[0:02] Chair Garcia?
>> Here.
[0:04] » Vice Chair Mendoza?
Commissioner Gallardo?
[0:08] » Here.
>> Commissioner Urquidez?
[0:10] » Here.
>> Commissioner Zavala?
[0:11] » Here.
>> Thank you. Uh is there a motion to
[0:14] excuse uh Vice Chair Mendoza?
[0:19] » I make a motion to excuse Vice Chair
Mendoza.
[0:22] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> I'll second that.
[0:26] » Motion and a second. Um all in favor?
Say I.
[0:31] » I.
>> I. Any opposed?
[0:34] Motion carries. Uh we can now stand for
the Pledge of Allegiance.
[0:41] Commissioner Zavala?
>> [clears throat]
[0:48] » Ready, salute.
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[0:51] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation
[0:57] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for
[1:04] » Thank you for that.
[1:08] » [clears throat]
>> Uh we are at public comments from the
[1:11] audience regarding items not on the
agenda. Are there any public comments
[1:16] from the audience?
Any emails? Hands raised?
[1:22] » No, I'm seeing none.
>> Okay, we'll close public comments and
[1:26] move on to the consent agenda. There's
one item, which is the adoption
[1:30] of the May 5th, 2026 Planning Commission
minutes.
[1:37] Entertain a motion when you're ready.
[1:41] » I make a motion to approve the uh
meeting minutes for the Planning
[1:45] Commission meeting on May 5th, 2026.
>> We have a motion. Is there a second?
[1:50] » I'll second.
>> Motion and a second. All in favor? I.
[1:54] Any opposed?
Motion carries. We can move on to public
[1:59] hearings. We have two public hearings
this evening.
[2:01] Our first public hearing is the
consideration
[2:05] of a resolution for a design review
approval for a new two-story 7,147
[2:11] square foot commercial building with 21
parking spaces on a 22,400
[2:17] square foot parcel
at 447 El Camino Real, Assessor's Parcel
[2:23] Number 024-022-004.
[2:30] Uh, may we have a staff report?
[2:34] » Thank you, Chair, members of the
Planning Commission. Brent Slamer here,
[2:37] contract planner for
the city. And first item we're looking
[2:41] at is 447 El Camino Real
design review approval.
[2:46] Um
across the street from the Inn
[2:50] um adjacent to
um another existing building
[2:58] that holds a number of automotive uses
and other off other general
[3:03] offices uses on uh El Camino Real.
Uh the particulars, it's a two-story
[3:09] structure 7,147
square feet. It's a vacant 22,400 square
[3:14] foot square foot lot. Um seven tenant
spaces are planned, two on the bottom
[3:19] floor, five on the top. Um the bottom
spaces are 1,512. The second floor
[3:25] offices 533 square feet. Uh no users
identified at present. Um
[3:32] talk a little bit more about setbacks.
Uh the in the in this zone there are
[3:36] zero-foot setbacks all around.
Um 21 spaces for parking on the side of
[3:42] the property. Signage would be deferred
for you know for the future. A unified
[3:47] uniform sign program would be required
once businesses are established.
[3:52] Um
since our last meeting, the
[3:56] HCD approved the building moratorium
back in June.
[3:59] Um so, any approvals that come from
planning at this point are automatically
[4:03] told,
meaning that they don't the the clock
[4:07] for approvals doesn't start until
they're able to actually receive a
[4:09] permit. So, um
during this time, people may move
[4:14] forward for planning approvals, get
planning approvals, and then
[4:17] um the time clock does not start until
the building moratorium is lifted and
[4:21] they're able to get a permit. Um
so.
[4:26] » [clears throat]
>> So, we wouldn't Well, we don't have a
[4:29] date of when that clock will start, but
it'll be
[4:32] it's typically design review approvals
are 3 years, it'd be 3 years after the
[4:36] date that the moratorium is lifted.
Um
[4:41] this is what the building elevations
look like. Uh said I'll defer to the
[4:46] architect for more explanation and the
questions that you may have. Um we do
[4:50] have representatives here today for the
project. Um
[4:54] if you look at the site plan here, it is
a long and narrow parcel.
[4:58] Um so, the building
while we encourage buildings to be
[5:02] oriented along El Camino Real, uh it
just the the way that this lot is
[5:07] situated makes it difficult to do that.
Um
[5:12] for a long time, we went back and forth
about
[5:15] the property. The property goes back to
9th Street,
[5:18] um but it's very narrow back there, and
there was long consideration about
[5:22] whether or not there would be a
connection to 9th Street. Um so, you see
[5:25] here there's a turnaround
uh in the back of the property. There's
[5:29] 24 parking spaces in the building up on
the side of the property.
[5:33] Um landscaping
[5:38] and
[5:41] um and you see here. So, building's
oriented on the
[5:45] which would be the north
of the of the property
[5:49] um here.
Parking on the side. Um there's a
[5:55] go to
[6:02] There's a stairwell up on the top.
There's two There's two units on the
[6:06] bottom, five units on the top. And as I
mentioned
[6:09] um
our architect and applicant are here to
[6:12] answer questions about the building.
Um
[6:16] from our perspective we looked at
parking, we looked at landscaping, we
[6:19] looked at all the um other requirements.
[6:25] Um no significant obvious questions have
been reviewed by all departments
[6:29] for access, for other things. Uh you
have a whole list of conditions of
[6:33] approval that are set up. I'm here to
answer any questions that you might have
[6:37] uh about the project. Um also, as I
mentioned um you have
[6:42] our architect and applicant here
to discuss the project and answer any
[6:46] questions that you may have for them.
[6:50] Staff recommending approval of the
project.
[6:52] » Thank you for that staff report. Are
there any questions for staff before we
[6:55] open the public hearing?
>> Uh yeah, I have a question.
[6:59] » Sure.
>> I think you already answered it, but
[7:02] just for my clarification, even if this
was approved
[7:06] it really wouldn't go into
I mean
[7:10] they wouldn't get in a permit, correct?
>> That is correct.
[7:12] » Until the moratoria moratorium is over.
>> That's right.
[7:16] » And that's not We're not going to see
that in the foreseeable future, are we?
[7:21] » Um
it's hard to say exactly when that's
[7:23] going to be, but yes, it's going to be a
few years.
[7:25] » I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt
you. But I was under the impression that
[7:29] no one would issue permits or get
permits until the issue with the
[7:33] wastewater was uh resolved. Am I correct
in that?
[7:37] » Building permits, yes. You can get a
planning permit, but you can't build
[7:40] anything until that
>> Exactly. Exactly. So,
[7:44] that project over there, I mean,
that's going to take a long time to get.
[7:48] I mean, that's not going to be done
6 months, 7 months, whatever.
[7:52] » No.
>> I mean, that expansion over there, they
[7:54] were talking one time, if I remember
correctly, that would going to take up
[7:57] to a couple of years to get it resolved.
>> That is correct.
[8:00] » So, again, being redundant here, even if
we approve it,
[8:05] they're not going to get a building
permit.
[8:07] » That is correct.
>> Okay.
[8:10] » This is the old Byers.
Uh
[8:13] based down here. It used to be
buildings.
[8:16] » This is a new building?
>> This is Go back to the map.
[8:20] This is the uh elementary school.
This is the inn over here.
[8:26] Um this is the Me Memorial
um
[8:30] medical clinic right here. This is where
there's the
[8:34] auto parts and the auto stores here.
Um this is where the donut shop.
[8:40] Uh anyway, it's this lot right here,
this vacant lot. I don't know if my
[8:43] cursor is moving with you, but
this lot right here. It backs up to 9th
[8:47] Street at the end of 9th Street.
Yeah, vacant lot.
[8:52] » So, so Bob, it goes It would be next to
that long tin building that's there
[8:56] where they have a tire shop and all that
stuff. It would be on the south side of
[8:59] that.
>> Exactly.
[9:03] » Any more questions for staff?
[9:07] Hearing none, we'll open up the public
hearing.
[9:11] The applicant here.
[9:16] » Good evening, council, or uh
if the chair that uh I'm Matt Reinhardt,
[9:21] I'm the architect for this project. And
uh I'd like to thank staff for bringing
[9:26] this to the planning commission.
And uh
[9:29] if you have any questions of me, uh
I'll be more than happy to answer them.
[9:34] Uh
I think uh
[9:37] some of the I
read all the conditions of approval.
[9:40] They're all acceptable. I'll actually go
over one with
[9:45] staff. I believe it's just a typo and it
was
[9:50] if I would just
the condition of approval on page 25,
[9:57] item 41.
It talks about the
[10:00] » [clears throat]
>> the sidewalk park strip and it's like
[10:05] there's a a full width sidewalk in that
area, so
[10:09] there's no landscaping in that sidewalk
area. It's just a full width sidewalk.
[10:15] You could probably just change that.
[10:19] And if you have any questions, I'll be
happy to answer.
[10:25] » Thank you for [snorts] that. Does
anybody have any questions for the
[10:28] architect?
[10:35] I have one. Okay, so
you indicate that there are seven tenant
[10:40] spaces for this project. I just want to
clarify that they're all going to be
[10:44] commercial tenants. [clears throat]
>> Yes, they're all commercial tenants.
[10:47] » Because I
>> Offices, office suites upstairs.
[10:49] » I was looking at the toilet rooms on the
second floor and there's showers in
[10:54] there.
>> There is.
[10:56] » You're having showers in your office?
>> There's a lot of people that want to
[11:00] shower in their private office, so
the
[11:05] that's what we're doing.
>> So this won't be converted to
[11:09] residential.
>> there's not a cooking area in there.
[11:12] » Okay.
[11:16] Is it every
space with a shower or is it just
[11:20] » has a shower.
[11:32] » Is staff okay with that
change on condition of approval 41
[11:37] regarding the landscaping?
>> Yes.
[11:45] » All right, any other questions anybody
have for him?
[11:52] Okay, well,
um
[11:55] there is a motion
on page
[11:59] I just want to say, you know, I went
through it all and it looks like
[12:01] everything is pretty much in conformance
with
[12:05] the zoning codes and um
[12:09] everything.
[12:12] All the conditions of approval are well
written.
[12:16] Okay, so the motion is on page 13 of
your packet, page six of the staff
[12:20] report. Anyone so inclined?
[clears throat]
[12:29] » I move that the Planning Commission of
the City of Greenfield adopt resolution
[12:32] number 2026-04
granting design review approval of a new
[12:36] 7,147 square foot commercial building at
447 El Camino Real subject subject to
[12:43] conditions of approval included in the
resolution.
[12:48] » Uh, do we need to mention the the
language change on 41?
[12:53] In the motion?
>> Yeah, I think it'd be good to just say
[12:55] as amended per
record.
[12:58] » Okay, as amended per the record. I mean
>> Cuz that'll cover that'll cover the
[13:02] action being taken in the motion and
that your reference is specifically that
[13:05] you guys addressed that specific
condition of approval being changed.
[13:08] » Thank you. We have a motion, is there a
second?
[13:12] » I'll second that.
>> A motion and a second, all in favor
[13:16] please say I.
>> I.
[13:18] » Any opposed?
Thank you very much.
[13:24] Our next public hearing is consideration
of a resolution for design review
[13:29] approval for a new 3,151
square foot duplex with a 903 square
[13:36] foot ADU on property located at 619
Maple Avenue. Assessor's parcel number
[13:42] 024092000.
[13:46] And APN 221001168.
That's staff report.
[13:52] » All right.
Uh 619 Maple Avenue.
[13:55] Um
It's a vacant lot. It's owned medium
[14:00] density residential. There's an alley
alongside it uh between 6th and 7th
[14:05] Street. Um
Two uh you gave the number so two-story
[14:10] duplex, single-story ADU. It's a 6,800
square foot vacant lot.
[14:15] Um
[14:18] Setbacks was
are 20 ft in the front, uh 5 ft setbacks
[14:23] on the side. And then there's a
two-story or for the two-story structure
[14:27] 39 sq 39 ft to the rear property. Um
show the site plan here in a second.
[14:34] Each unit has two parking spaces
uh for the duplex they're proposing one
[14:39] covered and one uncovered. ADU proposing
two uncovered off of the alley.
[14:45] Uh there's 2,500 sq ft proposed
landscaping and once again this project
[14:48] is subject to the building moratorium.
No building permit will be issued until
[14:53] the sewer plant issues are resolved.
Expiration dates would be told just the
[14:57] same.
>> [clears throat]
[14:58] » Uh this is the site plan. So on the left
side of your screen is Maple
[15:04] Avenue. The alley is immediately on the
north or is immediately adjacent to this
[15:09] property.
Um
[15:12] Interesting to note so typically under
state law we don't regulate ADUs. They
[15:18] go through ministerially. Um but here
for reference purposes I think as we
[15:22] look at this parcel, this vacant parcel,
um particular particularly as it applies
[15:28] to the parking. So, because the ADU is
located with uh nick next to El Camino
[15:33] Real and the bus stop that's along El
Camino Real, technically you're not
[15:37] required to provide any parking.
Um
[15:40] they're putting two outdoor spaces there
or outdoor, I mean, uncovered spaces
[15:44] over there.
Um the front
[15:48] I'll show the
You'll notice here you have a single car
[15:51] garage to each of these townhomes or to
each of these duplex units with a single
[15:56] car here. Uh for three units, you need
two parking spaces per unit, so they
[16:02] have six.
Um
[16:06] Of course, now with all the rules and
what you can do with converting garages
[16:09] and everything, it sometimes it feels
like we're
[16:13] we really don't have control how many
parking spaces there are on a property.
[16:16] Um
we did want to touch base on that. Um
[16:22] in terms of the architecture you see
here,
[16:25] um
[16:29] it says it you have it you have the
duplex, the two-stories, um the floor
[16:33] plans you have here, if you've taken a
look at those, they're
[16:36] uh three-bedroom units.
This is the ADU unit, or no, this is the
[16:43] Yeah, this is the ADU unit in the rear.
I'm happy to go over any questions
[16:47] specific to to those.
Um
[16:59] So, um zone medium-density residential,
three units allowed.
[17:04] Um
any questions over architecture,
[17:07] anything, happy to help answer them. I
don't know if they're if the architect
[17:13] or Yeah, I think I think architect's
available on Zoom, it looks like. Um
[17:18] we'll see
if he wants to comment or anything.
[17:26] But other than that, um
I'm happy here to answer any questions
[17:31] um
about this lot.
[17:32] » is the ADU on there?
>> 903 square feet.
[17:44] » Any questions for staff before we open
the public hearing?
[17:48] » Yeah, I I'm trying to find how far back
is the ADU from
[17:52] the main building?
>> 10 feet apart.
[17:54] » I'm sorry?
>> to the bottom of the site plan,
[17:57] » Okay.
>> the structures are 10 feet apart, which
[17:59] is
a requirement.
[18:02] » Is that minimum?
>> Yes.
[18:05] » Wow.
[18:07] I mean
there's
[18:11] What is that?
11th Street.
[18:15] Right off of
a little ways off of Oak.
[18:19] They're putting in an ADU back there.
[18:24] And some things just don't add up to me.
I mean, but that's a completely
[18:27] different scenario
because their front window of that ADU
[18:33] is just a few feet back from a garage
that's back there.
[18:36] So, the only thing they're looking at is
the back of a garage.
[18:41] So, that's what I kind of want to make
out here
[18:45] that they're just not going to be
looking at the back of that building.
[18:49] » Yeah, so
the the ADU requirements um are a lot
[18:54] are a lot less stringent than the city's
zoning requirements, so that's what
[18:58] allows you to put 5-ft uh rear setback,
for example, in this case. Uh we have to
[19:04] In fact, we have to require anything
that's within a 4-ft setback.
[19:07] Um we do have a 10-ft distance between
structure requirement. Um but the the
[19:12] direction from the state has been find a
way to get it done.
[19:15] Find a way to get it on the property
and not a lot of discretion to that.
[19:19] These are the standards if you meet the
standards, you need to allow this.
[19:23] Whether it looks pretty is I really have
no
[19:26] I hate to say that it's not of concern
to the state of California.
[19:29] » Okay.
>> Or what your view what your view looks
[19:31] like.
>> Yeah.
[19:34] I figure maybe they could paint a big
mural in the side of the garage and look
[19:37] at that.
[19:40] » Maybe
suggest that to the architect.
[19:45] » Any other questions for staff?
I have a quick one on your
[19:50] staff report on page 433 of the packet
under lighting.
[19:54] I can't tell if that's a concern or
something we should look at
[19:58] um
design review requirements should
[20:02] consider outdoor lighting to determine
if the proposed project should be
[20:06] approved. The proposed is standard
Hampton Bay LED outdoor residential. Is
[20:11] that acceptable?
>> Yeah, there's no no significant issues.
[20:15] It's more just this is what they're
providing and this is how it meets with
[20:18] their requirements, but no.
[20:24] » Okay, there's no other questions for
staff. We'll go ahead and open the
[20:27] public hearing.
>> I got to I got to ask you
[20:28] » Oh, I'm sorry.
>> Okay, thank
[20:32] you. We were saying that uh
it was an ADU going up
[20:37] building right now but uh
>> Yes.
[20:41] » Over on 11th between 11th and Palm.
Are they uh
[20:46] are they under uh
a mandatory on that or they can build it
[20:50] on their own property?
[20:54] » Um
They were Let me with the question as
[20:57] far as are they allowed to build are
they allowed to get a permit for that?
[21:00] » Yeah.
>> It would depend on the time they pulled
[21:02] the permits. So, you notice there's a
number of properties under construction
[21:05] right now.
Um, so if they pulled their permits
[21:09] prior to that June 19th date, they can
continue and finish their construction.
[21:14] And I'd have to you'd have to give me
the address, but I we can verify that
[21:17] for sure that more than likely they were
issued a permit before that date.
[21:21] » Yeah, cuz
previously we had been told that no
[21:25] permits would be issued after
like mid-September of last year.
[21:31] But then
that was proven that that wasn't true
[21:34] because there was still issuing after
that.
[21:37] » Correct. So, when the City Council
approved the moratorium that went into
[21:40] effect back in September, it was always
contingent upon
[21:44] » State approving it.
>> State approval. State approval didn't
[21:46] happen until June of this year.
But now it's happened. Everyone that
[21:52] comes to us is aware of those timelines.
They're aware of the requirements
[21:56] that they can be issued a planning
permit, but they will not be issued
[21:59] building permits at this point until
until the until the moratorium has
[22:04] ended.
>> So,
[22:06] from what I understand, permits were
still being issued up till June of this
[22:10] year. Is that correct?
>> Yes, and we are still issuing permits
[22:13] now for things that do not require or do
not affect the sewer. So, water heaters,
[22:18] roofing, re-roofs, you know, things like
that. We'll still issue those permits,
[22:22] but if it impacts the sewer system,
since June 19th, we haven't issued new
[22:26] permits. But we are continuing to
complete all the permits that were that
[22:30] were pulled before that time. So, there
are still a number of projects under
[22:34] construction right now.
[22:39] » Okay.
>> If you get us an address, we'll be happy
[22:41] to check on it for you.
>> I'm just worried about parking.
[22:45] You know, with parking status going
around here in Greenfield, you can't
[22:49] find a parking place.
Now you got
[22:53] four you're going [clears throat] to
have four six parking spots.
[22:58] And then you're going to have outside
parking, too?
[23:02] » You mean street parking?
>> Yeah.
[23:04] You would probably you'll be able to
put with the curb cut there, you're
[23:08] going to be able to put maybe two
uh cars and then they might be being
[23:12] used now as we speak.
Um
[23:15] once again, I come back to parking
parking has been taken
[23:20] very much out of our hands these days
with the ADU rules.
[23:23] Um we can argue about it all we want.
I'm just not sure how we address them.
[23:27] Um with the with the codes that we have
because especially with the garage
[23:31] conversion allowances and and things
like that. Um
[23:36] I wish I had a better solution for you.
Uh right now it's my I just all I can
[23:41] say is is contact the governor.
[23:51] » So that concludes questions for staff.
>> I just had one note for the record in
[23:56] regards to the resolution. I would just
recommend on any motion taken that I
[24:01] think there was just a clerical error in
the resolution itself. In the staff
[24:04] report it references section 15303
of the secret guidelines for a small
[24:11] structure new construction secret
exemption
[24:15] and in the resolution it references
15332 which is infill. I just recommend
[24:19] because that's just a clerical thing.
I'd recommend that any motion to approve
[24:23] the resolution reference
section 15303
[24:29] of the secret guidelines. Um
approve the resolution with
[24:34] reference in the resolution to 15303 of
the secret guidelines just to be
[24:37] consistent with the staff report. The
staff report um
[24:41] makes the secret exemption
the new construction pursuant to 15303.
[24:46] » Thank you.
[24:50] So would it be 15303 in place of 15332?
>> Correct.
[24:58] » All right, thank you for that
clarification. Um, we'll go ahead and
[25:01] open the public hearing.
Are there any public comments? I see uh
[25:08] a few people online participating. Now
is the time to comment if you'd like.
[25:15] Are any of these the applicant or
architect?
[25:22] Okay, we have a hand raised under LV.
[25:36] » Hello.
Good evening.
[25:38] » Good evening.
>> This is Luis Vargas with Nstudio
[25:41] Architecture uh with our architecture uh
firm
[25:44] uh for our client in uh just wanted to
say hello and thank you very much for
[25:49] bringing this to the planning
commission.
[25:51] Um, it's been in the work for many years
and unfortunately we are caught in the
[25:57] moratorium uh for the building permit um
as I understand it uh but our client
[26:02] wanted to move forward with with the
planning uh approval and um and if it is
[26:08] possible eventually uh the building
uh review
[26:12] uh knowing that there is not going to be
a permit issued until the moratorium is
[26:16] lifted but uh we appreciate your review
and consideration of this project.
[26:22] » Thank you very much.
Um
[26:31] Does anyone have any questions for the
architect?
[26:39] Okay, hearing none.
Any other public comments?
[26:49] Going once, going twice.
Okay, with that we'll close the public
[26:55] hearing
and open planning commission discussion
[26:58] and decision.
[27:03] Commissioner Zlotta?
>> Um, no, I don't have anything. I'm just
[27:08] trying to picture this on the map.
Kind of
[27:15] I mean
Is it in the corner? Oh, yeah, it is.
[27:21] I didn't have a chance to um
draw anything there, but I looked it up
[27:25] and I I don't think I got a good image
of it online.
[27:29] Um
[27:36] Isn't there a park nearby? I can't I
just
[27:39] » There's a
If you go down the end of the street
[27:43] before you get to the freeway, there's
like a pocket park with a basketball
[27:46] court.
>> Okay. Okay, now I I know where it's at.
[27:48] Okay.
>> It's up here.
[27:51] I don't
know if that's going to help anything.
[27:58] » Um, Commissioner Kitas?
>> Um
[28:02] No, I don't have any questions.
>> Commissioner Beyada?
[28:05] » Yeah, I have a question here. I always
do.
[28:09] Well, let's go on the premise that it's
approved, okay?
[28:13] And
like we've already stated
[28:16] a permit cannot be issued.
But how long can it actually sit like a
[28:21] limbo before they have to go through a
whole process again? Is there a time
[28:25] frame for that?
>> Three years plus the time that it takes
[28:28] for the plant to get finished.
So, if they don't pull a permit, so
[28:32] let's just say just theoretically the
plants completed and the moratorium's
[28:37] lifted on July 1st, 2028, which is you
know, almost 2 years from now
[28:42] they would be good till 2031 when go
pull a permit between that period
[28:46] between 2028 and July 1st, 2031 to pull
a building permit. If they didn't do it
[28:51] by then, then they they'd have to come
back.
[28:55] » Okay.
[28:57] » Thanks, Chair.
>> No.
[29:00] » I'm good as well. So, if there is a
motion
[29:08] on page
five of the staff report, 35 of the
[29:12] packet, and uh please don't forget to
include the uh
[29:16] correcting verbage for the uh
resolution.
[29:35] » I move that the Planning Commission of
the City of Greenfield adopt resolution
[29:39] number 2026-05
granting design review approval of a new
[29:45] 3,151 square foot duplex with a
with a 903 square foot ADU on property
[29:52] located at 618 Maple Avenue subject to
conditions
[29:56] of approval included in the resolution
referencing
[30:01] uh resolution
section 15303. Is that what it is?
[30:05] » Correct.
>> Yeah.
[30:09] That's sufficient.
>> Yeah.
[30:11] » Okay. We have a motion. Is there a
second?
[30:14] » Second.
>> Have a motion and a second. All in
[30:17] favor, please say I.
Any opposed?
[30:21] » Opposed.
[30:25] » Four eyes and none opposed.
>> Yep.
[30:28] » Thank you so much.
[30:32] And that concludes our public hearings.
We can move on to other business. We
[30:36] have one item,
a uh request for the deletion of
[30:40] condition of approval number 27
regarding the creation of a homeowners
[30:45] association for the St. Charles townhome
project located at 733 to 743 Elk Avenue
[30:53] APN 024392001
through 006.
[31:00] » Thank you, Chair members of the
commission. So, this project here
[31:03] um is under construction um did receive
their permits prior to the moratorium
[31:08] and is getting closer to uh completion
and um putting out for sale. Um
[31:14] this
pro- this parcel has been planned since
[31:17] the original St. Charles Place project
that was developed by Creek Bridge back
[31:21] in the mid-2000s.
Um when they built the apartments, the
[31:27] the commercial space, the subdivision,
the houses around them, the Village
[31:30] Green Park, all that area. Uh this was
part of that plan. There was a plan to
[31:35] have a number of uh six townhomes with
live-work units at the time. Um later in
[31:41] the the history of those those the
live-work unit requirements were
[31:45] deleted. Um and so we have the six
units that have been proposed. Um
[31:52] the planning commission
and as I said there I probably should
[31:57] have taken a picture today on where they
are and their update, but if you go over
[31:59] there they're they're being built. Um
they're going to look really nice um
[32:05] matching the rest of the subdivision,
but in this case you have attached
[32:09] townhomes.
Um
[32:12] the planning commission at its last
approval when it approved this
[32:16] uh had one condition that required the
creation of a homeowners association. Um
[32:22] we've been I've talked to
other staff members and trying to get an
[32:26] understanding of the purpose of the
homeowners association. Um Greenfield
[32:31] typically doesn't use doesn't usually
require those and for the most part we
[32:35] don't have private developments. Um
we do all our maintenance of of public
[32:41] areas on new developments through
lighting and landscaping maintenance
[32:44] districts. Um so, new the subdivisions
are well aware of those because they're
[32:48] included on your property tax bill and
they fund lighting, landscaping, um
[32:53] street maintenance.
Um so, there's a there's a condition
[32:58] number 27 that requires the creation of
a homeowners association for these six
[33:03] units.
Uh
[33:05] homeowners associations typically are
much larger, have much many more units,
[33:10] and generally cover the the maintenance
of private areas. So, private streets,
[33:16] uh gates, for example, um gate
maintenance, swimming pools, or other
[33:20] common area amenities that uh that are
provided. When we looked at this, when
[33:26] you look at the the areas in question,
um
[33:30] the frontage landscaping is usually
covered by a landscaping district, which
[33:35] this project is subject to in condition
26.
[33:38] Um so, they are in the landscaping
district. Uh fences are typically
[33:43] uh
governed by the property owner
[33:46] themselves or the common area fences.
Uh there are no gates
[33:50] in the sense of any gates over there.
There are no
[33:53] private streets.
Um
[33:56] and one of the other issue was allowance
for access to adjacent properties for
[34:00] maintenance of the exterior of the
building. So, as
[34:03] for example, when you have you have the
just like in the commercial buildings
[34:07] where you have zero one-foot setbacks,
the ability to get to
[34:11] you have to use someone else's property
to help uh fix something that you might
[34:15] have.
Um
[34:17] when they looked at the the fees just to
establish an HOA, it was over $200 per
[34:22] unit per month,
um which is a pretty substantial hit to
[34:26] your property tax bill.
Uh so, the applicant has requested us to
[34:30] look at this,
um
[34:32] see if there was any specific reasons um
that this was put in. As I mentioned,
[34:37] the surrounding development um never had
a homeowners association. None of our
[34:41] most recent developments have had a
homeowners association. None of them
[34:45] have private streets.
Um and there are no private streets in
[34:48] this setup either. Elm is public and the
road that goes around it is public.
[34:53] Um so
um
[34:57] to the under our zoning code, the the if
the planning commission creates
[35:01] conditions, the planning commission is
the one that has to amend or and or
[35:05] delete conditions. It's not something
that we do administratively unless we
[35:08] approve a project administratively. If
the city council approves the project,
[35:11] then the city council has to adjust the
condition. So that's why it's here in
[35:14] front of you today.
Um
[35:18] so that's what we're looking at is this
particular condition. The applicant has
[35:21] requested that we delete it. Uh we've
reviewed this with the city engineer. Um
[35:26] creation of the LMD, talked to the city
manager. Um we're supportive of doing
[35:30] that. Um but if there are questions or
concerns uh about why this was created,
[35:35] we're more than happy to address them or
any other questions that you might have.
[35:42] » I conclude your staff.
>> I conclude the staff report.
[35:45] » Okay, thank you.
Um we'll go ahead and open public
[35:48] comment. Are there any public comments?
[35:55] We have a hand raised on Amanda Lane.
One moment.
[36:01] Uh if you can unmute.
>> Hi.
[36:04] » [clears throat]
>> Good afternoon. Um so I I represent the
[36:08] developer on this project. Um and I just
wanted to Well, first of all, thank you
[36:12] for considering this item to be removed.
Um just wanted to give you a little bit
[36:18] more uh the background on this. Um we
had gone we spent a lot of time on this
[36:25] item. And we were trying to find ways of
how to meet this condition. And
[36:32] we went to different management
companies to try to get fees. And I can
[36:36] tell you the top two numbers that is
driving these fees
[36:40] so high is just the management, not even
the work. The management and the
[36:46] insurance on it. And as it was stated,
nothing is owned by the association. So
[36:53] it's technically would be considered a
non-CID,
[36:57] which is non-common
development, a common interest
[37:01] development. And therefore, it's the
reason for we felt really strongly as to
[37:07] if it can be removed, it sure would make
it easier. But
[37:11] kind of like the gentleman had stated is
that typically when you're dealing with
[37:16] HOAs, you're dealing with, you know, 50
units, you know, where you can share
[37:20] that cost more evenly,
you know, whether it's for landscaping,
[37:25] whether it's for gate maintenance,
pools, clubhouses, things like that. Not
[37:30] exactly sure why
when this condition was set.
[37:34] Unfortunately, it didn't come to me. I'm
the broker for the company.
[37:39] So when I was reviewing all the
documents as we were getting closer,
[37:43] this was something that popped up and um
you know, I I didn't realize that this
[37:49] condition was on there.
So it's when I kind of gotten involved.
[37:53] Otherwise, I would have gotten involved
much sooner. So
[37:56] I really hope that
this is something you would consider.
[38:00] And again, there's zero ownership by the
association. Everything is private.
[38:08] » Okay, thank you for your comment. Are
there any other public comments?
[38:18] Okay, hearing none, Now, close public
comment and move to planning commission
[38:23] discussion and decision.
Start on your end, Mr. Commissioner
[38:28] Peters.
>> Um
[38:32] I have one question and
I don't know how how to how to uh
[38:37] say it. Is it uh so if we go ahead and
say it
[38:42] drop the HOA,
what makes them think that
[38:49] families can move in with with the area
apartment and stuff like that?
[38:55] » Um so, this is a for-sale development,
so they would purchase the unit. Um and
[38:59] then, you know, and of course, it they
won't they won't do that until the
[39:03] buildings have been cleared for
occupancy and the
[39:06] the proper projects have been final,
which hasn't happened yet. Um but as
[39:11] soon as the project's finaled, they are
in as I mentioned before, they are in
[39:15] the landscaping and lighting maintenance
district, which is the typical standard
[39:18] we use for new developments. The the
property owner contributes on their
[39:22] property tax bill the bill for the the
landscape strip in front of the
[39:25] property, the lights, and the roads next
to it. Um
[39:30] so,
it doesn't it if we if we delete the
[39:34] condition, it just means that they don't
have to put together the homeowners
[39:37] association prior to getting a final.
Right now, they can't get a final
[39:42] without this condition in place as you
as and as the um
[39:46] the broker mentioned, they've been
reaching out to companies looking at
[39:49] that. And and I would say from my
perspective, and I wasn't here when this
[39:53] was approved, as she said, generally
HOAs, you know, operate in much larger
[39:57] numbers to help offset the maintenance
cost of the HOA. Um
[40:03] having six it puts a lot of as she said,
administrative burden. Um there's a lot
[40:07] of cost for management of that. Um but
I hope to answer your question that it
[40:13] just means that that's not a
consideration prior to them receiving
[40:16] their final inspection.
>> All right, thank you.
[40:26] » Well, from my perspective,
I think people are struggling just to
[40:30] make mortgage payments, make their rent.
This would just be an added burden.
[40:35] And
I know from what you've said
[40:39] that the decision hasn't actually been
made.
[40:42] And
they will actually will be
[40:46] the the people who purchase the
properties
[40:50] are actually be told towards the end
whether they have an HOA or not.
[40:54] So, I mean going forward, I think they
need to realize as soon as possible that
[40:59] yes, you have one or yes, you don't have
one.
[41:02] So, I think it would behoove us to make
a decision as
[41:07] quick as possible.
[41:10] » Yes.
Commissioner DeLoach.
[41:12] » Um
I just have a comment. I mean, I agree.
[41:16] I I think I'm comfortable
um with removing the HOA.
[41:22] Um but I do think that it would be nice
to have so residents can have some
[41:28] standards and rules and just
I'm looking at it like appearance, you
[41:33] know, um for the building, um
but
[41:39] you know, that's just my opinion.
[41:43] That's all I have.
>> Thank you.
[41:45] » Um I'll wait to check.
>> [snorts]
[41:47] » Um
my microphone on? Yeah, can you hear me
[41:50] okay? Yeah.
Um I'm actually a big fan of HOA. Uh
[41:55] especially with this particular
development here. Um I'm trying to scan
[41:59] through my brain of anything in town
that has
[42:03] any homes that are attached. And I don't
believe there's any in town that have
[42:07] that. So, you have
two, four, six units that are attached.
[42:12] without an HOA, now I can go and buy a
property and paint my house pink, and my
[42:17] neighbor's got to put up with it. Um
you know,
[42:21] does that look good? Does that not look
good aesthetically? You know, it's uh
[42:26] it's probably a probable it's probably a
problem. Um I think HOA, again, the
[42:32] standards
um
[42:34] um
I know there's HOA down in King City,
[42:38] and if you go through those
neighborhoods, they are in tip-top shape
[42:41] because they're required. As far as the
management goes, um not that I'm an
[42:46] expert, but I think if you can get six
people, one of those people can manage
[42:51] it as a homeowner.
Um manage the HOA, not that big of a
[42:56] deal, especially if you don't have any
uh maintenance or anything that that is
[43:01] really uh to a point where you need,
you know, a a management company to
[43:06] manage the property. So, uh my opinion
is or you know,
[43:10] HOA is good. I think it's it's it's the
right move, you know, but uh
[43:16] you know, that would be my
two cents on this.
[43:20] » Thank you for that.
Um
[43:23] for me, I think that this
uh development is a little too small for
[43:28] an HOA. There's six units.
They are all of these homeowners would
[43:33] potentially be the HOA. What what's to
stop them from
[43:38] saying it we don't our fee is $10 a
month. I mean, do they get to set their
[43:44] own fees, or what is that where does
that $200 come from?
[43:49] » Um that may be a question to to for for
the the broker, but generally speaking,
[43:54] you know, every HOA that exists, you
know, they have fees, and they the board
[43:58] or whatever can, you know, adjust things
accordingly based on how much you need.
[44:02] But, you do need set up, you need you
you do have management, you do have uh
[44:07] you know, the requirement for reserves,
you have
[44:10] it's really hard to do with only six
units because of the legal requirements
[44:14] under the state of California to have a
truly functioning homeowners
[44:18] association. Not to mention you need
people to volunteer to to be a part of
[44:22] that homeowners association and what
I've noticed um
[44:26] you know, some some HOAs are successful,
some HOAs in my previous city
[44:31] have fallen apart completely because
they lack the infrastructure or the
[44:36] people inside the development willing to
take on those jobs which aren't paid
[44:42] to and you know, you hear stories of
people who you know, do have really good
[44:46] HOAs and strong HOAs that uh
that keep everyone accountable and then
[44:50] you have some instances where you've had
some HOAs that have all the money
[44:55] disappear
um for lack of a better term. Um
[44:59] we had a case of that in Soledad. So
it's only as good as the people who I
[45:03] think to your point vice chair, it's
only as good as the people who run it.
[45:06] Um
and so
[45:08] you know, it's a it's a question of I
think just for us as policy if we had a
[45:13] development with private roads, for
example, Barolo Circle. Um Barolo Circle
[45:17] has is a is subject to that and they
have a private park in there and and
[45:22] that street on Barolo Circle is private
and those are
[45:27] those are not necessarily attached
units, they're very close together
[45:29] though
in terms of your example that you
[45:32] mentioned.
But
[45:35] you know, I don't know if that's
something that
[45:38] the applicant wanted to address or
clarify further if you wanted more
[45:41] clarification, but
if we had if for example, if anyone in
[45:45] Greenfield ended up proposing a
gated development, absolute and we would
[45:50] if you did a gated development, you
would have to have private roads. We
[45:53] wouldn't make those roads public and by
extension you would have a homeowners
[45:55] association because in order to maintain
those.
[45:58] Um and then it becomes it becomes a
development's responsibility to make
[46:02] sure those things are maintained.
Um
[46:06] it hasn't been typically the practice to
require HOAs in in Greenfield, but um
[46:11] certainly, you know, if someone wanted
to develop a project like that and if it
[46:15] had private amenities, then we'd have to
consider that. So
[46:19] I don't know if you wanted to add
>> Yeah, I just like to reiterate that
[46:22] again, you there's no fences, there's no
Well, there's fences, but there's no
[46:27] gate
allowing access.
[46:31] Um
and HOA was for maintenance of the
[46:34] exterior of the buildings. And again, um
condition 26 including it in the LLMD, I
[46:41] mean, that that's not free.
>> No.
[46:44] » Uh the homeowners will have to pay that
tax as well. So I think this is kind of
[46:49] uh double taxing
in my opinion. But I do see um Ms. Lane
[46:54] has her hand up if she'd like to
If you guys are okay with her addressing
[46:58] us again.
[47:01] Go ahead, Ms. Lane.
>> Okay, thank you. I just wanted to kind
[47:04] of clarify as some of the comments that
I was hearing. Um just to kind of give
[47:09] you a little bit more again. Um the I
know you had mentioned as to like why
[47:14] couldn't the homeowners maybe maybe at
$10 a month that they could do it. Um
[47:18] part of it would require that they have
to have a bank account. You have to
[47:21] establish a bank account. They have to
do record keeping. And so this is where
[47:25] a management company has to come in.
Um and I don't see the homeowners
[47:31] themselves taking on the burden to make
sure that they keep adequate records, do
[47:36] the filings that they have to do, um
keep track of bank account, good records
[47:41] of that. Um so a lot of that fee I if I
recall correctly off the top of my head,
[47:46] the just the management alone was I
believe between $300 um to $500 a month.
[47:55] And then um the insurance was the next
largest numbers. And the insurance is,
[48:00] in a sense, to, um, you need insurance
for the board members, which are the
[48:04] homeowners.
The other thing that I foresee is that,
[48:08] you know, you could find yourself that,
um, let's say that the homeowners buy
[48:13] into it and they know that there's an
HOA.
[48:16] At the end of the day, when the
developer, uh, at the beginning, they
[48:20] will they will serve as the HOA at the
beginning, but as each row as each
[48:25] townhome closes escrow, they are the
ones they are the board members. They
[48:30] become that. They are the association
that it and that that you have a manager
[48:34] that is managing it on their on their
behalf. Um, so that's where it becomes
[48:40] expensive. And then, uh, also to address
the other comment about like the
[48:44] situation that you mentioned about like
somebody can paint their house in pink
[48:48] and then you have to live with it. We do
not intend to get rid of the CCNRs. Our
[48:53] the CCNRs we plan to keep them. So, if
this gets passed tonight to eliminate
[48:58] the item, our intention is to still keep
the CCNRs in place cuz we do agree that
[49:04] keeping the integrity of the homes in
the local Nobody ever wants to live to
[49:08] next door to that one house that's not
being upkeep or whatnot. So, uh, our
[49:13] intention would be to keep that and
record the CCNRs.
[49:19] » Okay, thank you so much for that
clarification. We really appreciate it.
[49:22] » And if I may add to that point, Chair,
about CCNRs. So, CCNRs are required of
[49:27] each new subdivision in the city. Um,
the only thing with CCNRs is that city
[49:33] city staff does not regulate CCNRs.
CCNRs are privately, um,
[49:39] they're on your they're recorded on your
property and they can they have to be,
[49:44] um,
you have to go privately to to enforce
[49:47] those CCNRs. The city doesn't enforce
CCNRs unless those unless it's specific
[49:50] to a code in the municipal code that it
violates. So, um, but yes, every new
[49:56] subdivision has CC&Rs which generally
prohibit things like you talked about.
[50:02] » And I do think we have attached homes. I
think there's a two-bedroom development.
[50:06] I can't think of the street.
>> Then you're green?
[50:09] » Uh, yeah.
Not not the apartments, but the
[50:13] surrounding development.
They seem like they are.
[50:18] » They're close.
>> Yeah.
[50:20] » No, I was
the ones I was thinking was Tyler
[50:23] Avenue, but they're also I mean there's
I don't know what it is, but the setback
[50:26] is 5 ft or something like that between.
Yeah, that's probably that.
[50:30] But these are attached attached. They're
all six are
[50:33] R1.
>> It's like row houses. When did this get
[50:36] approved?
>> I can't remember.
[50:41] » And why was [clears throat] that one of
>> I can I can tell you. Let me bring it up
[50:45] here pretty quickly.
>> I'm just trying to
[50:49] why was it on on
one of the conditions?
[50:53] » 2022
>> 2022
[50:54] » July 5th, 2022
I was not working on this project.
[51:02] Rob Blaine prepared the staff report.
[51:07] That's what I have and I mean I think
you have a copy of the staff report in
[51:11] the in the materials if you want to look
further into that. We looked around as
[51:15] far as what exactly was the purpose of
this specific requirement. We wondered
[51:19] if it had to do with the fact that
originally these were intended to be
[51:22] live-work units which creates more
issues as far as the
[51:27] you know, what kind of business uses may
be going on over there.
[51:31] That requirement was deleted.
[51:38] While I while I I
I agree that there there certainly there
[51:42] developments that that need those, you
know, and
[51:46] that participate in them and they have
their certain benefits.
[51:49] The administrative cost itself it is
burdensome for a six unit development
[51:53] plus the the filling of roles um to to
make sure that it it keeps going and and
[51:58] and the
more than more so the record keeping
[52:01] that is required under the state to keep
it active.
[52:05] » And the insurance and the this and the
that and
[52:09] seeing some Tik Toks on
HOAs too that are kind of yeah.
[52:16] So.
>> I only have I have one question about
[52:19] that area where they're building. I've
been over there. I see how it is.
[52:25] Uh it's so congested now let alone when
people move in it's going to get worse
[52:30] because you got apartments all the way
around
[52:34] and you got them around you got them on
uh where uh
[52:39] what's
uh Dollar Tree is all the way around.
[52:42] There's apartments
and there's some businesses. So it's
[52:47] hard to find parking for you know if
they want more parking and stuff so
[52:52] I don't know it's to me it's really
congestion in that area.
[52:57] » It's certainly something that those that
end up purchasing the purchasing the
[53:00] units will have to consider before their
purchase and knowing that they are
[53:04] constrained in terms of parking versus
the ability to walk to certain things as
[53:08] well. The more dense environment the
more you can walk but the harder it is
[53:12] to park.
>> I understand that but uh
[53:15] what you're saying is that if
they
[53:18] abide by
the rules when they first buy the
[53:23] place
and they move in and stuff like that
[53:26] what makes them think about two months
later that hey my
[53:30] my payments are really high and I'm
going to get some more people in and
[53:33] spend $3,000 on that and there's going
to be more parking. I know these houses
[53:39] are going for $3,000 a month
in rent.
[53:44] » Mhm.
So,
[53:47] I I I don't know. I I would I would
prefer that HOA, but
[53:53] that's just me.
[53:56] » Okay.
Um,
[53:58] is that it, guys? Um, I just want to say
I think the the renderings are
[54:02] beautiful. I'm happy to see them being
built. I'm I I'm thrilled that they're
[54:08] uh
residential for purchase versus um
[54:13] you know,
renting, so
[54:16] I'm I'm glad to see it moving forward.
So, with that, if there's nothing else,
[54:20] there's a motion on page 60 of your
packet.
[54:37] Is anybody inclined to make the motion?
[54:47] Okay, I'll I'll do it. I move that the
Planning Commission of the City of
[54:51] Greenfield delete condition of approval
number 27
[54:55] regarding a homeowners association for
the Stonebridge Townhomes residential
[54:59] development at the southeast corner of
Elm Avenue and St. Charles Place.
[55:04] Is there a second?
>> Well, let's before we vote on this, I
[55:10] just want to clarify something for
myself. Okay?
[55:14] Does that mean if we vote yes that
they're going to do away with HOA? Is
[55:17] that correct?
Okay. Just wanted you to know. Thank
[55:20] you.
>> So, is there a second?
[55:23] » Yes.
>> We have a
[55:25] motion and a second. All in favor,
please say I.
[55:29] I. Opposed?
[55:34] So, can we have a roll call.
[55:41] Commissioner Gallardo?
[55:45] You have to say your vote again. We're
doing a roll call.
[55:49] » Schormann?
>> Yeah.
[55:52] » I vote for it.
[55:55] » Commissioner Ortiz?
>> No.
[55:58] » Commissioner Zavala?
>> I abstain.
[56:03] » Vice Chair Mendoza?
>> No.
[56:06] » Chair Garcia?
>> I.
[56:08] » Thank you. So
>> So with that you would have no action
[56:12] taken on the item, so there would it
would either be approved or denied. I
[56:16] think typically staff would recommend
that an action be taken whether that be
[56:19] to approve or deny.
Um
[56:23] otherwise it would just go back and
nothing would happen.
[56:28] » So
>> So you can make a second motion to see
[56:30] if someone wants to say or you can even
do it this way you can say motion to
[56:33] deny
uh removing the
[56:37] condition of approval just so there's a
final action on the item.
[56:46] » So
um is there a motion
[56:50] to
[56:53] not delete the condition of approval 27.
[57:01] » Is that is that a no vote?
Yes, so I guess it would be so I can
[57:06] second that. You would second that and
then you would vote.
[57:09] » I'm not making that motion.
>> Right. If there was if there was a
[57:12] motion made well here's let me just
break it down like this. Is are is
[57:15] anyone going to change their vote or are
you not going to abstain I guess?
[57:19] Or would you still abstain?
>> Um
[57:26] » Is either way it's just better if there
is an action taken rather than nothing
[57:29] happens because then I think it would
probably have to end up coming at some
[57:32] point because there was no action. If
there's action taken to approve then the
[57:37] applicants has nothing else to to deal
with. If the action is denied, then they
[57:41] can go forward and say, "Oh, do I want
to appeal that decision of the planning
[57:44] commission and to
I guess the city council." That way they
[57:48] have an option to go either way. I think
it might have to come back if there's no
[57:52] action taken.
But I'd have to double-check on that. Um
[57:57] That's why we typically recommend that
an action be taken.
[58:00] Uh on
>> Whether they say yes or no.
[58:04] » Sorry?
>> Whether it's a yes or no, you would need
[58:06] an action.
>> Right.
[58:13] » I'm not changing my vote.
[58:17] » Neither am I. I'm standing by my vote.
>> Yeah.
[58:22] » Gosh.
>> Can I ask a question?
[58:26] » Yeah, I mean yeah.
There's nothing There's no motions
[58:29] pending or anything right now. No action
has been taken. The item The item is
[58:31] still open. So
>> On on H and I I don't know who would
[58:35] answer this, but
when you establish an HOA, that's when
[58:39] you establish the HOA rules or is there
a template guideline of the state says
[58:46] you can do this, that, or
this is what they they have to be?
[58:49] » From the city from the city's
perspective in this condition that's
[58:52] being written, they the applicant would
have to provide the documents for the
[58:57] creation of the of the HOA. There's
certainly up-front fees in doing that.
[59:01] Um
as far as the rules, there's there's
[59:04] typically you know, there's state
requirements to have an HOA, and then
[59:08] there's you know, the typical There's
what I call it, like boiler plate, you
[59:12] know, this is what you can do, and then
depending on
[59:15] certain things you would add, you you
would add certain requirements into it.
[59:19] As was mentioned, what typically happens
is the developer
[59:23] runs the HOA at the beginning, and then
it's intended to be taken over by
[59:27] residents themselves. Um
and
[59:32] you know, for many reasons, you know,
these cities require that these HOAs be
[59:35] put in the place. In some cases,
developers want to put these into place.
[59:39] Um
so from our perspective, all we're
[59:42] looking at, we don't we don't regulate
the HOA rules, we don't regulate the
[59:46] requirements, we just make sure that
they did the process and it's before
[59:49] they in this case, before they receive a
final.
[59:52] Um as far as what happens down the road
with the HOA,
[59:56] um there really is no follow-up from the
city standpoint in terms of making sure
[59:59] that they stay active and that they're
paying their dues. We don't get involved
[1:00:03] in that. It's a private matter.
[1:00:08] » Can I ask the question of the broker
before I
[1:00:11] or
>> Um Ms. Lane, are are you
[1:00:13] we have another question for you. Are
you okay with
[1:00:16] » Yes.
>> Okay.
[1:00:17] » Is there anything
uh everything you mentioned was
[1:00:23] I guess
for lack of a better word, right? A con.
[1:00:28] Is there any positives that you would
think or you would say as a broker, as a
[1:00:33] as a listing agent uh that HOA would
help?
[1:00:37] » Um for this particular matter, no. And
let me just clarify because I this is
[1:00:42] not a traditional HOA. A traditional HOA
would mean that it is a common interest
[1:00:50] development. That means that that the
association owns property, owns
[1:00:56] sidewalks, owns streets, landscaping,
gates, all of that. In this particular
[1:01:02] one, it is not. It's considered a
non-CID.
[1:01:06] And the hardest thing here is it doesn't
change anything in terms of like the
[1:01:11] CCNRs. The only reason why under this
under the conditions of approval, it
[1:01:17] states that the only things that were to
be as part of the association was to
[1:01:23] maintain their front yards, which is a
tiny little patch, no grass. It's It's
[1:01:29] bark and some shrubs.
Um the back gate that is the gate that
[1:01:34] goes from the alley to their backyard.
And
[1:01:39] uh the side gate, kind of like the
neighbor fence gate on the side of lot
[1:01:44] one and the side of lot six. That's it.
So, this association in a sense would
[1:01:51] end up being a
um made solely to take care of three
[1:01:56] items,
which is the reason why from for us it's
[1:02:00] like it's it's a waste. And I say it's a
waste because we know well that if the
[1:02:06] homeowners were taking care of their own
gate, their own uh front yard, and their
[1:02:12] own fencing, it's not it would not cost
them $200 a month.
[1:02:18] But we're going to force these people to
pay a fee that we know darn well that
[1:02:23] the cost to maintain that little front
yard and those gates, which those gates
[1:02:28] are not going to need to be replaced for
many, many years, including the side
[1:02:32] fence, it's a burden. So, I kind of feel
I feel bad, to be honest, because it's
[1:02:37] not anything else and unlike a true HOA,
which you do have common area,
[1:02:44] um that's what the association is for
and that's what takes care of that and
[1:02:49] making them look pretty. And I agree
with you guys in the sense that if this
[1:02:54] truly was a true HOA and and the HOA
owned common area, I would be 100% all
[1:03:02] for the HOA. But this is not. This is
strictly only to take care of three
[1:03:07] things and we're going to end up
burdening these people. We're trying to
[1:03:11] make these these townhomes affordable.
And adding another
[1:03:15] um $200 a month doesn't help and at the
end of the day it could end up falling
[1:03:21] apart and my fear is like I have a
feeling they're going to go to the city
[1:03:26] and they're going to complain about it
when somebody else is in taking care of.
[1:03:30] I kind of feel this is more of a an
issue that potentially could end up
[1:03:36] coming back to use rather than letting
them take care of it themselves because
[1:03:41] 200 is not going towards uh yes it's
going to take care of the the
[1:03:47] landscaping in the front but again keep
in mind there's no grass. Grass is
[1:03:52] probably the heavy in terms of
maintenance maintenance it's probably
[1:03:57] the one item that I would say yeah it
takes weekly mowing but when you're
[1:04:01] dealing with a small little landscape
area that consists of nothing but bark
[1:04:06] and some shrubs that are planted
I mean you're talking you're watering it
[1:04:11] and it's tied into their own water
meters.
[1:04:13] So that's why for me it's like I feel it
would be more of a burden it is not your
[1:04:18] true association a homeowners
association it is a non CID.
[1:04:24] I don't know if that kind of helps
answer some of the concerns.
[1:04:30] » Thank you for that.
>> Can we go back to the picture of the um
[1:04:35] the house just a second.
I don't I don't have it in my pocket.
[1:04:43] This one? Yeah can we have that one?
[1:04:48] » Let me
see if I can put that up for you.
[1:04:54] Should have it.
[1:05:15] » Looking for the L the elevation page?
>> Yeah.
[1:05:19] » Okay.
>> Color one.
[1:05:21] » Sure.
[1:05:56] » So, the first motion did that die or can
we Okay.
[1:06:01] » At this point the commission should make
a new motion
[1:06:05] either approving
either removing the condition of
[1:06:09] approval or maintaining the condition of
approval.
[1:06:14] » Okay, I don't want to This is going to
be like a ballot board. No means yes and
[1:06:18] yes means no.
>> So, it would be motion to keep the
[1:06:22] condition of approval as is if you want
the HOA to remain or you would say
[1:06:27] motion to remove condition of approval
number 27 to remove the
[1:06:31] HOA condition from the
project.
[1:06:36] » Okay, I make a motion to remove
approval number 27 from the conditions
[1:06:42] of approval.
Um
[1:06:47] » I'll second that.
>> Okay, we have another motion and another
[1:06:51] second. May we have a roll call vote
again, please?
[1:06:59] » Yes.
>> Commissioner Lupita?
[1:07:04] » No.
>> Commissioner
[1:07:07] Commissioner
>> Yes.
[1:07:10] » Uh Vice Chairman Dawson?
>> No.
[1:07:13] » And Chair Garcia?
>> Yes.
[1:07:16] » Thank you.
>> There you go. So motion has passed 3-2
[1:07:20] uh removing the condition of approval
number 27 requiring future use.
[1:07:27] » Ooh, that was interesting. Okay, um we
can go now to comments from Planning
[1:07:33] Commission and staff. Staff, would you
like to start?
[1:07:37] » Um
>> comments for us.
[1:07:38] » Sure. As you know from since the time we
met last, I mean the biggest thing is of
[1:07:43] course HCD approval of the moratorium.
Uh we still have a number of projects
[1:07:48] that are in process. Um the
the uh former Cheeser spot on um Walnut
[1:07:56] Avenue is progressing along. Um the
storage facility
[1:08:00] the Extra Space Storage on El Camino is
moving very quickly. The Poppy project
[1:08:05] is also moving very quickly up on
up in that area uh for the the the fuel
[1:08:10] and the convenience store.
Um
[1:08:14] and then there are a number of other
ADUs that are under construction and the
[1:08:17] project we just discussed under
construction, but um
[1:08:21] for the most part, I mean that those the
that that's the the the list. Um
[1:08:26] of course
there's work that will continue on the
[1:08:30] plan. I think uh City Manager gave a
update briefly last time, but uh
[1:08:35] plans are still in design and then we'll
they're hoping to go to bid and then,
[1:08:40] you know, hopefully start construction
and it will be you know, I think it's
[1:08:44] over a two two-year period until that
plan is completed. We do have a few
[1:08:48] requirements with HCD that we have to
comply with. There's an annual report
[1:08:53] that has to go in. There's some
amendments to the housing element itself
[1:08:56] that we have to make. Uh you will likely
be seeing those next month at the
[1:09:00] Planning Commission meeting. Uh they're
all related to having to change some of
[1:09:04] our narratives about the uh our ability
to provide services and also a priority
[1:09:11] list if by some chance we get sewer and
we can only accommodate a part of the we
[1:09:18] have to create a list to basically of
everybody that's waiting for a sewer
[1:09:21] connection and then has to be
prioritized affordable housing first,
[1:09:25] other housing second, and then
commercial last. Um and then um if
[1:09:30] capacity for whatever reason wasn't
enough to accommodate all the requests,
[1:09:35] we we would be prioritizing them. It's
our understanding that the plan that the
[1:09:40] day that the plant would go online, our
capacity would increase to 2 million
[1:09:44] gallons, which is well beyond what our
requests for services are.
[1:09:49] Um
so that's been the primary activity
[1:09:53] um here um with department is just
dealing with the fact that um there's
[1:09:58] there's and with that a significant
reduction in permit revenue,
[1:10:02] um which was addressed during the budget
process. So um
[1:10:07] you know, there are there were a number
of vacancies, as you know, um over the
[1:10:10] last few months in the planning
department. And at this point, because
[1:10:13] of the state of the moratorium, there
there really are no plans to fill those
[1:10:17] uh in in the near near future,
um knowing that permit activity and
[1:10:22] permit revenue is going to be down
significantly.
[1:10:25] Um
but happy to answer any other questions
[1:10:28] about any other sites that you would
like to, but
[1:10:31] um if they haven't gotten a permit yet,
they're not getting a permit now.
[1:10:35] » I have a question about a site.
>> Mhm.
[1:10:37] » We approved about three three over 3
years ago on this
[1:10:43] on this uh
building down down by the
[1:10:48] upper center or what's that?
That little market huh?
[1:10:53] Is there was going to be a bar or
nightclub in there?
[1:10:56] It's still
it's still nothing in there.
[1:11:00] They took all the signs off and
everything.
[1:11:03] » The tap house.
>> We're told that the hold up on that was
[1:11:06] PG&E.
>> Yeah, but they took the the
[1:11:09] they took the I know what you're saying.
They took the the
[1:11:13] license away. Yeah.
But I can't believe the PG&E take that
[1:11:18] many years to
>> [laughter]
[1:11:21] » Well, no cuz a lot of them are doing a
pretty fast now.
[1:11:26] » I mean, look how long it took them to do
that one over there where Dumbledews and
[1:11:30] that Chester Chicken. Look how long it
took them to do that. They bought their
[1:11:34] own generators.
>> Yeah, but then they finally did it and
[1:11:37] then wasn't it maybe not 3 years, but
>> Okay.
[1:11:42] » I don't know. I was just curious about
that building.
[1:11:46] It's all
>> All right.
[1:11:50] » So, I know an encroachment permit was
pulled
[1:11:53] so they can try to complete. My
understanding from the owner is that
[1:11:57] PG&E is working on it.
Uh so, now it's just a matter of getting
[1:12:01] the work done.
And so, once they connect, then we'll be
[1:12:04] able to final the shell building because
it's not right ready to be used, but the
[1:12:10] tenant improvement permit was pulled
for that uh brewery or
[1:12:16] um so, once they have
um the connection, then the tenant
[1:12:21] improvements can begin for for that
business.
[1:12:25] » Do
[1:12:28] Do you know do they have to reapply to
get the license alcoholic license?
[1:12:33] » Um the condition of approval uh Brent
for the alcoholic license once they have
[1:12:37] it, it's
it's there for the life until removed,
[1:12:42] right?
>> Alcoholic licenses generally sit with
[1:12:44] the site, but you're not allowed to just
hold a license on a vacant property, but
[1:12:48] um
we can certainly look into that.
[1:12:52] What is the status?
>> that was posted.
[1:12:55] Mhm.
>> Okay.
[1:12:56] » As far as the use permit from the city
concerned, yes, it stays it runs with
[1:13:00] the land, but the ABC requirements as
far as, you know, holding on to it or
[1:13:04] whatever, we can we will look into that
for you.
[1:13:08] » Okay, so
Bob, I have a few I'd like to ask.
[1:13:13] Okay, uh the first one is
uh do you have any updates at all on the
[1:13:17] store at ECR and Oak where they might
came in with the lawyer and he was
[1:13:22] reasonable. People were reasonable kind
of had a problem with the
[1:13:25] » The buyer building?
>> Yeah, the buyer building.
[1:13:28] Any updates on that?
>> Mhm, they did submit a permit and it's
[1:13:31] still under review. We have not issued a
permit for it yet.
[1:13:34] » I mean, it looks like they haven't
progressed very much on that.
[1:13:38] It's a
It looks vacant. Okay.
[1:13:43] How about the
the museum? Any updates on the museum?
[1:13:52] » I know it's a public works project and I
believe that they were waiting on funds
[1:13:58] to try to complete cuz the permit that
was issued and completed was to set it
[1:14:03] on foundation, which was done, but any
other services we'd probably have to
[1:14:06] reach out to public works.
>> Okay.
[1:14:09] How about the park at 12th and Apple?
They received a grant for that. Are they
[1:14:14] progressing on that at all?
>> The community The community center
[1:14:17] project, yes. So, the community center
project
[1:14:20] um they're going through final design.
The
[1:14:24] we had a meeting today with the grant
with the state grant people. Um they're
[1:14:28] environmental. So,
when the grant was submitted, um
[1:14:33] we used all the the environmental review
from the previous projects
[1:14:38] uh to clear it with the state. Since
this involves federal funds, it requires
[1:14:42] NEPA, which is different than CEQA.
There's some different forms that have
[1:14:45] to be filled out. There's tribal
consultation that has to be completed.
[1:14:49] Um so, we had a meeting today on that.
It is moving forward, but as it's funded
[1:14:53] through through federal funds, it takes
time to get this money.
[1:14:58] Um but, it is progressing. The plans
have been progressing.
[1:15:02] Um
and of course, it needs One of the
[1:15:04] issues here is also the moratorium. Um
So, in the ordinance that the city
[1:15:11] council set, um
grant-funded projects may move forward,
[1:15:15] but there's going to have to be
provision for temporary facilities if if
[1:15:19] the building is completed before the
moratorium is completed.
[1:15:23] » Okay.
Okay, so I have one last one here.
[1:15:28] Uh a few weeks back,
>> [clears throat]
[1:15:30] » I drove up to Modesto
to see uh Paul Negan's son play,
[1:15:34] Michael.
He's uh play He was playing professional
[1:15:37] baseball with the Modesto rosters.
Unfortunately, like I said, we drove up
[1:15:43] We had a special trip for that.
They were doing their warm-ups, and he
[1:15:46] pulled a muscle and he didn't play.
>> [laughter]
[1:15:49] » He didn't play.
So, then I got a hold of him just the
[1:15:52] other day, and I told him that uh Well,
last week, I told him that I was going
[1:15:57] to drive up there again this past
weekend to see him play, and then he
[1:16:00] said,
"Unfortunately, he got cut from the
[1:16:02] team." So,
But, I told him, "Keep your dream alive.
[1:16:07] Say
your dad wants you to do that."
[1:16:11] That's it.
>> Thank you. Um
[1:16:17] So, you mentioned California Gourmet
Pizza. Do you have an ETA on when we
[1:16:21] will be having a pitcher of beer and a
pepperoni?
[1:16:25] » I don't. I'll go get that in the updates
there.
[1:16:28] » Um they are progressing. Um
Um
[1:16:32] their permit is issued. We're just
waiting to get the final inspections,
[1:16:36] but it's still going to be a little
while. I I can't exactly say exactly how
[1:16:39] long, but they are progressing.
>> Okay.
[1:16:43] » PG&E has anything to do with it, maybe a
couple more years.
[1:16:47] » Okay, so if there's no other uh
commission comments, uh we don't usually
[1:16:52] do this, but I'd like to um
close this meeting in honor of Salvador
[1:16:58] Zavala, a long-time Greenfield business
owner and father of
[1:17:03] his son.
Meeting adjourned.