.
Through the project and we think it's important not to encourage for the protection of the creek and also for the feeling of safety and security of the future residents of our project and when we think about who will be charged with.
We're releasing the path and maintaining it long term.
It would be the residents of our project and that's only six homes.
And we don't feel that that's a fair burden to place on the project.
And without the cut through if you look at the neighborhood as a whole it's about two blocks to walk around to windivist or to west park depending on which side you're coming to.
That is and we are not affecting in any way the path to the school that is off site on the edge of our lot one and certainly that could be used to as another way to get through the communities.
But from our perspective it really encourages more negative activity.
And then it solves problems in our minds.
Thank you there's good comprehensive answer.
Second question you said that you prefer not to have you would like to maintain two construction entrances one off of grove and one off of low note.
Don't you think that's intrusive to the low note neighborhood.
Well I think if we were to concentrate construction on the grove and you said that might be looked upon unfavorably by our neighbors on the other side of the project.
I would just sit I we didn't plan this.
Most dry but I would just say that the current access to the site is via a dry way off of low note.
And there is a barricade on the grove avenue side the utility connections for the subdivision come from the grove avenue side so there will be a period of time.
When we open that up and the entrances torn up as we're making those utility connections can be very difficult to access the site and do any other work.
I think that the project will go much more quickly and much more efficiently if we have the ability to enter the site from either side and that will disperse the impacts of the construction traffic between the two neighborhoods.
The RSA rep is here do we know you do you know could you share with us how much cut and fill is going to be on this project.
I'm curious if you're importing or exporting a lot of dirt through these neighborhoods.
Good evening commission.
My name is Derek Dittman RSA plus civil engineer.
We are estimating the project have a net cut of about 800 cubic yards mainly due to the street and the utilities that are having to conform with the dead end to grove avenue right now.
So that's our current estimate we can refine that and we're exporting 800.
That's about 80 trucks.
Great.
Okay.
Thank you.
Commissioner or thought of the many questions for the applicant.
I do have one for staff.
Okay.
Please.
Yeah.
By my share.
Michelle had some of the ones that I had as well.
So I appreciate that you asked those.
But in line with the with the pathway there.
Just for staff.
Just want to make sure that I'm clear.
But I do recall I believe last time that staff did say that due to a creek being there.
It was probably not feasible to have a pathway.
Is that correct?
I think from the public works side of things.
Yeah.
Tim spoke last time and there were some concerns about that.
But also ongoing maintenance as well which.
Yeah.
I'm kind of alluded to in terms of somebody having a pay for it to see.
Wouldn't be in a position of maintaining that.
Great.
Thank you.
That's a for no.
Eric.
Can I get you back up there for a second.
I have a question for this or maybe a couple of not sure.
Just first confirming that there are two each.
Right.
Ranch.
Farm.
And modern.
Yes.
Two two and two.
Two two.
Okay.
Right on.
that you all don't build 80 years, right?
So I'm curious about, I mean, I think there's an opportunity here for you in your company,
if you're, when you go to sell these and say, well, we can offer you an upgrade, and that's
the time to do it is, well, then, right?
So, how are you going to handle that, because it's great that we have the pads and compacted
in the utilities, and I'm very appreciative that you were so open to doing that, and the next
thing, of course, the whole point of doing that is, in the hopes that 80 years would get
built, and so, are you going to encourage, discourage, be neutral, vanilla on it, or if you
don't build 80 years, you're going to get a little brochure that we are 80 years for you or
something or how, how do you see doing that?
Sure.
So, I think we're going to be neutral on it.
We will, obviously, in our marketing package, and in our disclosures, show them that we have
compacted the pad to receive an ADU that we have installed a 3-quarter inch water line with the
hose we have off the back of the house, where they could connect that ADU, and that similarly,
there's a two-way sanitary sewer clean out at the back of the house where they could plumb
the wasteland to the ADU from the main house plumbing, and that we've upsized the main house electric
panel from a standard 200 amp panel to a 320 amp panel, which will provide up to 100 amps of capacity
for subfeed to an ADU, and, you know, we are aware of a number of factory built ADU companies that,
obviously, we don't have a financial interest in any one of those, that we could sort of point
them to, as companies that could build an ADU for them offsite and then crane into place with
a sort of a minimum of disruption, and that the utility connections would be easy for something
like that, but the challenge with our sort of stick building ADUs as part of our standard program is that
we generally don't get the money out.
You have to get the ROI, I get it done, it's okay. So that's so shame in that, I'm just my mouse.
So that's, you know, when you think about what the premium we could charge for a home with an ADU versus
the same plan without, it generally does not cover the cost of stick building that unit. However,
there are factory built units that are able to build at a much lower cost than stick building
and it's certainly possible that somebody, you know, could purchase one of those that
will lower cost than we could build. So, Eric, so I do, I do understand the economics and I wish
there was a way that we could incentivize that people would actually build them, then I understand that
that's not you, but you do our selling six well built houses presumably with that option and that
seems to be that would be a perk that you could offer to your potential buyers. And so maybe be a little bit
more than neutral and maybe give them three brochures or three different companies and say,
well, we don't have anything to do with these people, but as far as we know, the reputable and they
could make you want for a profit of this much and, you know, if I'm a new homeowner and I'm not
really about construction, I'm not about architecture, I'm not about design or I would be totally overwhelmed
at the prospect of me having to handle that myself or have my partner do it or whatever. So if there
I mean, maybe we could do this later after public comment talks more about if there's a way that we can
with minimal amount of harm to you in your company, but they get so it's easiest possible for these new
homeowners to have an A to you. Sure, you know, I mean, we are aware of several companies that have,
you know, web presences and they're in the news that, you know, their whole model is the white glove
service, you know, handling the permitting, handling the off-site build, handling the onsite prep,
you know, for these unit and I guess the buzzword is removing the pain points, if you will,
and so I think, and that space is growing as more and more jurisdictions sort of incorporate changes to
state law to streamline the permit process. And so I think, you know, honestly, 18 months from now,
when we have, you know, main residents to sell, there's going to be a number of companies in that space
that are able to, to surf folks quickly. So Eric says, usually, so 18 months from now is when they'll,
the first one will be built, or they're all pop up at the same time, or I apologize. I should say 18
months from the time we break ground. Okay, but at some point, 18 months from wherever that started,
is there one house, or six houses, or you can have a model house, or there's a two small,
a subdivision of, I think we, you know, our preference would be to build all six at one time.
It's possible in this economic environment that we may have a construction starts constraint from
a lender in which case we would do three and three. But it is our intention to build all six homes
at one time and certainly not to build one cell one, building another one cell one. Right, so if you don't,
How do you go about, you'd like to probably sell them before they're done? How are you going to sell them?
We'd like to sell them before they're done, but not too far before they're done. Because the market appreciates, we give that up. And if the market deteriorates, then we get retreated.
So it's usually, the homes are at least at the drywall stage.
That would be this stage that I would love to see the invitation to the party commission of the planning stuff.
But come and check you out.
Cool. There's a lot of these things that we're doing here together.
I've not thought I don't trust you, but I think that we want to take it to another level.
Anyways of understanding what we're approving and what it looks like what it's done.
Thank you, Eric. So please relax, enjoy yourself.
Either you're going on to a public comment.
Chair, if I could add to one of your comments and Eric doesn't need to stand up for this.
But rather than specifically give out brochures, I would recommend that the developer refer home buyers to napasonomaadu.org.
And that website is designed to help homeowners in these two counties to plan, budget, and construct the best possible aid you for their site.
So they will come out free of charge, assess the property, give direction, give out referrals and recommendations of certain builders and so forth, depending on the program of the owner.
And at that point, there's really no, I would hate to see the developer recommend company X.
And then, you know, that doesn't flow well for the buyer and also to recommend something that's somewhat generic to where, you know, they're partnering with a non-profit to help figure out how to proceed in this.
And so, you know, they don't really have any skin in the game in that, but I think it would be maybe the most, you know,
fair way to, you know, get a get a homeowner connected with the potential aid you pipeline.
So I'd like to recommend that after we get through our public comments, rebuttals of authority, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, that we do discuss that a little bit more before we go into our motions and actions and all of that.
So, how are we on public comment?
So, we have three requests to speak so far and if it's okay with you, I'd like to call them out and invite other members of the public to fill out a card if they are interested in speaking tonight.
First, I have Tom Andrews, then I have Rose Jager and then Neil Cole Will.
So, I were getting that teed up again.
If you're interested in speaking on the subject under public comment, please do fill out a card in the back on the back table and bring it forward and head it to Patty and she'll call your name.
Yes, fam.
Hi, good evening.
Welcome.
My name is Rose Jager and we had a lineup change here.
Thank you, Mr. Andrews.
I am here as a resident of the neighborhood and along the Bradford Street side corridor and I actually am the representative that has submitted the public comments on requesting the commissioners.
Consider our walkthrough and bike through paths amongst many of the other neighbors.
I'm the representative of a collective about over 18 was my last count.
This is a silent majority of the neighborhood in terms of a percentage when you look at the overall number of houses of the neighbors that are actually wanting this walkthrough path.
And I just want to really encourage the commission to hear us as concerned citizens to consider the general plans initiatives and it ideals as well for the city of Napa.
We brought the future of Napa along with us here this evening.
Thank you for your patience, by the way.
For the noise distractions.
They're first planning commission hearing staff.
I was wondering if it's possible at all if you could bring up the letter that we've provided to the city to Patricia.
There's photo combs in that of walkway paths that a but private property developments all throughout Napa.
That service comparables to this exact type of in fill sub development projects that we're looking at here for the low-knokes subdivision applicant.
There are new developments that have been filled in through North Napa that have easily accommodated a simple walkthrough by through paths that provide safety for young families old citizens all alike that have never had any issues of disturbance.
Or criminal problems.
They're all of the Napa Valley Register articles that I've read including everything that's on the little police blotter page.
My cousin being a CHP officer.
There's never been any criminal nuisances to cite the applicant's concern.
And then as far as other applicants concerning guarding budget.
I am sure that the price of these homes can absolutely afford for the residents to accommodate any sort of a nominal fee.
There may be in to pay of what would be honestly a 40 or 50 foot path at the most that we're talking about here.
So I feel that this is a in line with the general plan in terms of inclusivity to provide the paths for the future of Napa.
Thank you very much.
Awesome. Good job. Thank you so much.
I think Mr. Andrews was nice.
Thank you.
Thank you chair and commissioners.
I did send the letter in today about the act construction access mostly on loan oak and my concerns as I'm a retired contractor that's built a lot of different structures, roads.
And resorts and different things like that where we do quite intensive grading and utilities and utility systems.
And the proximity to the access for the construction access that's going to be at the end of loan oak avenue.
I think as Eric said that I mean, Eric the applicant said that they're concerned about the creek as we all are too concerned about the creek.
That using that as an access where there are possibly going to stage cement trucks, boom pumps, screens, whatever else they might use that will create a vibration in the ground and possibly called it possibly cause a cave end.
And then the first plan that I saw they had a stabilized construction entrance there, which they have to cut out a footer more to put the stabilized construction entrance in and it wouldn't behave anybody in the long run formed to do that and then find out that they end up with more problems with a stabilized entrance because they're so close to the creek.
And so myself as a concerned contractor that's not going to build that or anything but at the same time I do have experience in that.
And then I also I'm three to four lots downstream and there has been cave ends from that parcel during a couple of the last heavy rains and.
So I have knowledge of that and I've also been improving my creek bank.
And you know at so I compliment that I really like the project I want to want to say that I think by not not having the path.
It gives a good deal because it's been nothing but trouble there and the folks that are going to buy these homes and be able to enjoy the repairing corridor that's there I just like I do where my my place is.
I think it's important for them and the environment and everything too but I I'm sorry that rose I mean I met Matt rose right in her bike with.
Oh, they're a little boy when they used to cut through that I mean and I really missing those people but it's not feasible for the developer or the city to come up with a path.
It's just it's just not a good idea and so I think that's it good job thanks Tom appreciate it.
Patty you have another speaker.
Is Mr. Neil Cole over here.
And then I have Cindy Deutsch.
Good evening commission.
Oh, well, 25, 60 Bradford. Why why for us just spoke and.
I'll talk on two parts the path is definitely a goal for the neighborhood and as you've received letters for on the Navi Valley bicycle coalition as well as others.
It's a goal for the broader community as well.
I've heard a lot of comments from the commission itself stating that basically this plan is too far gone too far developed to.
To save so here we are ringing it out trying to get the best product we can for what's been delivered.
For the last 16 years I've ran my own design and build firm that specializes in signage.
I've attended probably no less than 35 planning or design review commissions and I've had to fight for sign programs harder than the developers fighting for this plan.
I would love to see the commission use the power and authority it has to focus on the plan that's been presented rather than the window dressing quite literally.
I still failed to see how this plan works to.
In filled more homes that napkins can buy.
If I share my sorrow set himself last meeting that he doesn't know anyone that lives and works an apple they can buy one of these houses and we're spending time figuring out how to add an eighty you to a five bedroom house instead of.
Does this plan match the neighborhood there's still no homes even shown adjacent to it.
But by these homes are going to drive by 48 other houses that are already part of this neighborhood.
This is called a subdivision because they are dividing land but it's actually a neighborhood extension this bullbout that's there with all the great utilities and all the great access.
That is all provided by the rest of the neighborhood and you're now going to have this.
One play of plop down at the end that is in continuous with the rest of the neighborhood and now cuts off access to people that have used it.
The fact that the developer lacks the creativity to find a way to incorporate something that benefits the broader community shows how poorly conceive the plan itself is.
I think that the commission has the privilege and the duty to say stop this isn't the best plan for an apple.
How are we addressing you know lack of lack of housing here six homes that are probably going to be what 1.5 to start 1.8.
And so we're building six homes for people that are probably not working in this area maybe they're going to move to this area.
Instead of building 8 9 10 11 homes for people right here.
So we have actually netted zero gain homes for this town and we have eliminated a throw fair that has existed in the way that it has when we have an opportunity to adopt it in a smart way.
We're not asking for access to the creek or the trees of the repair and corridor there's a way to fit a four foot wide concrete path with a footer to a planting on each side of it and solid fencing that connects growth to low note and that type of path exists all over town.
I was just in the park across the street from Browns Valley Elementary and realized at the end of that which by the way they're repairing corridor follows the same creek.
They've got a straight shot by measured at four feet wide.
It's 75 feet long concrete path that connects to the next called the sack and all of those families have access to that park.
In this case we're looking for access for people to get on and continue on the bike plan.
The second item in the bike plan other than try to push this the bike plan forward is to look for any and all opportunities and new development that could be utilized.
I think this is a great opportunity and I would love to see the breaks just pumped on this.
Thank you.
Thank you for coming up and speaking.
Our next speaker please.
Hi, my name is Cindy Dwight.
And I live at 2375 low note, which is right by the end of the low note.
The last speaker I do have to say one thing about it.
I could have bought that lot and bought built one house.
It's private property and my correct.
So complaining that there's only six houses going in.
I can't agree with that.
I would have loved and not seen anything there we all would have.
But this is happening as private property they have the right to develop it.
My husband and I wrote our bikes through that path and walked through there and picked things off the tree.
The entire 15 years we've lived there.
I don't think that having a path makes sense if there's any access to the creek.
So our preference would be no path if there's going to be access to the creek because the other side.
Maybe it doesn't get the.
It's low note that people come down to get to the creek.
And we've seen crime rose said there'd been none there's been crime.
Somebody came down just two years ago and just ran over the dead in sign because they were so drunk.
So that's the kind of.
Anything that can happen at the end of loan oak, if you give access to the creek.
So I'm a member of the bicycle coalition. I wish there was a path there, but if there's access to the creek,
I don't think we can have a path. Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a next speaker, please.
The last card I have is for Ingrid.
Is there anyone else after Ingrid? Just checking?
Nope. Okay.
Welcome Ingrid.
Welcome. I mean, hello to everyone there.
Okay. I live on Grove Avenue, one of two houses, and the...
Okay. First of all, we're not asking for access to the creek.
We're asking for access to loan oak.
Right now, it doesn't make sense for the construction trucks to go.
I wish I could use a laser pointer to show you the huge, huge, big circle they're going to have to make to get there.
And loan oak is direct, and it's called loan oak estates.
Isn't it not? Why isn't it called robe states or something else?
We're not going through with loan oak.
We have modest homes, nothing like that's going to be built here.
It's a small families with children and you're going to pass West Park Elementary.
You're going to go down to the end of West Park. You're going to go down Bradford to creek side to grove and then in to this field.
Are you can go directly from the freeway down loan oak into the field, which makes more sense.
But it's a very fragile ecosystem repairing area there.
We're sad to see it go.
And the least we're asking for is just a pathway, not to the creek, just from Grove Avenue to loan oak,
for people to take their bikes for children to walk from schools.
You know, mothers to push their strollers, you know, it's like we've been doing this forever now and we're losing it.
And we're not asking to go to the creek.
That's what we're not. So just to clarify.
I just wanted to know how many trees are going to be removed.
You know, there's a huge hundred year old redwood tree at the very end.
I can't show you where I'm talking because I don't have a laser pointer.
I just hope that they won't have to take that one down like they're taking all over Napa.
And then the water.
We're in a drought.
A serious drought is going to continue.
Where's the water going to come from for these huge houses and the ADUs and all that.
You know, I don't know.
It's a concern.
And I've seen that creek become a raging river when we do have rain.
It's huge.
And I just don't think this is the ideal place for six second homes for the people that can afford it.
It just doesn't make sense to anyway.
Thank you for listening to me.
Thank you for coming up and speaking.
Seeing there are no more members of the public for public comments.
Can I get a motion to close public comment?
Move a close public comment.
May I have a second.
Second.
All in favor.
Aye.
So that is the end of that.
So now.
I think it would be liked to invite Eric maybe to.
You have an opportunity to do rebut the things that you've heard.
Some of these things we talked about the last time, but we're going to do it again.
We're going to do it again.
We're going to.
And so they are.
You heard a lot about the pathway.
About the number of houses.
Six houses.
How come it's not nine houses?
Your construction plan was brought up a couple times.
How many trees are you taken down?
Can you speak to water a little bit?
And then when you're done with that I'll see if.
Eric of my colleagues.
I'm having additional questions or comments.
Well, we have you up there.
Thank you.
Please.
Okay.
Again, Eric with even the terms.
I will take these on.
Maybe in no particular order, but please remind me if I forget something.
There are 145 trees on the site.
We are proposing to remove 20 of those.
Of those 23 of them are considered.
And we're going to take a look at the number of trees.
And we will be mitigating for those.
And that's in the project conditions of approval.
In regards to the number of homes.
I think we've heard on both sides.
Some would like more smaller homes.
Some would like fewer homes.
Our.
Goal in proposing the six homes was to be completely in compliance with the underlying zoning of the site, which includes not just density requirements, but also minimum lot size and minimum lot with requirements.
And given that half of the acreage of the site is lost to the protection of the creek.
Six homes was the best honestly that we could do within without asking for variances around the zoning.
And I would venture to say that if we had done that and we had attempted to get 11 or 12 much smaller homes on lots that didn't meet the zoning standards and we're asking for a bunch of variances.
We might see this room packed more than it is tonight.
So we feel that the six homes in compatibility with the underlying zoning is.
Is appropriate here and the least antagonism to the folks in the neighborhood that have other concerns about traffic and how many other homes use the same roads, etc.
In regards to the construction access, I think I've spoken on that point.
The project will go much faster and more efficiently for everyone if we're allowed to access the site from both ends.
We will provide stabilized construction instances at both ends and street sweeping and all the things that we need to do to control tracking out into the neighborhood and you know traffic controls when appropriate for moving you know big trucks and things through there.
So we would really like to preserve that ability.
And I think that will get us out of everyone's hair faster.
The path is a tough one.
We are incredibly opposed to it.
I myself have had to call the police to run people off of the property.
So I know that that's a very real issue.
When I called the police department they were well aware of this site as a place where from time to time people have been down in the creek and doing things that they shouldn't have been doing.
And the reason that they were down there is because the unauthorized access to the site took them right by the creek and it's there's a plateau below the first bank that before you get down to the water that's a pretty inviting space for people to congregate and we don't see any way to put a pathway through this property without inviting folks to take a look at that.
But since we've fenced off the property at both ends we've had that fence broken down no fewer than three times and all by people who have wanted to get down into the creek to bike and hanging out.
I mean we've seen it all down there and I think that considering the neighborhood overall and what it takes to go around just a few blocks we're not cutting off a regional path.
There are no bike lanes on loan oak near our project right now or on creek side or a girl that on you side.
There are no connections to regional trails.
This is really truly a it's been a trespassing issue and and we've we've done our best to control it in the time that we've been there.
I'm not accusing any of our neighbors of of of you know doing anything you know on lawful that they probably didn't know that it was private property and and and and I can certainly understand that when the site was unfenced before we became involved.
But I would venture to say that as much as people like.
Biking and walking through there if we were to propose to put a five or ten foot path through their backyard they would feel very exposed and very much like their privacy and security had been compromised.
And you know at a huge bridge we have to think of the neighborhood but also of our six future homeowners and how they're going to feel.
When we leave this you know when we leave the property to them and someone would have to own and maintain that kind of a path.
Someone would have to deal with any of the negative by products that we've seen and we really don't feel like that's something that we feel good about leaving to six future homeowners.
So again I just don't think that this property is is the place for that and we're we're not for.
There was a question about water.
So new homes are built to the highest standards of water efficiency there's a state water efficiency ordinance that we comply with that includes low flow plumbing fixtures that includes.
You know drip irrigation as opposed to spray irrigation drought tolerant plantings.
It's really a much higher standard than older homes who may not have these features.
And you know we're paying our water capacity fees and everything else to support the you know the maintenance of the overall system to be able to provide service to these homes.
So.
So I have we're almost there and then we can see if our colleagues have additional questions from you there or for you.
And this question is it's not really your job to monitor what the private sector does.
So I've heard many times recently when we're talking about residential projects that oftentimes this turns out to be for second homeowners.
So.
Do you have any kind of profile of who these people are that are going to be buying your product and.
No, I mean we we design our houses to be the most appealing to the broadest cross section of the community and anyone who comes for that you know is interested in purchasing and has the means to do so with more than happy to sell them a house and you know we.
We have no plans to partner with you know companies that.
You know do Airbnb or other types of fractional ownership things you know.
We're just a single family home builder most of our homeowners are you know on our occupants and this is their main residence, but we certainly don't require that nor nor would you choose yourself right.
Right.
I'm on our sense of the house that you have built here in Napa.
Yeah, that you've sold here in Napa as far as you know those are people that actually live here and.
Sure it's it's it's a mix we you know we have a lot of people that do relocate from.
You know other Bay area cities where they feel like they have a hurry quality of life here in Napa and and that's something that they're seeking and so we do certainly see that we do see move up buyers from within Napa.
We see folks who are retiring we see you know we have had a few second.
Homeowner certainly I don't know that we track that in any way.
You know so.
But you know our intent is to build the highest quality home that's attractive to the most number of people.
I get a nice ROI I understand ROI I'm last question.
Could you give us a rough idea of how much is a five bedroom three car garage going to sell for.
Come on well today three months ago or three months from now I guess.
Oh gosh.
Honestly you know we couldn't say I think.
Vice chair Masaro estimated 1.5 the last hearing and and I.
You know but I guess I would say that that's not inaccurate we we haven't priced these homes we don't know exactly what they will sell for.
But that's close enough I just want to make sure that we're kind of it's somewhere somewhere over there got it.
Okay one moment let me make the rounds here commissioner shot well.
Do you have any questions or comments regarding the rebuttals or anything that long ago the applicant standing there.
Oh I don't have any questions for the applicant I have comments.
Okay perfect thank you commissioner Kelly saying same commissioner her photo.
Really quick for the applicant after a homes I didn't see this in the plan but just if you could speak to this but after the homes are completed is there a plan to put up a fence on loan oak.
Yes this was a something that we did not have in the conceptual plans we did discuss it at the last hearing and I think it's.
And I think it's absolutely appropriate that we fence off the end of loan oak avenue.
And we were going to work with public works on the appropriate style for that fencing whether it includes a street barricade as well.
That sort of thing and I think we'll do that in the improvement plans if that's acceptable.
Yeah just certainly could I just concern for a natural habitat roaming around that area so if you consider that into your plans.
What what to know.
Normally, the creek itself would be considered the wildlife corridor, and that will not be cut off.
The creek takes a bend there, and then it moves up towards Mr. Andrews property.
Great, thank you.
Very good. Thank you. Vice Chairman Masaro. No questions.
I have actually one more.
Vice Chairman Masaro mentioned earlier this idea of awnings. How do you feel about awnings?
I guess it depends on how well they're done and whether they fit with the style.
How about well done, and if it was the style, that would be perfect.
Well, you know, I think we can-
I think we can-
My architects was pretty mad.
You know, we, as a plant-on feature, we really haven't done them.
We have seen homeowners do them.
After they move in, typically, what we'll see is people do more like a pergola or something like that in the back yard,
off of that, you know, rear slider, and that would be part of a landscape program that they do.
We don't landscape the backyards as part of our normal.
Oh, you don't.
We do not.
Easy to put the ADU in. Okay.
Yeah.
Cool. Thanks, Eric.
Okay. Please.
Have a seat.
Enjoy yourself.
So, bringing it back to the commission.
This is the time for us to comment, deliberate, eventually work our way towards emotion.
And to wish for a short one, may I begin with you.
Thank you.
First and foremost, I just wanted to thank the applicant for meeting with the subcommittee so quickly as well.
And I wanted to thank the subcommittee for their efforts.
And I'm very glad that you guys met early on, and it didn't take weeks or months for that to happen.
And I'm pretty satisfied with the results of the subcommittee's efforts.
And I just have some comments really that relate to the public outreach and some of the other issues that have come up.
So, in terms of the ADUs, it makes complete sense that they now have the areas there that are delineated and ready.
They'll be, you know, very accessible and easy and more affordable to put in an ADU.
But I am still in the account that it's nice for the homeowner to actually not have an ADU already in their backyard in the event
and the event that they would like to use their backyard in a different way how to backyard activities and such and such.
So, in terms of us requiring or suggesting that the developers or that we incentivize people to build them.
I think, you know, it's a slippery slope.
But I did, I just want to say, I did really enjoy that prefab tour that I went on recently and I liked Commissioner Kelly's comment of using the NAPA and Sonoma ADU.
What is that coalition or organization to work with the property owners, because I wouldn't think that the developer would want the liability of making suggestions for
companies that provide ADUs in the event that it went sour.
So, great suggestion, Commissioner Kelly.
Let's see here.
So, I'm extraordinarily sensitive to the bike coalition and all of the residents who wish to have that path.
But as I mentioned in the prior meeting, when I did the site visit with Eric and we walked down to the creek and I also live near a creek.
I am well aware of the disadvantages of having access to a creek and yes, I also understand that the residents are suggesting that there be a wall and not access to the creek.
I think that, you know, I worked, I worked, I actually spoke with Michael Allen at great length about this and this morning and I've already and I worked with other staff members prior to the last meeting because,
Yeah, I agree that we want to have more paths, we want to have more accessibility for the communities to not have to, you know, use motor vehicles to get from one place to another to have more access to schools and neighborhoods on bike and by foot.
I ultimately, having spent a lot of time working, speaking with staff on this and doing the site visit that I can see the reasons that it would not really be ideal to have this that path.
That's hard thing for me to say.
Tom Andrews okay, so I had mentioned this in the last meeting that I to believe like the applicant believes that more access to the site will allow the construction efforts to move along quicker.
So I, and I, I walked that area at the end and I know where you live Tom because I've met with you on other projects that were the general plan and such.
I, I believe that the applicant's reasons for needing that access from loan oak makes sense.
That's it for now. Thank you, Commissioner. So I will commissioner for title that to put you on the spot, but I was going back back. Yeah, that's fine. Thank you chair.
Now, I really appreciate first and foremost, the vice chair and our commissioner commissioner Kelly for me, part of this up committee and chair for suggesting that we move forward with that and hearing good comments on both ends.
I'm also big thanks to the applicant for willing to work with our professionals on the commission on this matter. I am pleased to see some of the changes the adjustments including what the 80 use.
I just as Commissioner Kelly mentioned and Commissioner shot well as well. I think it's important that we do refer to owners to the Napa Sonoma 80 you component and you know do have some sort of a plan going into this.
Although it's only six homes. I do believe that having the opportunity to have 80 use for the owners that will be purchasing these is a great benefit to our community and in line with the general plan.
And that's well, just also want to be just cognizant of the construction efforts at both ends. I think just making sure that we have point A point B and make it easier for our residents there in that neighborhood. That's our my comments for now.
Thank you chair.
A lot of comments by neighbors, a lot of discussion with the applicant, a lot of questions of the applicant and of course this is our second time looking at this and I'll just
Maybe no particular order you know give some some thoughts. The first regarding 80 use. I agree with the developer that it would be cost prohibitive of them to to build an 80 you at the same time I agree not every buyer necessarily wants an 80 you in their backyard.
So I think that there's a benefit there's a value to having the site prepped and let's say someone buys this and they turn around in five years and sell it and then the new buyer has that opportunity to build the 80 you I think that's value added to the property even if an 80 is not immediately constructed and you know hopefully encourages that maybe to happen at some point.
You know down the road.
We mostly now turn away perspective 80 you clients because it is infeasible for us to do something on a project so small to really fit in realistically to you know an applicant's budget or clients budget.
And we suggest an aposenoma 80 you and suggest that there are companies that will do this you know turn key so you know you sign a contract with them and they hand you the key at the end.
Having this intermediate step taking care will make that a less expensive and hopefully a speedier process so while I favor those I don't favor.
You know asking the developer to to build or necessarily even offer I appreciate the the neutrality but I would ask that that you refer maybe to you know the the nonprofit.
Naposenoma 80 you dot org so you know if an applicant wants to pursue that.
In regard to construction access you know I know Tom Tom and I have been associates for a long time and I designed Tom's house for model and we tried to get rid of the bridge.
But I really think that in trying to disperse it I think it would be hard to say you know loan oak is going to bear all of the brunt or grove cord is going to bear all the brunt.
Hopefully if they can share and it gets the job done quicker.
I am you know all for you know getting in and getting out as soon as possible.
I would like to maybe you know throw out their you know the discussion regarding a pathway wall.
You know a bike path is certainly much wider than a walking path.
As I've looked at this the idea that I don't favor kind of a dead end walking path for for observance of the creek but if you had the shortest possible connection.
A sidewalk or you know AC paved area.
Fencing on both sides to you know prevent access to the creek.
I don't oppose that I don't know that there's enough I don't know if there's enough support from the commission on that but.
You know I I really sort of believe in connected neighborhoods.
You know this parcel has been there for a long time and it's it's had a pathway understand people have been trespassing over it for years.
And maybe a question for Sabrina but at what point do pathways become right away.
I think there's a law that says after so many years that they that they are sort of public domain.
I don't know if you know that.
Yeah for the script of the events I believe it's probably five years but there are certain elements that you have you know that then needs to be satisfied in order to demonstrate that and it would require quite.
But at some point a path sort of becomes.
One that's not restrictive sort of becomes a right away after you know some some time period you know 50 I don't know what the with the timeline is on that.
The way we're to be construct just a walkway through here you know shortest possible route where you know they each the way is going to have to maintain.
All the water retention areas.
The private drive you know if there was a little extra maintenance for the walkway.
But if it if.
Lowknoke was otherwise closed and there was just you know a small walkway through there again I think you're promoting a you know keeping connected neighborhoods flowing.
And I don't I don't think that if someone's going to come to the end of lowknoke and they want to try to access the creek.
I don't think that you know a walking path maybe.
Deters that because people are coming and going.
So I I definitely see the benefit of that.
Again there would have to be I think enough of the commission to to agree with that.
I do appreciate that the applicant has spent the additional time you know working on.
The architecture and reiterate what I said earlier that it would be you know nicer to see these earlier with less time and less cost spent by the applicant to you know give input at an early stage.
And those are my comments chair.
Thank you commissioner Kelly vice chair Missaro.
There's nothing in this project that particularly makes me really excited.
Well but the other side of it is.
Given all of the things that have happened with this project.
I have to look at smaller things now not bigger things.
For example if this project had come to us from day one.
I would say let's start with a connection path and let's let's work around that.
I do understand the issues with the path in terms of maintenance and cost particularly maintenance.
Because then you, you know, do you create an HOA to maintain the path? It is a, it is a headache.
The fact that the creek is there does change the dynamics of whether or not a path should be there.
Because the path does potentially allow for negative use of the creek or negative access to the creek.
So that's a long way of saying that as much as I would like to see the path, I would not force it to become a condition of approval.
As far as access, the reason I asked about the number of yards of dirt, I'd like to lessen the impact on the neighborhoods as much as possible.
And by maintaining the access, construction access through loan oak and through grove.
Hopefully, cuts the impact into the neighborhoods in half, in other words, they're each sharing the access.
In terms of things like the awnings and the consumption of water.
The awnings need, I mean, you'll, so many designs now incorporate awnings.
And the reason is because they actually saved money.
They save money in construction, believe it or not.
I mean, everything we do has awnings, particularly on a western south.
They save money in construction because of savings and insulation and the size of the AC units and all sorts of things.
And then they definitely save money in terms of operational costs for the owner.
So if this project had come to a sooner, I would say, I would, I would be much more forceful on the awnings discussion.
With respect to water, Eric was correct that California has codes having to do with water consumption.
Those codes are obsolete.
I mean, we're in the middle of a drought.
We're, you're three of a drought.
The weather patterns are not really good.
There's been certain communities that have mandated groundwater systems.
And I'd like to see gray water become part of our code.
Or part of the municipal code in Napa.
But right now, neither one of those exists.
And so we can't, we can't tell the, the applicant, well, you have to have a gray water system.
But the one public speaker that talked about the water was correct that we're not going to consume more water because of this.
Every time a house is built, climate change gets worse unless you're at net zero energy and net zero water.
And unfortunately, I don't see these houses being either.
I see these houses as an opportunity for the planning commission and the planning department to do better as a team going forward on all future housing projects.
We need to look at them sooner and we need to look at them within the lens of first the neighborhood the general plan and all sorts of things like that.
I can't oppose this project.
I like to see things different in the future, but I cannot oppose this project.
Well, I realized we're not in church, but I'm going to give you an amen on that.
So, I think we talked about that a little bit in the last reading that moving forward, collaborating, working with planning staff.
If you're how we can do these things better, I mean despite the best efforts of the applicant, it's kind of an underwhelming project.
It's nothing to be really excited about and I'm not sitting up here for my hundred bucks not to get excited from time to time and so I want to be excited about what we're doing.
But having said that we've already been a long road and we.
The applicant is following the rules as they're understood.
Getting encouragement from staff as they should because they're following the rules that includes density and whatnot.
I don't know if there's a way to put this Napa Sonoma ADU kind of thing in any kind of conditions.
If it's just a suggestion then nothing's ever going to really probably happen and I'm looking at Sabrina.
Sure, I would recommend against that because that group is funded by the community foundation and other things.
Why not sure how long the funding is going to be around for that?
Okay, never mind. Well, I don't know how to handle it because well, I guess if they don't want to use it, they being the builder don't want to use it as a.
Value added thing to get better ROI then they don't they don't need to but long as they're aware somebody needs to make the buyer aware that they have that as an option.
No one's twisting their arm, but it's an option and it is building.
The site is designed for it. Commissioner Shaw.
I think that by having.
The area already ready for an ADU is enough at this cool.
I don't know. Well, it's more than we usually get so that's also I forgot to think.
Vice chair.
Massaro and commissioner Kelly for putting in the extra time on this subcommittee.
I think that was a good way to break it off because the way that we were talking the last year there was nothing that.
That the applicant could really walk away with and I don't want to sit here in a public meeting and talk about the pitch of a roof and how many window trim where the window trim should go and whatnot.
Let's see, so I'm all forgetting it done quicker than slower.
So that means two sided access for construction.
The path that's a really tough one. I understand the concept of connectivity and all that but when I look at this little drawing with a little yellow lines.
There are dead ends. One is a dead end in any event and you know when I go on my little.
Health walks of the depth of river trail between Lincoln and.
Trincus.
That's a good example.
And I don't know who's responsible for the city, but there's a lot of deferred maintenance there. There's lots of well worn paths for.
But let hold this drug use whatever and I wouldn't want to buy a million a half dollar house and it's not so much what happens during the day although it's right out there in broad daylight. What happens at night.
So I wouldn't want it if I if I was a homeowner and so as a home builder seller, I would be thinking about my customer.
And it's just not significant enough to really move the needle on connectivity as far as I'm concerned.
I don't know where to do land on all these are you saying that you're giving up on that or.
On this project. Yes. Okay.
I don't really have any more comments. So unless my call we do have one.
Vice chair.
Please close. Sorry, but that's how the rules are set up. I can't accept any public comment now.
I have to kind of go by the rules and Michael is part of the city staff that is opposed to a path being back there.
That's my colleagues. Would you like.
Yep. Okay. Please.
Honorable chair.
Thank you.
The second area that's towards the rear there just so you know towards the rear.
Yeah, the first thing we looked up in this project came in was we looked for connectivity.
It is in our general plan we looked to seek for connectivity which came out of the result of a lot of the neighborhoods in our city from years ago that that.
The backyard might a but another backyard but there's no actual connectivity to get to it without driving all the way around the neighborhood and come out.
So that's always been one of the first and foremost components that we look for.
We look at this in this particular situation.
If you look at the way low note is degrading and the and the creep that is degrading and the existing home that's to the north the north and the very last time when the end of low note.
Boulevard.
We looked at that and thought can we even get a city street in there and we didn't think we could but we did ask the applicant to do a charrette showing a potential.
We looked at a city street getting through that intersection and it didn't work.
It showed that it didn't work for us public works.
We had a meeting about that with Mr. Smith and his team and we determined that it was not feasible.
We looked and we then did think about a bike path or a pedestrian path cutting through there.
However, if you look at the location and I think it was spoke to by Commissioner Sops shot well and a couple others.
Honestly, city staff looked at this and thought this isn't going to benefit anyone other than the immediate neighbor the immediate neighbors.
This whole neighborhood is cut off by the creek if you look at it there is no if you get through growth say from from low note to grove while you can do is get back out of the parking come back around to the school.
It's not as though putting a connection there would connect the neighborhood over with browns valley.
There's no there's no linkage by which the neighborhood would gain an access to say a well the schools right there access to like a you know a part of their park or transit or a grocery store.
There is a path that cuts over from grow over to the school.
The school does have a gate on the other side alone oak there is there is the opportunity for people to walk through that way to get to get over to low I'm sorry.
Linda Vista so the benefit of putting a path there is very minimal it really only benefit the homes in the media area.
I understand the neighborhood has been familiar with having this path which is nice little amenity for them however it is private property.
I'll just speak where to what's the rentables and didn't want to go to deep into it.
Honestly I'm not a lawyer but I don't believe there's any way to a prescriptive easement could be had just because people have been walking through there.
That usually happens when there's been a drive way that someone has been using for years and it was never there property and now all of a sudden someone has a dispute with their property.
They claim I've been using this you know for my access forever and I think that's the situation where there might be some merit to that sort of argument but just the fact that people have been cutting across a private property for enjoyment not really out of necessity.
I don't I don't know how that would go but as I spoke to this the layout of the neighborhood.
It doesn't really provide an additional amenity other than just the people that write that immediate location.
There's access to the school from Linda Vista as I mentioned there's access from Grove so what is that little connection going to do also we did look at the fact that the site is impacted.
It reminds me you heard already we would have loved to see far more homes there.
I don't think the neighborhood would have been happy with that but that's it we it's our charge to try and get medium to high density.
However because of the creek setback and we went through several iterations with the applicant team looking at how they could lay out the homes.
And yes the city staff as well as the applicant is bound by the development standards which have a certain minimum lot size and setbacks.
So the the layout that came out was was after several iterations with the applicant team talking to us in advance that we determined that was the most appropriate where they could get the minimum.
Lots because they really have less than half of that site is actually developable so then to compound that by putting a path on there.
Probably lose a lot which would put them under the density range because they're right at the bottom they're right the minimum density.
And yes staff also does look at where the where that path would have to go.
I think commissioner here to you you said it quite if I was if I was my home I would not want that path there and I will speak to this the police department does have an extensive log of issues at this site.
And with regard to other paths within the city there are multiple you know there's there's there's immense logs on on problems they have we asked the police department about the path and they said they would not be supportive of a path there.
They say it's just it's an attractive nuisance given that it would be bound by fences on both sides between two homes it would be slightly it would be you know more less.
It's included.
They did not think it was a good idea they were not supportive of it so for those reasons we thought this wasn't the right location.
There are other locations of the city where past new work well.
Unfortunately this is just not one of them because of the physical frustration of the site as it exists today.
Thank you Mister Allen.
So back to the commission.
Eric I have a suggestion you've heard from the commission.
How important dwelling units are and you've expressed.
You're not in the business of doing dwelling units and I respect that something you can consider.
When we do housing projects we don't landscape the backyard either but what we do is we have a landscape architect design.
The backyards and then the buyers can pick one of two or three options for the backyard.
So we get some control over quality and they get options.
You may want to think about approaching an eight one or more ADU companies to present options for those sites and put together a marketing package specifically for your project so that when you are.
Enticing perspective buyers you can say you know not only do you have this beautiful home in Napa but you also have an option to put an ex auxiliary dwelling unit in your backyard and here's an option from one of the companies that does that.
Because so you essentially create a strategic partnership with an ADU company.
You may want to think about that because I think.
The more of you point maybe one or two with these ADU's will get built and from your viewpoint it may make your project more attractive to a potential buyer so I just want to make that suggestion.
So I think we've run it all the way out.
I wonder if.
And a motion for many, committee.
Someone put it up there and we have it here.
Right here.
Do you got it?
Yes.
I move that we recommend the city council adopt a resolution determining the project is exempt from
sequela and approving a tentative subdivision map, design review, permit, and use permit.
Oh.
So I think you have to finish that.
And then they, right.
That is, yes, based on a determination that the application as conditioned is consistent with the city's
general plan zoning ordinance and other applicable city requirements and policies.
Well done.
Commissioner Shotwell.
There I have a second.
Second.
All in favor.
Aye.
Any opposed?
Motion carries.
Very good.
We have another item on the agenda.
Thank you.
Good luck.
We'll look for that invitation.
Maybe some may be used.
Our next agenda item is the Clay Street Care Facility.
Look at that on Clay Street of all things.
We are.
That's an application for use permit.
To authorize a ten bed residence.
Okay.
So look for the elderly.
And some tandem parking.
There you have it.
So let's start with commissioner.
Disclosures.
Commissioner Totto.
Non-pricissized the fact that I live nearby.
Growing.
Massage album.
So it's.
Very good.
Vice chair.
I drove by the site.
No other disclosures.
Commissioner Shotwell.
I am familiar with the site because.
I was part of the volunteer effort in September of 2020 when the former property owner suffered a fire.
And I was and I.
Help to clean up after the fire.
Good.
Commissioner Kelly.
Yeah.
Post.
Post fire.
I think.
I don't know.
I have any song here but I met with him and saw.
All the fire damage in the property So I'm familiar with it as well.
And my disclosures, that I met briefly with staff this morning, um.
Discuss this all very briefly.
So.
I have.
Well, another disclosure.
I.
I spoke with staff.
I spoke with.
or.
Dr. Dillie.
Speaking of writer.
planning one of the new faces and then we briefly met last time. This for agenda item 7B
Project PL-22-009-1 for Clay Street Care Facility. It's an application for use permits authorize
a 10-bed residential care facility for the elderly, acronyms RCFE, and to allow tandem parking spaces
in the driveway at 2025 Clay Street. The property is located within the TRI-144 traditional residential
general plan designation and the RT-5 traditional residential infill zoning district. The project
size is located on the south side of Clay Avenue. There's Seymour Street to the west,
Warren Street to the east. The lots approximately 9,000 square feet has it existing house
that's approximately 2,779 square feet. It's located within a traditional residential neighborhood
with a mix of residential building types and densities. To the east, a button to the east is
apartment to the west. You have a single family resident and to the south. You actually have two units.
If you stand at the sidewalk, this is a picture of the front of the house. You'll notice on the west side
of the structure. There have been some damage that occurred. For some additional background,
there was a fire that occurred as previously mentioned in September of 2020. At the time of the fire,
it was a six-bed residential care facility. Since the fire of the structure is sat vacant,
it's still in this condition today. It's actually all stud on the inside. This is a picture of
the apartments located on the east side. This single family residents on the west. This is an
in that's located further east and then these are offices in a residential zone so that designed to
kind of fit the context of the neighborhood. Applicant is requesting to operate 10-bed residential
care facility for the elderly. Staffing will consist of three caregivers during the day,
two caregivers at night. The typical shift schedule could be 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. to 12 a.m. to 8 a.m.
there may be a shift in that actual time. There may be some overlap depending on the schedule of the meals
or if additional help is needed so that's somewhat fluid. The applicant would contract with
outside services on an as needed basis. A residential care facility as defined in Napa Municipal Code
Chapter 17.06 in California Health Safety Code Section 1502 means any group care or similar facility
licensed by the State of California for 24 hour non-medical care persons in need of personal services
supervision or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for protection
of that individual. RCFEs deliver care to elderly residents along with assistance with daily living
activities general supervision as needed. To accommodate the 10-bed residential care facility the
applicant does have a few modifications to the existing structure and site and there are some alterations
to the interior of the floor plan approximately 831 square foot addition to the rear of the
roof repairs as needed as well as an extension with that addition and improvements to the facade
so the plan is for that addition to match and be cohesive with the existing structure and repair
where needed as a result of the fire damage. One of two existing sheds on the property would be demolished.
I did want to quickly clarify or clarify that pursuant to Napa Municipal Code Section 1708.06
A single story addition to an existing residential structure does not require the approval
of a design review permit. However the applicant would be required to supply plans to be reviewed and
approved by the City Department. These plans shall conform to California building and fire code
satisfy the conditions of approval if approved and meet the requirements set forth by community
care licensing division with the California Department of Social Services. That also includes
some annual inspections to make sure that each year that the interior of the building is safe
you know not likely to have an additional fire. In the floor plan there is a living room kitchen
in dining room, eight total bedroom, six of those having a single bed, two having two beds, seven and
half total bathroom, seven for the residents, half bath for staff only, a median room and a staff room.
The parking requirement for residential care facilities is one space for four beds.
With ten beds you know the two and a half the rounds up to the three spaces required
where the applicant is providing four spaces. One space in the existing garage, one space in the
driveway and we understand that is in tandem fashion but because there is a garage it is permitted to be there
but under consideration tonight are the tandem spaces located on the west side and that driveway.
Pursuant to nap a municipal code section 1708.020 residential care facilities with seven or
more residents are conditionally permitted land use so if has six or fewer beds it's permitted by
right doesn't need the discretion of the city and you are also considering the tandem parking permitted
with residential development through the use permit. In approving the use permit you would be required
to make these findings listed here but with that staff recommends that the planning commission adopt a
resolution determining that the project is exempt from sequa and approving the use permit to authorize
the ten bed residential care facility for the elderly and to allow tandem parking spaces in the driveway.
That concludes my presentation open for any questions. Well done writer well done. Do we have any
questions from the commission for staff at this time? We do commissioner Kelly.
Thank you chair writer thank you for the presentation. Just a couple of questions.
So you mentioned this as a senior care facility but does it age restricted or you know if there's
someone who's non-ambulatory or or somehow disabled would it also accommodate
someone who might that. So a licensed care facility for residential care facility for the
elderly is for non-medical. There are some additional uses that are made deferred to the applicant
as a licensed administrator to elaborate on. Whenever there is a bed ridden or non-medical
tenant in there that does change occupancy requirements but I think I defer to the
okay the applicant on that. So may I ask them to kind of give us is there required age range of
just a question. Do you know is there didn't see it before is there any signage proposed for this or
is it just going to appear like a residence on the street? There's no signage proposed at this time
if there was signage proposed it would have to adhere to the sign ordinance and require a
separate permit. Okay and then lastly there's there's a whole bunch of asphalt in the front and I'm curious
whether that's going to be maybe replaced with some pretty landscape or something. At this time the applicant
has a voice that they will be removing that asphalt and it's not a requirement. So the way that structure
sits is although it's a residential care facility is you know residential care facilities are fit
in the confines of most most the time a single family residence and for single family residences it's
not a requirement to have that landscaping by the city. We did have that discussion I defer to the
applicant on their choice but it's not a requirement. Okay and you know the the other reason why I bring that
up is it sort of looks like the entire front yard is a parking lot and there was a record
option that way of that paving being there back to like 1991. So that pavement's been there for a while and
the prior residential care facility did use it as parking the applicant does not plan to use it as parking
wants to fit within the okay you know the context of the neighborhood. So if the if the planning commission
improves the project and then improves the tandem parking then would it be appropriate to if they're not
going to landscape to restrict that area so we're not stacking cars in front of this house. That's that's
you're just rushing okay foundation it that way. Great thank you very much. And while if I could just
address your question the RCFEs are interested to 60 and older 60 and older oh I qualify.
Wow I get I just got in I get to go. That's really feels really awkward right now so I wish for her
photo under 60. Thank you chair. Two commissioner Kelly's kind of last point there with the asphalt
again very familiar with this area but my question just getting to the point here I saw in the proposed plans
that I don't know there's some potential frontage I don't know maybe the applicant will speak a
little bit more to this but I'll just you know caution us just for any potential emergency services
being used there as a clay can get very you know there's a lot of traffic that passed through there
so I know that that asphalt was used a lot for ambulatory services so just you know caution us to
consider that thank you at this time if the applicant would oh I thought I did I'm sorry no can you pull
up site plant please okay so let me let me go back where's the garage in the back right
in the right oh it's a left front it's in the eastern side so the left side of that side okay so the three
parking spaces there'll be two in the driveway and one in the garage correct there four parking
four is the fourth one one in the existing driveway right in front of the garage okay and in the garage so
and their staff is three so I would presume that these parking space and we could ask the applicant but these
parking spaces are for staff correct based on our discussions with the applicant none of the tenants will
have any of their own vehicles so primarily just for staff and then space whenever
say a like kid picks up their parent or grandchild picks up their grandparent well that was my
question for guess so guess we'll park in the street there is an additional space so there's a condition
that you'll find that no or that staff's recommending that no more than three staff members are there at once
so you'd presume that they might not bring two of their own cars so there would be a space available
for guess
And based on discussions with the applicant, there would be scheduling and coordination efforts there.
So signage there for that one space that says, guest parking only, for example, could be a condition.
So the parking requirement there, I mean, like I said, it's one space for the four beds.
That tandem space that it could, I mean, there could potentially be an empty.
Maybe the parking requirement, yeah, don't only regulate whether it's guests or not.
There's a certain number that's required for bed.
There would be that requirement.
You can ask them.
I'm not asking for more.
Okay, thank you.
Yeah.
At this time, I would invite the applicant to step on up.
Tell us the story.
All right, well, good evening.
Chairman, council or commissioners.
My name is Chris Music and I am the owner of the property.
And I brought along with me my architect Toby Long.
I apologize.
This is my first time presenting or speaking in a forum like this.
You're doing great.
I didn't even notice.
But a little bit about myself and my goal with this property.
I'll keep it brief as it's seen that is kind of the goal.
I have been in a real estate for over 10 years developing single family homes.
I have within the last couple of years.
I decided to get into the residential care facility for the elderly space.
I have found this project and it fit everything I was looking for and the goal that I have for it.
And we've started the process to try to make that come a reality.
And that we stand here before you.
Very good.
I guess that concludes your presentation.
That is my opposite.
Okay, cool. So just hold on one second.
Let me just see if any of my colleagues might have a question for you.
Sorry with commissioner shot.
Well, commissioner Kelly.
Yeah, a couple questions.
Maybe maybe for you and your architect.
So what is your proposed status?
What is your proposed status with all the AC paving in front of the house?
Who you?
Posting to keep it or landscape.
So for the landscaping in the front or the area in the front,
it was our intent to remove a good amount of that asphalt to make it more landscape.
And aesthetically pleasing as you enter, you know, drive up to home.
Obviously, functionally it would be great to have the additional space to park.
Especially for ambulances, a thing of that nature.
But just to attract residents and their family members,
specifically who are most likely making these choices for them,
you know, the beauty of the home is part of it as well.
So with the parking that's on site,
we feel they will have what we need for parking for the staff.
Pick up, drop off as well as if there's a situation where
an ambulance is needed.
Okay.
So with regard to the parking, maybe a question for staff,
if you have,
you've got the two tandem parkings on the side.
Can you have, let's say,
there's someone showing up to pick up,
or there's an ambulance or something.
Obviously the ambulance is going to pull in wherever I can,
but can you have like a loading zone behind the two tandem parking,
if it's just someone's arriving to say pick up their grandmother.
Yeah, I mean, I suppose we can,
as long as it's not impeding the sidewalk or anything,
and it's far enough off the street,
sure, but I guess kind of is my clue to
they do meet the minimum parking requirement as they are now.
So I guess I don't know if you're talking about taking one of those four,
including a loading only or anything.
No, I'm maybe the two on the side,
maybe they've been tucked back a little further
and then you have an extra space for like,
pick up or drop off or something.
It's, I guess it's really a fifth space,
but it's not a space,
but there is a provided area to,
you know, for temporary use.
Yeah, I mean, if the applicant's amenable to it,
that's going to be the condition sign.
That's what I see.
That's what we're talking about.
We only have two kind of spaces in the residential property.
So kids, your question could that happen?
Sure.
But could citizen staff say,
we recommend you prove that no.
Okay.
Could you put a green 20 minute green curb out front?
For that, if the, if the concern is ambulances and
grab and go or whatever.
That would be required.
That would give us the recognition.
Sorry.
Oh, please.
How many can you fit in the building?
That would require public works.
I have to have to make that call.
The planning commission doesn't have the authority to require.
That would require that.
If public works, of course, that's not here.
We could, we could, we could certainly take that to them and discuss that.
And see if it's a possibility, but it is kind of an act,
not an act of God, but it's an act of our public works director,
making it a good determination that it's necessary,
and also not derogatory.
You understand, the city staff gets a lot of inquiries about people
wanting green curbs or red curbs.
We just can't throw them out wherever we wish.
So we have to be a determination which,
so we could, we could commit to looking into that.
But we certainly couldn't, we make that a condition.
It required it.
And it would have to be a very compelling,
it was a very compelling reason to act.
It serves to do the ask.
There would be, like we said, the driveway as it is,
if a truck, if a fire ambulance comes up,
they're going to be able to park wherever they have to.
Well, that's what they usually do.
Exactly.
So writer.
Oh, writer.
I think wanted to add to that.
Did you?
Well, I will add that.
If you, if you do visit that section of Clay Street,
it does specify that there's no parking.
It is a single lane.
It is very tight in that area.
It would be up to public works.
But I did want to add that.
Yeah.
I was, I was, you know, I know that's kind of a busy area.
I wasn't necessarily suggesting that.
But, you know, if the two tandem parking spaces were tucked back far enough
and they were, they were marked.
I'm not suggesting anybody park there as a pickup or drop off.
But we would officially recognize the two spaces.
And then the other question are all the access points.
Are they accessible?
The door?
All the doors?
Correct.
Okay.
Very good.
I think that's all the questions I have.
I wish you heard thought of that.
I already asked you if you had questions for the.
You.
Nice chair.
Staff.
This is reading as a use permit.
So does this facility already have a use permit?
Yeah.
Use permit is not required for a sick bed.
Residential care facility.
So anything above that requires the approval.
I see.
So we are looking at a use permit.
We're not just looking at tandem parking care.
Correct.
Okay.
So for the applicant.
It seems.
So far that our concerns are.
The front paved area.
In other words, we don't want to turn that into.
We don't want to turn that into parking.
You know, people are just going to go in there and park.
So I mean, you're, you're, you're plan of the garage parking space in front of it.
And two in the driveway.
Frankly, makes sense in a meet your minimums.
But we want to then make sure that the street elevation is, as you say,
Mr. owner, beautiful and attractive.
And we don't really want extra cars parking there.
So are you agreeable to removing that pavement or in some way.
I think it so that is not parking and it has been landscaped or.
Pervious.
Papers or something like that.
Yes.
I am agreeable to.
I.
I understood that that was already the plan, but if it is, it is now.
Yeah.
Okay.
Cool.
Right.
On any of all the thing, thank you.
Okay.
If there's no more questions.
Oh, wait.
Commissioner show.
Oh, thank you so much.
Thank you for hearing us tonight.
My name is Toby Long.
I'm the architect working with Chris.
It may be that simply by striping the tandem spaces in the driveway.
We leave a de facto zone that I think.
Commissioner.
It's up to you.
You're speaking to.
I think we will be willing to do that.
And I think landscape in the front is a great idea.
We'll help with everything from making the street more attractive to storm water management as well.
Awesome.
Thank you so much.
Please have a seat.
Yeah.
If that's an issue with staff.
You didn't hear it from me, but you know.
It won't be signed as parking.
If I could add one more thing to that.
Something that we probably didn't talk about or identify is those two tenant parking spaces.
Because they are not leading to a garage space.
They do have to be 20 feet back.
They cannot park in the front set back.
So there will be an area that is not officially a parking space, but a car.
If it had to could pull in there and park there.
We're not condoning that.
Right.
So this would be the time that we would go to public comment.
And is there anyone from the public that would like to speak?
I'm kind of looking over there because, man, you don't have any public left.
She's your friend.
That's so cute.
But she can still talk if she wanted to.
We're having a birthday weekend.
And she is here from San Diego.
And you guys are really raining on my phone.
How much fun?
How much fun is this?
Well, I just, I just had my birthday.
So maybe I can get in on the birthday week.
Oh, wait.
So you sure you don't want to come up and speak as a member of the public though.
Okay, thank you.
So since there's no more requests to speak.
I was motion to close.
Thank you. May I have a second.
Amen.
All right. All in favor.
Hi. So, um, you guys want to talk about it?
Or do you want to make a motion? Or what do you want to do?
I only wanted to say I am so appreciative of what you're planning on doing.
And, um, I just am very grateful.
Thank you.
Oh, yes.
And I would say make sure there's enough electricity for hairdryers in every bathroom and so forth.
No, I echo.
Thank you so much for, you know, taking a nice sore and returning it to the community and putting it to, you know, really beneficial use.
I know we talk about, you know, 80 use, but here's a, you know, here's a building that will occupy, you know, ten members of our communities.
So thank you for doing that.
We should have thought of.
Yeah.
Just like my fellow commissioners said, I mean, just really excited to see this area.
Again, very close to why grew up and just excited to see that it's growing from six to ten beds and yeah, perfect use for our community.
Thank you.
Mr. Vice Chair.
I agree. I like it.
And don't take the following comment wrong.
I'd like to see a condition of approval that the pavement is removed and it's changed out for landscaping.
And the reason I say that is something could happen to you,
the property gets sold and somebody leaves the pavement.
So if we make it a condition of approval, it follows, it follows the land.
And it sounds like you're amenable to it, and I think, you know, like the thumbs up.
So I like to add that condition of approval that the pavement in the front that that will be removed and some form of landscaping will be put in its place.
I would just offer my full throttle support and thank you.
It's definitely something that I would call public benefit.
And as we get older and we're over 60, would like to have a place to put our head.
It's indignant.
And it'll, and you know, and with a nice front yard.
And just to add to that, I think that this is, you know, it's kind of a hybrid sort of thing where, you know, there's probably dignity in, you know, a smaller home that has, you know, lots of, you know, there's a living room in kitchen and areas.
It's not some huge, large care facility.
And so, you know, if this pen pencils out for you, maybe there are, you know, other places you can explore in the community as well.
We would support you.
So vice chair, since you had an additional condition, I would like to nominate you to make the motion.
Second.
I move.
What, where's there? Is that it? Okay.
That we recommend to city council to adopt a resolution.
Determining the project is exempt from sequo.
Are we going to city council?
No.
Very kind of action.
You're done after us, folks.
Okay.
We.
Why don't we have a trouble with this?
Staff recommend, no, the planning commission.
Would like to approve a resolution determining that the project is exempt from sequo and approve the use permit to authorize a 10-bed residential care facility for the elderly.
And to allow tandem parking spaces in the driveway with the additional condition that the front pavement will be removed and landscaping will be put in its place.
Second.
Motion scenery.
Thank you gentlemen.
Thank you.
Sorry, taken as a while to get there.
In vice Chair, that was drought.
almost their boys and girls. So, Edmund reports there aren't any comments by commissioners
and staff and I really go staff first. I know I just want to update that council this past
Tuesday. They adopted a fee for the Parkland program. So, for Parkland's that are going to
become a reply for a permanency. It'll be $10 a square foot for the space that are occupying the
Parkland program. So, Rick, you're sharing that because it's kind of a planning urban planning kind of
thing even though we weren't really involved in that. Yeah, just sharing what council did on the
two days ago. What did they also did was the oxpho stage. So, can you just, for everybody's,
I don't know if it's the oxpho stage. Does it know what it is yet? Okay, I'll look.
Why not with the stage? Oh, yeah. But, that A stage, that stage.
All right, I'm well aware of this.
Well, I extended it for another year.
Well, it's not really an extension, but there was always a chance that it wouldn't.
And so there's some discussion about which side of the state should face and mess up the lawn
and blah, blah, blah. So anyways, there's that. How about from my fellow commissioners?
Ricky, a question. Do you have any idea how many meetings will have between now and the end of the year?
Planning commission?
Yeah, well, see, we don't have anything on the agenda.
I don't believe for the the first one in December.
But the second one, we might have an item or trying to track for it's a bank use.
And right around 15 first street over here.
And once the window closed for an agenda item for the first one in December,
could one still be added or is that window closed?
I think that one is closed by now.
The next one is the third week in December.
Correct. The next one is the third week in December.
Okay.
Is everybody going to be here? It's the holidays.
I'll be there.
It's after I come back from Mexico.
Show off.
You got nothing?
Okay.
Well, I have a speech.
First.
No, but no, serious.
Maybe at the next meeting we can start planning for getting together on some residential design guidelines updates.
And I very much want to, I just want to point out that just before COVID with your predecessor here,
we had a plan to go around a little bus and look at project rendering that we approved and what we actually got.
And that was not just residential.
That was the camera hotel.
There was some other one.
So that's two separate things that I think will make us better commissioners.
All right.
And so Rick, can you find a way to put down your endless list of things to do?
The bus to where is the location?
And then lastly, so I'd vice chair.
Massara and myself are up for reappointment.
You never know.
Especially with me.
But so we're both reapplying.
I work reapplied.
And that is, I believe on the 20th of December those interviews.
Does anybody know?
Oh, how do you know?
It's actually been January 17th.
I'm going to try it out.
So we might need you guys to still stay on for a meeting in January before you get reappointed.
If we get reappointed right now.
So I would still be, even if I don't get reappointed.
I very much would encourage the commission to pursue those two things.
I just mentioned because it will make you all better commissioners.
And with that.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Really?
No, really, really.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Okay.
So commission.
Question for staff.
When do when does the general plan get updated in the municipal code and you track it and all
of that?
When does that happen?
The general plan adoption should be fine.
Right.
That's.
Tomorrow at five.
I think it is tomorrow 5 p.m.
This is official.
And then we've been working with our console already.
We had to kick off for the the bridge zoning.
If you want to call that.
Right.
So we anticipate that.
We'll be done sometime in March.
So as far as when you try to look up zoning that the updates will,
won't be there.
Listen there until until next March.
Well, that's when we would bring the crosswalk zoning to,
to for consideration and option.
Right.
And then it will take a little bit of time after that.
But yes, sometime in the first court.
Okay.
Next year.
Very good.
Thank you.
Is there anything else you can do to drive this out for you, Bob?
Thank you.
We are adjourned.
Thank you.