1
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:52,000
Okay, good evening, everybody. I'd like to call the planning commission workshop of March 10th, 2026 to order. Can we have a roll call, please?

2
00:00:52,000 --> 00:01:18,000
Commissioner Gerlach? Here. Commissioner Luxe? Here. Commissioner Perlman? Here. Commissioner Shadlik? Here. Commissioner Wood? Here. Vice-chair Barber? Here. Chair McKay? Here. Looking at tonight's agenda, can we have a motion to approve that? So moved. Second. All in favour? Aye. Any opposed? Nope, okay.

3
00:01:18,000 --> 00:01:47,000
January 27th, 2026 minutes. Motion for that. So moved. Second. All in favour? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Acceptance of communications and correspondence. All the correspondence that was received on this item came in before we produced the packet so you've already received it as part of that.

4
00:01:47,000 --> 00:02:12,000
Great. Thank you. Any declarations of conflicts of interest? Yes. I have to recuse myself for this matter tonight because I live across the street. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Any other conflicts of interest? Export to communications? Nope, okay.

5
00:02:12,000 --> 00:02:38,000
Non-agenda public comment. This time is set aside to receive comments from the public regarding matters of general interest, not on the agenda, but related to planning commission business. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the planning commission cannot consider any issues or take action on any request during this comment period. If you wish to make a public comment about something that we are not discussing tonight, please approach the podium at this time.

6
00:02:43,000 --> 00:03:10,000
Going once. Okay. We'll close the non-agenda public comment and move on to our workshop. Could the staff report please? Good evening commissioners. Long time no see. Good to be back. As you were all aware, this is a workshop tonight so no action will be taken. The project is entitled The Willow's Condominiums.

7
00:03:10,000 --> 00:03:32,000
Our site address is 156 West Grant Street on the southwest corner of Grant Street and Grove Street. So the action tonight is just to conduct a planning commission workshop for a proposal to construct a four-unit condominium project.

8
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:43,000
A workshop is an opportunity for the applicant to present the project to the planning commission and receive informal feedback from the commission and from the public.

9
00:03:44,000 --> 00:04:08,000
So just a little background. The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting at the site on January 22nd to explain the project to the neighbors and show them the plans, those types of things, just to get a general idea of the project.

10
00:04:09,000 --> 00:04:21,000
Take some answer questions from the public or from the neighbors. And then on February 11th, the applicant did submit the application requesting this planning commission workshop tonight.

11
00:04:21,000 --> 00:04:46,000
Project site, as I noted, southwest corner of Grant and Grove. Jason uses mostly residential, multifamily, condos, a single family to the north and to directly across the street to the east.

12
00:04:47,000 --> 00:05:08,000
And then, as you are all aware of the neighborhood, in the Grove Street neighborhood plan up to the north, then we have industrial areas directly to the south of the project, down at the point of the triangle, along the west side of Grove Street.

13
00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:25,000
So just a brief project description. The project is a four-unit condominium project with on-site parking. The parcel will be subdivided into condo parcels and common area.

14
00:05:25,000 --> 00:05:34,000
There's also a request to modify the Habitat Preservation Area boundary to accommodate the project and the removal of three to four heritage trees.

15
00:05:34,000 --> 00:06:03,000
The application submitted are a tentative parcel map for condos, the Habitat Preservation Area modification. In this instance, we don't have a distinct Habitat Preservation Area entitlement, so we typically use the building envelope modification and the project we subject to those specific findings.

16
00:06:04,000 --> 00:06:11,000
Also a major designer view for the multifamily development and also the heritage tree removal permit.

17
00:06:12,000 --> 00:06:24,000
Potential required applications would be a variance for maximum building height and or a variance to encroach into the 25-foot riparian setback of Norton's slew.

18
00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:50,000
As noted in your brief staff report, the standards for review of this project are subject to the general plan policies and goals, the Grove Street neighborhood plan, the city's land use code, subdivision map act, State of California, and Title 17 of the municipal code, which serves as the city's subdivision ordinance.

19
00:06:50,000 --> 00:07:06,000
So tonight's recommended action is to receive the applicant presentation. The applicant team is here. They've brought their own presentation that we'll put up on the screen for you.

20
00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:11,000
You will be receiving public comments.

21
00:07:21,000 --> 00:07:26,000
And then provide non-bonding comments and initial reactions to the proposal.

22
00:07:26,000 --> 00:07:41,000
So the project team tonight before you, Warren and Nancy Fine, they are the property owners. Daniela Coco is the designer, and I believe Matt Watson, the contractor, is also here.

23
00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:49,000
So with that, we can go ahead and welcome the project team for you.

24
00:07:50,000 --> 00:07:55,000
Really quick before we do that. Does anybody have any questions of staff before we do the applicant presentation?

25
00:07:57,000 --> 00:08:00,000
Okay. Welcome.

26
00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:20,000
Well, thank you very much for the public attendance. And nice to be here. And thank you for your time to review our, or to at least hear our introduction to the project.

27
00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:35,000
The project is at 156 West Grove Street, which is at the intersection of Grove and West Grant. It's approximately three-quarters of an acre.

28
00:08:36,000 --> 00:08:46,000
And the project team is here. I'm one of the owners, Warren Fine. Nancy Fine is also one of the owners.

29
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:57,000
Daniela Coco was co-designer, and Matt Watson is the proposed contractor for the project.

30
00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:13,000
Geotechnical was done by JPC Associates, and Aaron Arthur was the WRC environmental consultant, which he did the biology.

31
00:09:16,000 --> 00:09:27,000
Tree identification. Civil engineer was Court Munsell of Munsell Civil Engineering here in Hillsburg.

32
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,000
Next.

33
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:45,000
Here are a few slides. The center slide is the site, and it orients the various pictures around the center.

34
00:09:46,000 --> 00:09:54,000
We have pictures at the intersection. We have pictures looking down Grove, up Grove, West Grant, and so on.

35
00:09:54,000 --> 00:10:13,000
And across the street we have the Grove lofts, which was actually the subdivision that this particular parcel was a remainder of that subdivision.

36
00:10:14,000 --> 00:10:29,000
And I think that was done in the early 2000s, and the Grove was built in 2006, 2007, and we can move to the next slide.

37
00:10:29,000 --> 00:10:49,000
So here's the zoning map for Hillsburg on the right, and on the left is a blow-up of the area, and there's a little purple triangle at the intersection of West Grant and Grove.

38
00:10:50,000 --> 00:11:01,000
The triangular shape is the parcel, and is zoned currently ORM, which is multi-residential and office.

39
00:11:06,000 --> 00:11:08,000
Next slide, please.

40
00:11:09,000 --> 00:11:22,000
So the workshop objectives for us, for the design team, is really to introduce the basis of the design that we considered when we prepared the solution.

41
00:11:23,000 --> 00:11:41,000
Then obtain community input. We've actually obtained the community input that was in written correspondence, and we have responded in this presentation to a few of the key items.

42
00:11:42,000 --> 00:11:58,000
And at the end of the presentation, we'd like to obtain informal feedback from the Planning Commission and achieve basic clarity on the applicable statutory and guideline requirements that governance design.

43
00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:19,000
There seem to be some conflicts in which zoning requirements and community guidelines which may be applicable, and so we're seeking guidance on that, on those particular issues.

44
00:12:20,000 --> 00:12:37,000
And also to discuss the density requirements, which has also changed over the time from when it was originally zoned and the current zoning map, regarding the design basis.

45
00:12:38,000 --> 00:12:53,000
Statutory requirements, I think, are in the Healdsburg General Plan and the Healdsburg Municipal Code, and guidelines are under the Grove Street Neighborhood Plan.

46
00:12:54,000 --> 00:13:09,000
And there's an important difference there when it's statutory and when it's a guideline. So there's a certain amount of judgment that's going to have to go into the things that appear to be in conflict.

47
00:13:09,000 --> 00:13:36,000
Okay, next slide. Can't read this, but on the left we have the excerpts from the land use code chapter 20, and you go down through that, and you'll find the side yard setbacks are, for a two story, equals 10 feet setback, which is how it was designed, and how the layout was done.

48
00:13:37,000 --> 00:13:47,000
And the height, according to the ORM zoning for the Healdsburg Municipal Code, is 40 feet.

49
00:13:48,000 --> 00:14:06,000
On the right, you see the Grove Street Neighborhood Plan, which, again, are guidelines, and it says 35 feet is the height, and there's a 30 foot setback for this yard off of, or the distance off of Grove Street.

50
00:14:07,000 --> 00:14:28,000
So there's a difference. And we'll address that. You'll see the solution that we came up with, and then we'll talk at the end about how the commission views those interpretations that we've made for our design.

51
00:14:28,000 --> 00:14:57,000
Next slide. So from the Heald Street, I mean, from the Grove Street Neighborhood Plan, you see the zoning, which was PORs now ORM, and on the left, you see the specific plan, which is basically hatched area, and north of west.

52
00:14:58,000 --> 00:15:00,000
Grant and the park.

53
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:06,720
And the parcel we're discussing and the parcel across the street, which was, again, the original

54
00:15:06,720 --> 00:15:16,480
subdivision, was excluded from the specific plan. And so, from this, we made the interpretation

55
00:15:16,480 --> 00:15:24,480
of the Hillsburg Municipal Code is the governing statutory requirements for the design. Next

56
00:15:24,480 --> 00:15:35,920
plan. So here's some pictures. The center picture is the Grove Street loss across the street, which

57
00:15:35,920 --> 00:15:47,000
used the Grove Street neighborhood plan as a basis for the design. And you'll see the pictures

58
00:15:47,000 --> 00:15:58,120
that are included in the West, in the Grove Street neighborhood plan. Largely described

59
00:15:58,120 --> 00:16:11,280
Queen Anne and Victorian and, you know, that style of single family homes on a single lot

60
00:16:11,280 --> 00:16:23,760
with picket fences and 30-foot setbacks, et cetera. Our site is not R1. It's ORM. So, next

61
00:16:23,760 --> 00:16:33,360
slide. The Willows, I won't go through this. You've all seen the documents and had plenty

62
00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:40,120
of time to read it. It's zoned ORM. We're talking about two buildings, two condominiums

63
00:16:40,120 --> 00:16:51,280
for her building, maximum height, 40 feet, two stories above grade. So, the first story

64
00:16:51,280 --> 00:16:57,560
is living, dining and office. Second story is three bedrooms, three baths, with access

65
00:16:57,560 --> 00:17:03,960
to a roof deck. There's elevators who serve from the garage to the roof deck. The site

66
00:17:03,960 --> 00:17:13,480
is approximately 31,000 square feet. Buildable area is about 14,000 feet. And the building

67
00:17:13,480 --> 00:17:22,360
footprint is 6,600 square feet. And the construction duration is planned for 24 months. Next slide.

68
00:17:22,360 --> 00:17:30,840
There's a 3D view, Grove and West Grant on the corner. There's four condominiums.

69
00:17:30,840 --> 00:17:36,760
You see two buildings, one on the north and one on the east. And there are two condominiums

70
00:17:36,760 --> 00:17:45,120
in each, we call unit one, two, three and four. A common access to garages which are off

71
00:17:45,120 --> 00:17:52,640
the street and tucked in to the hillside. This is a sloping site from the northeast

72
00:17:52,640 --> 00:18:06,440
corner to the slew, which is the hypotenuse of this triangle. Next slide. So, quickly here's

73
00:18:06,440 --> 00:18:18,920
the layout. The hypotenuse of the triangle is Dorton slew. There's a site wall which

74
00:18:18,920 --> 00:18:28,080
contains the drive surface and the entrance and the ingress and egress for the site. The

75
00:18:28,080 --> 00:18:39,160
green area is the habitat preservation area with a slight modification given take off of

76
00:18:39,160 --> 00:18:51,520
what appears on the title map. And there's no legal description of that line, of the definition

77
00:18:51,520 --> 00:19:02,320
of the habitat. So, in our discussions with the planning group at the city, we talked about

78
00:19:02,320 --> 00:19:09,000
a little give and take and a modification is possible. So, anyway, that's the result of

79
00:19:09,000 --> 00:19:15,640
that discussion. Again, the two buildings, the one on the left is building one, the one

80
00:19:15,640 --> 00:19:22,320
on the top is building two, and it has units one, two, three and four in them. It shows

81
00:19:22,320 --> 00:19:34,440
utilities, shows which are available. It shows ecology ramps for trash access to the streets

82
00:19:34,440 --> 00:19:51,560
and trash pickup as normal. Next slide. Here's the landscape plan which and the habitat,

83
00:19:52,240 --> 00:19:59,280
heritage trees are four of them which would be removed. Actually, one was diseased and is

84
00:19:59,280 --> 00:20:04,720
now gone. How it disappeared, I don't have any idea, but it's no longer there. So, there

85
00:20:04,720 --> 00:20:13,720
are three habitat, I mean habitat, three heritage trees and the rule is three to one replacement

86
00:20:13,840 --> 00:20:22,840
and we plan to put the redwoods and the oaks and the black walnut replaced in the habitat

87
00:20:22,840 --> 00:20:30,840
zone. If they don't fit, we'll put them someplace else in Neilsburg. Next slide. Here's a

88
00:20:30,840 --> 00:20:53,840
view going up Grove Street with ingress, egress, landscaping along Grove and 3D view. Next. Here's

89
00:20:54,120 --> 00:21:02,120
continuing up Grove, showing the solution we have come up with. Again, you're looking at

90
00:21:02,120 --> 00:21:13,120
unit four on the left and unit three in the middle. Next slide. You see you're looking

91
00:21:13,120 --> 00:21:21,240
north, you're looking, you're an east of the building and the main entrance to the

92
00:21:21,400 --> 00:21:30,400
pedestrian entrance to the site is between the buildings. There's lighting there at night

93
00:21:30,400 --> 00:21:40,400
and you see, again, you see unit two on the right and unit three in the middle and four

94
00:21:40,400 --> 00:21:48,400
on the left. And regarding the height, you'll see this later in a slide on building number

95
00:21:48,480 --> 00:21:59,480
two on the left, you'll see the height above grade is about 30 feet on the right side to

96
00:21:59,480 --> 00:22:07,480
the top of the pergola on the roof deck and on the left it's about 37 feet to the roof

97
00:22:07,520 --> 00:22:14,520
to the planter. So we tried very hard to get 35 feet visible and presentable from the street.

98
00:22:22,040 --> 00:22:29,040
You don't actually see the 40 foot building because of the slope of the site and it's

99
00:22:30,040 --> 00:22:37,040
the same on the building one. It's about 30 feet on the east side, on the street side,

100
00:22:39,320 --> 00:22:45,320
as you're looking at it to the high point. It's 40 feet near the, on the other end

101
00:22:45,320 --> 00:22:52,320
of the building, down slope. Next slide, please. So here you see these. This is

102
00:22:53,320 --> 00:23:00,320
a night shot lighting and day shot from the north. These are north elevations, north perspectives.

103
00:23:04,320 --> 00:23:11,320
Next slide. And here's from the, from the southwest and you see into the courtyard, garage

104
00:23:12,520 --> 00:23:19,520
entries, entries into the units, balconies and roof deck and then you see the night

105
00:23:22,520 --> 00:23:29,520
lighting scheme to identify, excuse me, identify the site wall and identify entrances to the

106
00:23:32,120 --> 00:23:39,120
various units. Next slide. This is a view from the east across the street from the growth

107
00:23:44,320 --> 00:23:51,320
loss and here is the elevation. We've taken some of the landscaping away so you can see

108
00:23:52,320 --> 00:23:59,320
the buildings and then there's the night shot above so you see the lighting. Next. Elevations

109
00:24:01,920 --> 00:24:08,920
and you can see here the elevations with the actual visible scale part of the building

110
00:24:08,920 --> 00:24:15,920
that you would see from the street. So 37 and 30 feet on the right, they'll have 30 feet

111
00:24:19,920 --> 00:24:26,920
and almost 40 feet on the right on the north elevation. And the dotted line represents

112
00:24:28,920 --> 00:24:35,920
building height and the center, and the center point of the building is the building

113
00:24:38,920 --> 00:24:45,920
is the average of the low point and the high point and so that is downhill from what is

114
00:24:45,920 --> 00:24:51,920
visible. That's what appears here on the dotted line and it's 40 feet from that point

115
00:24:51,920 --> 00:24:58,920
to the highest point of the building. And it's the same story for the elevations on

116
00:24:58,920 --> 00:25:05,920
the north. Next. Floor plans. This is a garage level, two-car garage, two-car

117
00:25:08,920 --> 00:25:15,920
garage, the ecology, trash, enclosures. There's an entry stairwell to the first floor and an elevator

118
00:25:21,920 --> 00:25:28,920
and on the left top corner of unit one you'll see a shop and utility area.

119
00:25:29,920 --> 00:25:36,920
Units one, three and four are identical. They simply are oriented different and have different

120
00:25:43,920 --> 00:25:50,920
orientations to break up the units and to provide interest in architectural articulation.

121
00:25:51,920 --> 00:25:59,920
Next slide. Going up to the main floor, if you look at unit one, down in the bottom left corner

122
00:26:03,920 --> 00:26:09,920
you see the living surface, the living room, you see a kitchen, a dining, an outdoor patio,

123
00:26:09,920 --> 00:26:16,920
stairs up, elevator up, small office and a half bath. Next slide.

124
00:26:20,920 --> 00:26:27,920
Bedroom floor, three bedrooms, three baths, the laundry room, closets, elevator and a stairwell

125
00:26:31,920 --> 00:26:38,920
to the roof deck. Next slide. Roof deck is a small covered area where it covers the stairwell

126
00:26:41,920 --> 00:26:48,920
coming up and covers the elevator and then access to the roof deck which has a pergola

127
00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:55,920
over it, mostly to support the shade structures, especially in the summertime and this provides

128
00:26:56,920 --> 00:27:03,920
privacy and an outdoor space for these condominiums. The site is, as you can imagine, is very constrained.

129
00:27:07,920 --> 00:27:14,920
It's a sloping site. There's no room for people to have gardens or put those on the roof

130
00:27:15,920 --> 00:27:20,920
and to give them the outdoor space.

131
00:27:23,920 --> 00:27:30,920
You see the entry, sorry, you see the entry between the two buildings, the main pedestrian entry.

132
00:27:31,920 --> 00:27:32,920
Next slide.

133
00:27:33,920 --> 00:27:40,920
So, in the correspondence that we received from the city, we tried to address each and then

134
00:27:44,920 --> 00:27:51,920
these two slides, this one and the next slide, we tried to consolidate the community issues

135
00:27:55,920 --> 00:28:01,920
if you could go back to the first slide, the community issues and the response from

136
00:28:02,920 --> 00:28:12,920
the design team. So, I'll briefly go through our response to the key issues as we interpreted

137
00:28:15,920 --> 00:28:22,920
them from the correspondence. The first one is scale, bulk and mass. There seem to be

138
00:28:23,920 --> 00:28:30,920
a number of people who are concerned about that. The scale of this building, of this set of

139
00:28:31,920 --> 00:28:38,920
condominiums, the height is determined by the HMC and ORM zoning allows 40 feet and we're,

140
00:28:41,920 --> 00:28:47,920
as you saw from the elevations, we're within that height limit. The bulk and the mass are

141
00:28:48,920 --> 00:28:54,920
governed by square footage largely and as far as I know, there is no code or guideline

142
00:28:55,920 --> 00:29:01,920
limitation to the size of a unit in ORM. And there are many examples of 2,000 to 6,000

143
00:29:04,920 --> 00:29:09,920
square feet residences on Grove Street in the Grove Street neighborhood. So, it's nothing

144
00:29:10,920 --> 00:29:15,920
unusual about each one of these units has about 3,500 square feet of conditioned space

145
00:29:16,920 --> 00:29:23,920
and about 1,500 square feet of unconditioned space including the roof.

146
00:29:24,920 --> 00:29:31,920
On Grove Street, the height above grade which is what you see is like, as I said, between

147
00:29:34,920 --> 00:29:41,920
30 and 37 feet. So, it's not, when you talk about scale and bulk and mass, the response

148
00:29:41,920 --> 00:29:48,920
is we're within the guideline, the statutory requirements for Heelsburg. ORM, another point,

149
00:29:49,920 --> 00:29:55,920
ORM of zoning. So, it's not a number of people who are concerned about the height

150
00:29:56,920 --> 00:30:01,920
of the building. So, it's not a number of people who are concerned about the height

151
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:07,000
The meeting is intended to be a transition between R1 and the downtown commercial, and it's

152
00:30:02,920 --> 00:30:07,920
of the building. So, it's not a number of people who are concerned about the height

153
00:30:07,000 --> 00:30:17,000
a narrow boundary between the residential historical district and the downtown commercial area. So

154
00:30:17,000 --> 00:30:25,400
it's a second point. The third point, a number of architectural features have been used to

155
00:30:25,400 --> 00:30:37,200
reduce the bulk and the mass and the appearance on the street line, and these are articulated

156
00:30:37,200 --> 00:30:47,560
facades. There's no comm. It's articulated. We use two buildings instead of one to cut down

157
00:30:47,560 --> 00:30:56,280
the size of the building. We use variable roof heights and a varying palette of materials and

158
00:30:56,280 --> 00:31:09,600
colors and the final point, landscaping to soften all of it from the street view. Setbacks again

159
00:31:09,600 --> 00:31:19,480
are based on the HMC or M zoning. And if we refer to figure 1.2, which is coming up after

160
00:31:19,480 --> 00:31:28,880
this slide, I'll show you that when we get there. And a specific site, a specific plan

161
00:31:28,880 --> 00:31:39,280
as defined as capital S, capital P is not required for this lot as we saw in the land use designation

162
00:31:39,280 --> 00:31:50,800
in the Grove Street plan. Traffic and access was an issue for the community. I'm going to

163
00:31:50,800 --> 00:31:59,520
have to refer to the city on traffic. I can't do anything about the traffic. And in discussions

164
00:31:59,520 --> 00:32:05,640
with Jeff and the Planning Commission, he's talked to the, as I understand, to the

165
00:32:05,680 --> 00:32:11,160
city engineer or the traffic engineer, and they're talking about reducing the speed limit

166
00:32:11,160 --> 00:32:21,080
along Grove Street. People are the people in the lofts, the people that were concerned

167
00:32:21,080 --> 00:32:28,040
about this or raised the concern. You know, people coming around, the drivers coming around

168
00:32:28,040 --> 00:32:33,120
Grove Street coming up the hill, you know, are going more than 25. And to get out

169
00:32:33,120 --> 00:32:43,160
of the Grove Street, they're having difficulty because of the speed. And the access for the

170
00:32:43,160 --> 00:32:53,080
willows is a little further downhill. And it has an unobstructed view north and south or

171
00:32:53,080 --> 00:32:59,120
right and left. So it shouldn't be a problem for ingress and egress to the willows. I

172
00:32:59,120 --> 00:33:05,120
think there is an issue of speed. And again, I can't answer that. The city is going to have to deal

173
00:33:05,120 --> 00:33:16,320
with that. We tried to reduce the vehicular ingress and egress to one location off of Grove

174
00:33:16,320 --> 00:33:24,000
instead of designing it with garages that each had entry and exit to Grove Street.

175
00:33:25,000 --> 00:33:35,000
It's a busy street. There are school buses and children and people. So we decided that it should be,

176
00:33:35,000 --> 00:33:41,000
let's get the garages off of the streets, tuck them in behind the buildings, have one access.

177
00:33:41,000 --> 00:33:53,000
And it also suits the terrain and the topography of the site. And the main,

178
00:33:53,000 --> 00:34:00,000
and the other ingress and egress or access to the site is the main pedestrian entrance between

179
00:34:00,000 --> 00:34:18,000
one and two. Next slide. The final grouping of comments that we addressed or we put under

180
00:34:18,000 --> 00:34:30,000
the rubric, neighborhood impact. And the first one, and again, these are not verbatim. They're

181
00:34:30,000 --> 00:34:41,000
summaries of how we interpreted it. This design is not consistent with the neighborhood use

182
00:34:41,000 --> 00:34:57,000
character and aesthetics. Again, it's hard to address one's aesthetic appreciation of a building.

183
00:34:57,000 --> 00:35:05,000
ORM, again, is designed to be a transition between downtown and commercial and the residential.

184
00:35:05,000 --> 00:35:27,000
And the team felt that a contemporary design fit very well with the character of the community.

185
00:35:27,000 --> 00:35:34,000
It's not trying to be R1. It's not trying to be a Queen Anne. It's not trying to be a craftsman.

186
00:35:34,000 --> 00:35:43,000
It's not trying to be a single-family home. It's a multi-family set of condominiums.

187
00:35:43,000 --> 00:35:55,000
And there are multiple examples around the world and around the U.S., in fact, for modern and traditional

188
00:35:55,000 --> 00:36:07,000
architecture existing together. You can imagine I.M. Pei and the plaza at the Louvre coincided

189
00:36:07,000 --> 00:36:15,000
and they came up with what some people hate and some people love, Gaudi and Barcelona.

190
00:36:15,000 --> 00:36:21,000
And I could go on and on. But the point is contemporary design was chosen.

191
00:36:21,000 --> 00:36:31,000
We think it fits nicely. We think it will be a pleasing addition to the architecture and the fabric

192
00:36:31,000 --> 00:36:39,000
of the different designs for Healdsburg. The scale, the second point, the scale is dominant

193
00:36:39,000 --> 00:36:49,000
and imposing. Again, scale is determined by three things, two things, height and square footage.

194
00:36:49,000 --> 00:36:56,000
And I think we're well within the requirements of what's allowed for this site.

195
00:36:56,000 --> 00:37:02,000
The street-facing facades look like the backs of the building. But I think if you look carefully,

196
00:37:02,000 --> 00:37:11,000
you'll see that Unit 4 is actually a side view. And if you look at Unit 2, it is back

197
00:37:11,000 --> 00:37:19,000
and end view. If you look at Unit 2, it is on Grove Street. It is the front of the building.

198
00:37:19,000 --> 00:37:31,000
And if you look at from the north, you'll see two views that could be considered the back.

199
00:37:31,000 --> 00:37:40,000
But we're also looking, if you look across the street, the single-family house is a side view.

200
00:37:40,000 --> 00:37:47,000
If you look across the street on Grove, the one on the corner is a side view.

201
00:37:47,000 --> 00:37:52,000
We don't see the street. We don't see the building entry on the front.

202
00:37:52,000 --> 00:38:03,000
If you look at the Grove, you see four units, single driveway, a parking lot in front.

203
00:38:03,000 --> 00:38:14,000
And most of it is behind the first four, and they give way from driveways onto a common driveway,

204
00:38:14,000 --> 00:38:23,000
which is exactly what we did for 156 West Grand.

205
00:38:23,000 --> 00:38:32,000
The Rift-X look like downtown hotels, and it's not like residential design.

206
00:38:32,000 --> 00:38:45,000
The answer is, this is not R1. It's not residential design. It's a transition piece, an infield piece

207
00:38:45,000 --> 00:38:51,000
that allows that, again, there's no prohibition for Rift-X.

208
00:38:51,000 --> 00:38:59,000
Question on concern about light pollution. In all exterior lighting, especially in California,

209
00:38:59,000 --> 00:39:08,000
it's all compliant with city and state codes, which is down lighting, no sky pollution, et cetera.

210
00:39:08,000 --> 00:39:14,000
And the 40-foot height, again, comes up, and I've already addressed that.

211
00:39:14,000 --> 00:39:18,000
Next slide.

212
00:39:18,000 --> 00:39:27,000
So we come to the part of the presentation where I think we should have some discussion

213
00:39:27,000 --> 00:39:38,000
and you can tell me if our design is compliant or not or what we should do

214
00:39:38,000 --> 00:39:49,000
or how we can take your comments into consideration, and then we can have some takeaways.

215
00:39:49,000 --> 00:39:59,000
We have a number of slides beyond this which we can use to use in the discussion

216
00:39:59,000 --> 00:40:05,000
if those points come up, but I don't want to bore everybody with going through all of that.

217
00:40:05,000 --> 00:40:11,000
So I think we're at the point where we can talk about...

218
00:40:11,000 --> 00:40:16,000
Can I bring up something there? There was an additional comment that wasn't...

219
00:40:16,000 --> 00:40:19,000
I'm sorry. Could you speak from the mic?

220
00:40:19,000 --> 00:40:22,000
That way people that are viewing elsewhere can hear you. Thank you.

221
00:40:22,000 --> 00:40:30,000
There was an additional comment that came in, not written, but when we had our meeting at the property

222
00:40:30,000 --> 00:40:35,000
and that was someone felt, I don't know, maybe this person sent us an email.

223
00:40:35,000 --> 00:40:44,000
They felt that the project would shade them entirely and they wouldn't ever have any sunlight.

224
00:40:44,000 --> 00:40:49,000
And so I thought we should go to 26 and just answer that input.

225
00:40:49,000 --> 00:40:55,000
This is another input from the community that we have some answers to before we open it up.

226
00:40:55,000 --> 00:40:57,000
You're right. Thank you, ma'am.

227
00:40:57,000 --> 00:40:58,000
And that's 26.

228
00:40:58,000 --> 00:41:00,000
So if we go to the next slide, I think it's the next...

229
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:09,000
Yeah, it's really difficult to see in this projection, but it's basically a shadow study.

230
00:41:09,000 --> 00:41:21,000
These are three pictures, three simulations for the summer, June 21 solstice.

231
00:41:21,000 --> 00:41:35,000
The model is geolocated and you can see in the morning shot the white outlined area does not actually...

232
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:44,000
The shadow at 8 o'clock in the morning does not leave the property and certainly doesn't shade anyone at Foss Creek.

233
00:41:44,000 --> 00:41:54,000
If you go to noon in the summertime, it doesn't even leave the shadow of the building, doesn't even leave the site.

234
00:41:54,000 --> 00:42:04,000
And on the 6 p.m. in June, it reaches partway or across Grove, basically.

235
00:42:04,000 --> 00:42:20,000
So this building, the set of buildings does not impinge at all on people's sunlight or shadow them in any way.

236
00:42:20,000 --> 00:42:32,000
If you go to the next slide, this is the winter shadow study and at 9.30 when the sun is coming up,

237
00:42:32,000 --> 00:42:43,000
you'll see the long shadow across West Grant and to the back side of the property just to the north of us.

238
00:42:43,000 --> 00:42:59,000
And if you go to noon, it goes partway across West Grant and if you look in the evening, it goes through and across the intersection.

239
00:42:59,000 --> 00:43:15,000
So again, the impact of this building from an exposure point of view to me, it doesn't impact the community at all.

240
00:43:15,000 --> 00:43:17,000
Any other questions about that?

241
00:43:17,000 --> 00:43:21,000
Okay, if we can go back up to them.

242
00:43:21,000 --> 00:43:23,000
If we can go back up to them.

243
00:43:23,000 --> 00:43:32,000
Okay, so the discussion and take away so comments from the city planning.

244
00:43:32,000 --> 00:43:41,000
Thank you. I think I'd like to do questions from the commission to start off and then we'll go to public comment the workshops for the planning commissioner.

245
00:43:41,000 --> 00:43:49,000
Generally pretty casual but with this many folks I want to make sure that we keep it productive and we all get out here by, you know, a reasonable hour.

246
00:43:49,000 --> 00:43:50,000
Absolutely.

247
00:43:50,000 --> 00:44:08,000
So I'll do let's do questions from the commission for either staff or the applicant and then leave the comments till after the first public comment and then we'll have the applicant kind of respond to questions and discussion and public comment.

248
00:44:08,000 --> 00:44:18,000
And then we'll provide deliberation and recommendations with a commission. And then if anybody else wants to make another comment, we can do that.

249
00:44:18,000 --> 00:44:21,000
And then we'll go from there.

250
00:44:21,000 --> 00:44:39,000
Okay, so I just, you know, how are we going to proceed the questions will be noted in minutes or how does that happen so that we have a record of the questions and the responses.

251
00:44:39,000 --> 00:44:48,000
The meeting is recorded. I don't know how detailed the minutes would get, but the video will be made available to everybody here and to you as well.

252
00:44:48,000 --> 00:44:50,000
Okay, okay, great.

253
00:44:50,000 --> 00:44:53,000
So does anybody want to take it off with some questions.

254
00:44:53,000 --> 00:44:55,000
Go for it.

255
00:44:55,000 --> 00:44:58,000
Thank you very much for doing this project.

256
00:44:58,000 --> 00:45:00,000
I have a question really for staff.

257
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:07,000
I thought that the ORM district height limit was 35 feet. Is it 40 feet or is it 35?

258
00:45:07,000 --> 00:45:15,000
There's a discrepancy between the actual ORM zoning and the zoning code and what is in the

259
00:45:15,000 --> 00:45:22,000
actual Grove Street neighborhood plan for that design district, which is 35, 40 respectively.

260
00:45:22,000 --> 00:45:31,000
Okay, so I'm wondering if it's 40, why is a variance needed? What's the height variance for?

261
00:45:31,000 --> 00:45:39,000
Well, in most cases, if there's a specific plan, that would usually take precedent over the actual zoning.

262
00:45:39,000 --> 00:45:49,000
That's what we do up on Trinity and other lots in the Grove Street plan.

263
00:45:49,000 --> 00:45:56,000
So in that case, you're saying that the Grove Street neighborhood plan would take precedence over the ORM zoning?

264
00:45:56,000 --> 00:45:58,000
In most cases, correct. In most cases.

265
00:45:58,000 --> 00:46:00,000
What about this case?

266
00:46:00,000 --> 00:46:09,000
Yeah, I think what I was going to recommend is that once there's an application that matter is either settled

267
00:46:09,000 --> 00:46:14,000
or the city has a specific position that they're going to stick to on that interpretation.

268
00:46:14,000 --> 00:46:16,000
Can I add two cents?

269
00:46:16,000 --> 00:46:19,000
No, it's a staff question.

270
00:46:19,000 --> 00:46:22,000
Yeah, okay.

271
00:46:22,000 --> 00:46:31,000
I kind of have the same question. My question was, has the conflicting language come up before with another district?

272
00:46:31,000 --> 00:46:39,000
Maybe not even Grove Street, but like another one and how it conflicted with the general plan or the general guidelines?

273
00:46:39,000 --> 00:46:45,000
And is there a precedent on another conflict, maybe someplace else in the city with a design district?

274
00:46:45,000 --> 00:46:52,000
Yeah, we're going to need to dig into this one because what's unique here is you have a specific plan that was adopted in 2000.

275
00:46:52,000 --> 00:47:01,000
I mean, 2000, and then you have a general plan that was adopted around 2009, 2010, along with the implementing zoning ordinance.

276
00:47:01,000 --> 00:47:05,000
So there's a lack of consistency between those two documents.

277
00:47:05,000 --> 00:47:15,000
Typically what I've seen is when you go through and you adopt a new general plan and zoning ordinance, you go back and amend that specific plan to make sure that you had consistency amongst all the documents.

278
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:28,000
So we'll probably have to have, depending on whatever the final design of the project is and what the issues are that are remaining, we'll work with the attorney's office to kind of figure out what supersedes water, what takes precedent.

279
00:47:28,000 --> 00:47:36,000
Because it puts staff in a difficult position as well as the commission, for sure, when you have inconsistencies like this.

280
00:47:36,000 --> 00:47:38,000
Also a setback question as well.

281
00:47:38,000 --> 00:47:40,000
Yep, all those types of issues.

282
00:47:40,000 --> 00:47:41,000
Different setbacks.

283
00:47:41,000 --> 00:47:57,000
Yeah, I think I'd prefer the city to land on a determination on that and provide that to the applicant and allow the applicant to design a project that is in compliance with the city's interpreted development standards for the site.

284
00:47:57,000 --> 00:48:11,000
I don't, I mean, if they don't want to, and they want to go for the variance, that's their decision, but I think it probably be a good faith to at least allow them to go a non variance route and present a project that complies with those standards.

285
00:48:11,000 --> 00:48:16,000
Sure.

286
00:48:16,000 --> 00:48:19,000
Anybody want to go next?

287
00:48:19,000 --> 00:48:21,000
No questions.

288
00:48:21,000 --> 00:48:22,000
Yeah.

289
00:48:23,000 --> 00:48:25,000
You're with fire.

290
00:48:25,000 --> 00:48:27,000
No, public works.

291
00:48:27,000 --> 00:48:30,000
Is there anybody can dress fire now.

292
00:48:30,000 --> 00:48:41,000
So as far as the motor court in the back, it has to be that wide for fire department access.

293
00:48:41,000 --> 00:48:47,000
There's no room there was to give whatsoever fire is reviewed the project.

294
00:48:47,000 --> 00:48:48,000
Okay.

295
00:48:48,000 --> 00:49:00,000
Is it 20 feet Belgium was consistent with their, with their dimensional plans for multiple units. It's 20, the entrance driveway has to be a minimum of 20.

296
00:49:00,000 --> 00:49:14,000
And is there any more information as far as the conversation as far as the tree removal specifically the redwood tree at the very corner and how that came to be.

297
00:49:14,000 --> 00:49:16,000
The tree that's been removed.

298
00:49:17,000 --> 00:49:25,000
I saw that one, but the one that's like six feet closer to the corners, basically six feet from the sidewalk.

299
00:49:25,000 --> 00:49:32,000
Was there any discussion of trying to save it or why it couldn't be saved or.

300
00:49:32,000 --> 00:49:41,000
Well, in the city's tree ordinance, there are there are certain exemptions of having to get a permit.

301
00:49:41,000 --> 00:49:57,000
So even if you do get a permit, you can make findings that the applicant has a right to develop the property, even if there are trees based on mitigation, which is a three to one tree replacement.

302
00:49:57,000 --> 00:50:04,000
Yeah, so basically, you know, sorry, many times a tree is not going to stop a development from happening.

303
00:50:04,000 --> 00:50:09,000
Yeah, just like six feet from the sidewalk.

304
00:50:09,000 --> 00:50:19,000
Yeah, I was my observation is that there are redwoods at every corner, including the one that's there now.

305
00:50:19,000 --> 00:50:24,000
And it's fairly distant from the corner of the building.

306
00:50:24,000 --> 00:50:35,000
So it just seems like, you know, if we're looking at landscape in general for our town, a redwood is, you know, is our is our tree here.

307
00:50:35,000 --> 00:50:44,000
And if it's not impeding the development, and I understand that, you know, in that regard, if it's not impeding the development, would you consider, you know, keeping it.

308
00:50:44,000 --> 00:50:49,000
So that was just my feeling about it.

309
00:50:50,000 --> 00:51:06,000
It's a it's a the city is asked to reduce the height about two feet on that corner, which would take the height of what the elevation of the terrain.

310
00:51:06,000 --> 00:51:11,000
There's a there's about a two foot retaining wall around that corner.

311
00:51:11,000 --> 00:51:15,000
And the city is asked to take it down to sidewalk level.

312
00:51:15,000 --> 00:51:19,000
So it's a drop of about four feet, three feet.

313
00:51:19,000 --> 00:51:21,000
And the tree is right there.

314
00:51:21,000 --> 00:51:22,000
That's one issue.

315
00:51:22,000 --> 00:51:37,000
Second issue is because the the garages are cut into the hillside, the root structure of that tree, even though it has a taproot,

316
00:51:37,000 --> 00:51:47,000
the tree structure would be a problem for the retaining wall structures of the garage in the construction of that building.

317
00:51:47,000 --> 00:51:51,000
I mean, I'm an architect, so I deal with this all the time.

318
00:51:51,000 --> 00:52:04,000
I mean, I understand the first comment that you made, but in terms of excavating for your garage on unit two, it seems like you are plenty far away to not impact the tree.

319
00:52:04,000 --> 00:52:08,000
I mean, you might, you might get, you know, 10% of the roots or 15% of the roots.

320
00:52:08,000 --> 00:52:10,000
Well, we're inside the drip circle of that tree.

321
00:52:10,000 --> 00:52:11,000
No, no, no, I understand.

322
00:52:11,000 --> 00:52:19,000
But you can definitely work with Arborists and you can definitely, you know, it's also that those roots go under the street.

323
00:52:19,000 --> 00:52:25,000
So it's, you know, cutting back there is is doable, is all I'm saying with an Arborists review.

324
00:52:25,000 --> 00:52:26,000
Okay.

325
00:52:26,000 --> 00:52:27,000
It's definitely doable.

326
00:52:27,000 --> 00:52:28,000
Okay.

327
00:52:28,000 --> 00:52:30,000
And I would encourage you if at all possible.

328
00:52:30,000 --> 00:52:36,000
It brings up another, it brings up two, two issues for the landscape plan.

329
00:52:36,000 --> 00:52:52,000
Again, we anticipated replacing those trees and further down the hill in the slough area and at a ratio of three to one, so we have three redwoods instead of one, not on that corner.

330
00:52:52,000 --> 00:52:55,000
The other issue is going to be the construction.

331
00:52:55,000 --> 00:53:18,000
As I said, the construction of that corner is going to require an excavation or retaining wall of about, well, depending on how we do it, if we bench out or if we go straight down, we're going to have to come in front into the setback area and insert a cutoff wall in order to

332
00:53:18,000 --> 00:53:29,000
retain the street with anchors back under the street in order to be able to hold that, that excavation.

333
00:53:29,000 --> 00:53:39,000
And that would then provide us enough room to put the retaining walls in, do the parging, do the French drains, do the backfilling, etc.

334
00:53:39,000 --> 00:53:56,000
So another issue that's coming, that comes up for the city is, or from a designer's point of view, is can we put a temporary or a permanent cutoff wall in the setback area?

335
00:53:56,000 --> 00:54:01,000
The building is set on the setbacks.

336
00:54:02,000 --> 00:54:16,000
But the footing for that retaining wall would go probably two feet underneath, down 16 feet, it would go two feet into it, and that would be a position for the cutoff wall.

337
00:54:16,000 --> 00:54:21,000
I don't see that as a problem because it's all hidden and it's underground.

338
00:54:21,000 --> 00:54:22,000
Yeah, it's all underground.

339
00:54:22,000 --> 00:54:25,000
It's not like it impacts the visually of the street.

340
00:54:25,000 --> 00:54:26,000
Right.

341
00:54:26,000 --> 00:54:29,000
But that's a construction concern.

342
00:54:29,000 --> 00:54:43,000
That goes on the list of things that we need some discussion with the city and what's acceptable to the planning commission.

343
00:54:43,000 --> 00:54:46,000
First off, just thank you for your work so far.

344
00:54:46,000 --> 00:54:48,000
It's clear you've put a lot of thought into it.

345
00:54:48,000 --> 00:54:52,000
In terms of questions, one, I may have misunderstood from your presentation.

346
00:54:52,000 --> 00:55:06,000
I just want to clarify with staff that the Grove Street neighborhood plan aside from the question around height and setbacks, the design elements and everything else in that document would apply to this parcel?

347
00:55:06,000 --> 00:55:11,000
Or is the assumption that only HMC would?

348
00:55:11,000 --> 00:55:16,000
Well, the grocery plan is divided up into what's called design districts.

349
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:28,000
So only the land use element of the Grove Street plan would apply for the professional offices, high-density residential, and also the zoning.

350
00:55:28,000 --> 00:55:38,000
But when you get into actual design, you have to go to the design district for the ORM.

351
00:55:39,000 --> 00:55:43,000
There are actually, I think, two guidelines that actually apply.

352
00:55:43,000 --> 00:55:46,000
It's very vague.

353
00:55:46,000 --> 00:56:06,000
So that's why we are defaulting to the citywide design guidelines for multifamily development because the Grove Street plan does refer to the design review manual, which was the one prior to the citywide design as we have now.

354
00:56:06,000 --> 00:56:09,000
Thank you.

355
00:56:09,000 --> 00:56:17,000
I guess I was also hoping to understand, I'm curious if other orientations were considered for the site.

356
00:56:17,000 --> 00:56:22,000
I appreciate that you've proposed it as two separate buildings.

357
00:56:22,000 --> 00:56:25,000
I like that.

358
00:56:25,000 --> 00:56:40,000
You know, I guess I'm specifically thinking about in terms of ingress and egress, and I'm curious if was it ever considered on West Grant, farther West, and not having any ingress on Grove.

359
00:56:40,000 --> 00:56:45,000
You just, you know, how did that come to shape? I know you touched on it a little bit.

360
00:56:45,000 --> 00:56:53,000
If you look at the contour map of that site, and I think we have it.

361
00:56:53,000 --> 00:56:59,000
We have it. I don't know which slide it is. It's after the after this if you go.

362
00:56:59,000 --> 00:57:03,000
Keep going forward.

363
00:57:03,000 --> 00:57:09,000
Back, back, back, back. One more. One more.

364
00:57:09,000 --> 00:57:14,000
One more. No, one more. Keep going back.

365
00:57:14,000 --> 00:57:18,000
There you go.

366
00:57:18,000 --> 00:57:20,000
That's not it.

367
00:57:20,000 --> 00:57:31,000
Anyway, just describe it. Anyway, the slot, the site slopes from the corner to the slew.

368
00:57:31,000 --> 00:57:46,000
And the access off of West Grant is not really possible in order to get the slope and the grade of the ingress.

369
00:57:46,000 --> 00:57:53,000
There it is. The ingress in from the West side and stay out of the habitat.

370
00:57:53,000 --> 00:58:00,000
And it's too steep and it takes up too much terrain because it's such a constrained site.

371
00:58:00,000 --> 00:58:13,000
We went around to the other side and came in on on a contour. You'll notice that we're roughly at 107 elevation coming in off the street.

372
00:58:13,000 --> 00:58:20,000
And that is the elevation of the slabs in two, sorry, in one and four.

373
00:58:20,000 --> 00:58:24,000
And then two and three are stepped up.

374
00:58:24,000 --> 00:58:35,000
But in order to get that slope, you can see the distance and the vertical distance which creates the grade would eat up a lot of terrain.

375
00:58:35,000 --> 00:58:38,000
And we just felt that it would be better to come in.

376
00:58:38,000 --> 00:58:56,000
I'm confused. Why can't you put a retaining wall on the West side of the building that fronts on West Grant and lower and then have the driveway go around that corner onto West Grant?

377
00:58:56,000 --> 00:59:01,000
It seems to me all you need is a retaining wall that deals with the grade.

378
00:59:01,000 --> 00:59:03,000
Where specifically are you talking about?

379
00:59:03,000 --> 00:59:05,000
They already have a retaining wall right there.

380
00:59:05,000 --> 00:59:16,000
They can have a deeper retaining wall and cut the driveway in and avoid Mr. Gerlach's traffic problems.

381
00:59:16,000 --> 00:59:27,000
It becomes a problem if we move the retaining wall that you see at the West side of Unit 1.

382
00:59:27,000 --> 00:59:29,000
If we move it further into the habitat.

383
00:59:29,000 --> 00:59:31,000
Then you move the building.

384
00:59:31,000 --> 00:59:33,000
We move it further into the habitat.

385
00:59:34,000 --> 00:59:36,000
I don't think that's what we're talking about.

386
00:59:36,000 --> 00:59:45,000
What we're talking about is you've got this path that's along the West side of Building 1 and you've got a retaining wall there.

387
00:59:45,000 --> 00:59:54,000
If you didn't have the driveway over here, you could move the buildings in such a way that you could just go straight out to West Grant right there.

388
00:59:54,000 --> 01:00:00,000
I'm not saying that the buildings would stay the exact same footprint, but you would gain the...

389
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:09,240
And then you would, you know, reshape the buildings in such a way, because you've already

390
01:00:09,240 --> 01:00:13,880
got about a, you know, eight foot path there, and you'd need 20 feet.

391
01:00:13,880 --> 01:00:18,800
The other issue is the bridge. The other issue is the bridge, which is right there.

392
01:00:18,800 --> 01:00:20,280
Well, it doesn't.

393
01:00:20,280 --> 01:00:24,360
Your issue is, there's no bridge on West Grand Street.

394
01:00:24,360 --> 01:00:27,080
No, it starts right there. It starts right there.

395
01:00:27,080 --> 01:00:28,080
There's a bridge.

396
01:00:28,080 --> 01:00:29,080
There is a bridge.

397
01:00:29,200 --> 01:00:34,760
Where the walkway comes back in, and where we have the Recology Rams here, and it goes

398
01:00:34,760 --> 01:00:36,360
across the sluice right there.

399
01:00:36,360 --> 01:00:37,360
Yeah, but...

400
01:00:37,360 --> 01:00:41,600
No, I know. I mean, for what you're showing, you're already showing that you're building

401
01:00:41,600 --> 01:00:44,320
in that area. It's not where the bridge structure is at all.

402
01:00:44,320 --> 01:00:50,680
The roadway on West Grand is about five feet above the sidewalk.

403
01:00:50,680 --> 01:00:54,160
If you're, can you speak out of the mic, if you're going to speak? Thank you.

404
01:00:54,160 --> 01:00:55,160
Thank you.

405
01:00:55,160 --> 01:00:56,160
You can see it there.

406
01:00:56,160 --> 01:01:01,800
Most of you who are really familiar with this know that you can see the sidewalk there on

407
01:01:01,800 --> 01:01:02,800
West Grand.

408
01:01:02,800 --> 01:01:03,800
No.

409
01:01:03,800 --> 01:01:09,880
And you can see where you have that little walkway along the edge of building your unit

410
01:01:09,880 --> 01:01:10,880
one.

411
01:01:10,880 --> 01:01:17,760
Right there, if you go out to the sidewalk, the street is up like two or three feet above.

412
01:01:17,760 --> 01:01:25,440
So to, you know, there's a certain grade that's necessary for a car to go in without

413
01:01:25,440 --> 01:01:27,600
scraping the bottom of the car.

414
01:01:27,600 --> 01:01:34,840
And it's just if maybe the city wants to totally redo West Grant, maybe that can be possible

415
01:01:34,840 --> 01:01:40,320
given where the street is and the elevation of the street and the elevation of the sidewalk.

416
01:01:40,320 --> 01:01:42,640
It really, I mean, we did look at that.

417
01:01:42,640 --> 01:01:43,640
Yeah.

418
01:01:43,640 --> 01:01:44,640
We did.

419
01:01:44,640 --> 01:01:46,160
Because the address is on West Grant.

420
01:01:46,160 --> 01:01:50,480
Another opportunity would go between the two units.

421
01:01:50,480 --> 01:01:54,040
You know, again, you'd reorganize it because you wouldn't have a driveway on

422
01:01:54,040 --> 01:01:58,520
the grove, on the south side of Grove of the property.

423
01:01:58,520 --> 01:02:03,280
But you could go, you know, you could separate building one into two units and have a driveway

424
01:02:03,280 --> 01:02:04,600
between them.

425
01:02:04,600 --> 01:02:06,040
And then that would come out on West Grant.

426
01:02:06,040 --> 01:02:09,360
You wouldn't, you know, it would just be in a place where there's no parking, there's

427
01:02:09,360 --> 01:02:10,360
no parking there now.

428
01:02:10,360 --> 01:02:15,760
Well, there are three units, there are three parking spots there now.

429
01:02:15,760 --> 01:02:19,480
So you would lose the parking spots on the street.

430
01:02:19,480 --> 01:02:20,480
Number one.

431
01:02:20,480 --> 01:02:21,480
Park on that side.

432
01:02:21,600 --> 01:02:29,480
Number two, if you separate building one into two parts, then you don't have the common wall,

433
01:02:29,480 --> 01:02:32,480
which then doesn't qualify as multifamily.

434
01:02:32,480 --> 01:02:34,520
So there's a problem.

435
01:02:34,520 --> 01:02:37,520
There's a problem with that.

436
01:02:37,520 --> 01:02:38,520
Okay.

437
01:02:38,520 --> 01:02:39,520
Any further questions?

438
01:02:39,520 --> 01:02:40,520
I don't know.

439
01:02:40,520 --> 01:02:47,760
This is probably not something that we have, it's not in the staff report, but I'm curious

440
01:02:47,760 --> 01:02:52,680
about this habitat preservation area, what it means, how it was established.

441
01:02:52,680 --> 01:02:57,320
So maybe once we circle back on this, we can get a lot more information about that because

442
01:02:57,320 --> 01:03:02,480
if it also says planning commission shall base its recommendation, is that a recommendation

443
01:03:02,480 --> 01:03:03,480
to council?

444
01:03:03,480 --> 01:03:08,240
Or are we making that decision to just a little bit more detail on that I think would

445
01:03:08,240 --> 01:03:09,240
be helpful for myself.

446
01:03:09,240 --> 01:03:14,680
I'm supposed to make findings to approve a modification for preservation area.

447
01:03:14,680 --> 01:03:17,320
It seems like a serious matter.

448
01:03:17,360 --> 01:03:23,760
If you go to the slide, we have a slide on this actually, if you go down through the slides

449
01:03:23,760 --> 01:03:25,760
after the discussion, keep going.

450
01:03:25,760 --> 01:03:27,760
Yeah, keep going.

451
01:03:27,760 --> 01:03:29,760
Keep going.

452
01:03:29,760 --> 01:03:31,760
Keep going.

453
01:03:31,760 --> 01:03:33,760
Go, go, go.

454
01:03:33,760 --> 01:03:35,760
Keep going.

455
01:03:35,760 --> 01:03:37,760
37.

456
01:03:37,760 --> 01:03:39,760
Slide 50.

457
01:03:39,760 --> 01:03:41,760
There.

458
01:03:41,760 --> 01:03:43,760
Back.

459
01:03:43,760 --> 01:03:45,760
Back one.

460
01:03:46,200 --> 01:03:48,200
There.

461
01:03:48,200 --> 01:04:00,200
So in red is the original line, and the green is the proposed line.

462
01:04:00,200 --> 01:04:05,200
So we've taken some of it and given some back.

463
01:04:05,200 --> 01:04:14,200
It would be a net roughly 2,000 square feet out of 14 or 15,000 square feet.

464
01:04:14,640 --> 01:04:19,640
So it's maybe a 10% reduction in the habitat.

465
01:04:19,640 --> 01:04:28,640
But if you go to the subdivision map that is part of the title report, there is no legal

466
01:04:28,640 --> 01:04:30,640
description of that line.

467
01:04:30,640 --> 01:04:32,640
And we traced it.

468
01:04:32,640 --> 01:04:37,640
We did the best we could with the title document, which is a scale document.

469
01:04:38,080 --> 01:04:47,080
We scaled it, and that created the dotted line, which is on the title report.

470
01:04:47,080 --> 01:04:51,080
Again, discussions with the city, give and take.

471
01:04:51,080 --> 01:05:02,080
There's no, from the biology, there's no real loss of habitat, no endangered species.

472
01:05:02,520 --> 01:05:05,520
We're far enough away from the bank.

473
01:05:05,520 --> 01:05:08,520
We're not touching the bank of the slew.

474
01:05:08,520 --> 01:05:12,520
And that's the proposal that we came up with.

475
01:05:12,520 --> 01:05:14,520
Okay.

476
01:05:14,520 --> 01:05:16,520
Thank you.

477
01:05:16,520 --> 01:05:18,520
I can elaborate on that a little bit.

478
01:05:18,520 --> 01:05:20,520
Sure.

479
01:05:20,520 --> 01:05:26,520
As far as how that habitat area was established, it was established at the time of the parcel

480
01:05:26,520 --> 01:05:28,520
map itself.

481
01:05:28,960 --> 01:05:31,960
And this was the remainder parcel.

482
01:05:31,960 --> 01:05:40,960
There was a biological report done then, and this, although it doesn't really provide any

483
01:05:40,960 --> 01:05:48,960
sort of rhyme or reason, so to speak, of why these boundaries were established.

484
01:05:48,960 --> 01:05:55,960
From what I can tell, it was based on probably the denseness of the vegetation.

485
01:05:56,960 --> 01:06:03,960
The denseness of the vegetation itself, because the vegetation gets less and less as you go up

486
01:06:03,960 --> 01:06:05,960
towards the street.

487
01:06:05,960 --> 01:06:11,960
Just to, but I've read the report.

488
01:06:11,960 --> 01:06:18,960
There really was no, like I said, there's no legal description of it, but that's my take

489
01:06:18,960 --> 01:06:24,960
on it, and that was just designated on the parcel map itself on one of the pages.

490
01:06:24,960 --> 01:06:26,960
Okay.

491
01:06:26,960 --> 01:06:28,960
Thank you.

492
01:06:28,960 --> 01:06:30,960
So that's basically how it was established.

493
01:06:30,960 --> 01:06:34,960
My questions were asked and answered.

494
01:06:34,960 --> 01:06:36,960
Great.

495
01:06:36,960 --> 01:06:38,960
Good teamwork.

496
01:06:38,960 --> 01:06:40,960
Okay.

497
01:06:40,960 --> 01:06:42,960
Any other questions at this time?

498
01:06:42,960 --> 01:06:44,960
Okay.

499
01:06:44,960 --> 01:06:46,960
Let's go to public comment.

500
01:06:46,960 --> 01:06:50,960
So if you'd like to make a comment, just approach the podium.

501
01:06:51,960 --> 01:06:58,960
And I don't know if we're putting a timer up, but try to stay within your timer.

502
01:06:58,960 --> 01:07:03,960
And like I said, we'll probably have another chance later on in the evening to make another

503
01:07:03,960 --> 01:07:05,960
comment after you've heard the discussion.

504
01:07:05,960 --> 01:07:06,960
Thank you.

505
01:07:06,960 --> 01:07:08,960
Thank you.

506
01:07:08,960 --> 01:07:10,960
My name is Tom Carlisle.

507
01:07:10,960 --> 01:07:18,960
I live on the corner of Grove and West Grant, so kitty corner to the subject property.

508
01:07:18,960 --> 01:07:26,960
Is this okay in my reverberating in my own ears?

509
01:07:26,960 --> 01:07:29,960
I have a few concerns.

510
01:07:29,960 --> 01:07:36,960
One of them is this is a very active intersection from my own house.

511
01:07:36,960 --> 01:07:38,960
I hear honking.

512
01:07:38,960 --> 01:07:39,960
I hear yelling.

513
01:07:39,960 --> 01:07:46,960
People run through the stop sign all the time and somebody gets pissed off about it.

514
01:07:46,960 --> 01:07:52,960
So that's not the concern of the applicant here, but what we see is that

515
01:07:52,960 --> 01:07:58,960
especially going south on Grove, people as soon as they go through that intersection

516
01:07:58,960 --> 01:08:02,960
and they're going down the hill towards city hall, they speed up.

517
01:08:02,960 --> 01:08:06,960
Now reducing the speed limit to 25 isn't going to stop that.

518
01:08:06,960 --> 01:08:09,960
Everybody goes too fast there.

519
01:08:09,960 --> 01:08:18,960
Another concern is you're going to be exiting the applicant's property in right at the same

520
01:08:18,960 --> 01:08:23,960
place where people from Park Point and the Post Office and the Foss Creek

521
01:08:23,960 --> 01:08:28,960
Apartments are trying to get across and turn right or left.

522
01:08:28,960 --> 01:08:33,960
And I know from working out at Park Point, when I try to cross, you have to, you

523
01:08:33,960 --> 01:08:37,960
know, it's a curve and people come down really fast and they're coming the other

524
01:08:37,960 --> 01:08:39,960
way from the city hall area.

525
01:08:39,960 --> 01:08:47,960
Now you're adding one more egress from this property that it's going to be very

526
01:08:47,960 --> 01:08:51,960
hard to look right, left, right before you leave the property.

527
01:08:51,960 --> 01:08:55,960
So that's my concern and I would really encourage that the city do a traffic

528
01:08:55,960 --> 01:09:00,960
study and see if this is feasible to do something.

529
01:09:00,960 --> 01:09:09,960
Okay. Secondly, there's also school children right now who get picked up on a

530
01:09:09,960 --> 01:09:13,960
bus right at that subject property.

531
01:09:13,960 --> 01:09:19,960
And so I'm concerned about where that bus is going to pick kids up.

532
01:09:19,960 --> 01:09:22,960
And there's also, yeah.

533
01:09:22,960 --> 01:09:29,960
So the other thing that I'm concerned about is construction parking.

534
01:09:29,960 --> 01:09:34,960
There's no parking on the Grove Street side of the subject property.

535
01:09:34,960 --> 01:09:39,960
And there's only three parking spaces on West Grant Street.

536
01:09:39,960 --> 01:09:42,960
So, and the lot is very constrained.

537
01:09:42,960 --> 01:09:46,960
I understand what it's like to, you know, to try to build on something that is

538
01:09:46,960 --> 01:09:51,960
that constrained, but there's going to be a lot of construction parking needed.

539
01:09:51,960 --> 01:09:55,960
And I'm afraid they're all going to park in front of my house on West

540
01:09:55,960 --> 01:09:59,960
Grant and Grove and that we need those parking spaces.

541
01:09:59,960 --> 01:10:03,960
We need it for the community and for the, for the residents.

542
01:10:03,960 --> 01:10:07,960
There's a lot of people in the community at the very bottom of West

543
01:10:07,960 --> 01:10:10,960
Grant Street that park up there.

544
01:10:10,960 --> 01:10:15,960
And I also know from my own experience that contractors, when they park their

545
01:10:15,960 --> 01:10:19,960
trucks anywhere, they work out of their trucks.

546
01:10:19,960 --> 01:10:24,960
So it just means the construction zone is now going to be out off the

547
01:10:24,960 --> 01:10:30,960
property unless the city and the applicant can mitigate it somehow.

548
01:10:30,960 --> 01:10:38,960
So I would really like to encourage the city to be very specific on where

549
01:10:38,960 --> 01:10:45,960
construction parking and how material goods are delivered and how

550
01:10:45,960 --> 01:10:51,960
trucks enter and exit because, you know, not only is that a tough turn

551
01:10:51,960 --> 01:10:57,960
into the property, but think of big steel and wood trucks and, you know,

552
01:10:57,960 --> 01:11:03,960
all the things you need, you know, and how is that going to be dealt with

553
01:11:03,960 --> 01:11:05,960
in our neighborhood.

554
01:11:05,960 --> 01:11:10,960
Lastly, I would just say that I think the sizing and the massing is

555
01:11:10,960 --> 01:11:13,960
way out of scale for the neighborhood.

556
01:11:13,960 --> 01:11:20,960
I think, I don't really understand the whole ORM designated.

557
01:11:20,960 --> 01:11:22,960
That's a little bit new for me tonight.

558
01:11:22,960 --> 01:11:27,960
So I again really want to encourage you guys to really look at is this

559
01:11:27,960 --> 01:11:31,960
building appropriate for a residential community?

560
01:11:31,960 --> 01:11:34,960
Maybe it is a transition zone and they should be able to build up.

561
01:11:34,960 --> 01:11:37,960
I don't really have a problem with building on the property or even

562
01:11:37,960 --> 01:11:38,960
going up.

563
01:11:38,960 --> 01:11:40,960
It just looks really massive.

564
01:11:40,960 --> 01:11:44,960
And I think it's imposing on the actual neighborhood.

565
01:11:44,960 --> 01:11:46,960
So thank you.

566
01:11:46,960 --> 01:11:48,960
Thank you.

567
01:11:48,960 --> 01:11:51,960
Yeah, future speakers agree with anything that's been said.

568
01:11:51,960 --> 01:11:55,960
You can say I agree with that thing that has been said.

569
01:11:55,960 --> 01:12:05,960
Save yourself some breath if you'd like, but not a requirement.

570
01:12:05,960 --> 01:12:06,960
Hi.

571
01:12:06,960 --> 01:12:07,960
My name is Sarah Peña.

572
01:12:07,960 --> 01:12:13,960
I live directly across from where this is going to be built.

573
01:12:13,960 --> 01:12:17,960
My first concern was privacy.

574
01:12:17,960 --> 01:12:22,960
Our living room windows directly open up to where this giant

575
01:12:22,960 --> 01:12:27,960
building is going to be, which kind of falls into the line of,

576
01:12:27,960 --> 01:12:32,960
well also in their PowerPoint, they said that their buildings

577
01:12:32,960 --> 01:12:33,960
will optimize privacy.

578
01:12:33,960 --> 01:12:36,960
So I'm curious how exactly they're trying to optimize

579
01:12:36,960 --> 01:12:39,960
privacy for the neighborhood.

580
01:12:39,960 --> 01:12:42,960
They also showed a shadow plan.

581
01:12:42,960 --> 01:12:45,960
The shadow plan actually did directly affect our house.

582
01:12:45,960 --> 01:12:50,960
It showed it on the plan that they showed.

583
01:12:50,960 --> 01:12:53,960
It looks like the shadows are going to just completely cover

584
01:12:53,960 --> 01:12:57,960
like the front section of our yard where we have plants growing.

585
01:12:57,960 --> 01:13:00,960
Also our living room windows once again will be completely

586
01:13:00,960 --> 01:13:03,960
shaded out by this building.

587
01:13:03,960 --> 01:13:07,960
They also have parking concerns as well, not just for

588
01:13:07,960 --> 01:13:11,960
daring construction, but for having more families living on

589
01:13:11,960 --> 01:13:12,960
the block.

590
01:13:12,960 --> 01:13:15,960
We already struggled to find parking on our street.

591
01:13:15,960 --> 01:13:19,960
So that's just something to consider.

592
01:13:19,960 --> 01:13:24,960
And then I'm genuinely curious.

593
01:13:24,960 --> 01:13:28,960
I don't know if I can ask questions, but I'm curious if

594
01:13:28,960 --> 01:13:30,960
this is low income housing.

595
01:13:30,960 --> 01:13:32,960
I don't think it is.

596
01:13:32,960 --> 01:13:33,960
I'm not.

597
01:13:33,960 --> 01:13:36,960
I'm just genuinely curious how much these condominiums will

598
01:13:36,960 --> 01:13:39,960
be and how accessible they actually are to families coming

599
01:13:39,960 --> 01:13:41,960
and trying to live in Healdsburg.

600
01:13:41,960 --> 01:13:45,960
Aside from destroying heritage trees and encroaching on

601
01:13:45,960 --> 01:13:49,960
habitat to create more unaffordable housing, disrupting the

602
01:13:49,960 --> 01:13:52,960
neighborhood by creating noise with two years of construction

603
01:13:52,960 --> 01:13:55,960
and potentially adding to the current traffic and parking

604
01:13:55,960 --> 01:13:56,960
issues for our neighborhood.

605
01:13:56,960 --> 01:13:59,960
I just don't see how this benefits our community.

606
01:13:59,960 --> 01:14:04,960
And I'm really actually curious about that.

607
01:14:05,960 --> 01:14:14,960
Thank you.

608
01:14:14,960 --> 01:14:15,960
Good evening all.

609
01:14:15,960 --> 01:14:16,960
My name is Sunny York.

610
01:14:16,960 --> 01:14:20,960
I live at 216 A Foss Creek Circle.

611
01:14:20,960 --> 01:14:24,960
So in the condominium complex that will butt right up to

612
01:14:24,960 --> 01:14:26,960
this project.

613
01:14:26,960 --> 01:14:29,960
One of the things that has not been mentioned, and I'd be

614
01:14:29,960 --> 01:14:34,960
very curious to know from the project planners is obviously

615
01:14:34,960 --> 01:14:38,960
there is a creek or a slew there, whichever you would like to

616
01:14:38,960 --> 01:14:39,960
call it.

617
01:14:39,960 --> 01:14:42,960
I'm wondering if studies will have been done or what's going

618
01:14:42,960 --> 01:14:47,960
to happen to ensure drainage as it stands right now when we

619
01:14:47,960 --> 01:14:49,960
have significant rain.

620
01:14:49,960 --> 01:14:55,960
There are drainage issues that flow into our parking areas

621
01:14:55,960 --> 01:14:56,960
as it is now.

622
01:14:56,960 --> 01:14:59,960
And that would be a really big concern to me.

623
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:05,840
Particularly as they talk about digging and excavating into that lot and doing things that

624
01:15:05,840 --> 01:15:09,680
need to happen, what is going to be done in terms of studies to make sure there's not going

625
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:16,800
to be any impact there would be really critical. Our unit is actually located in the back of

626
01:15:16,800 --> 01:15:22,840
the property, so we will be butted up right against that property line from where the

627
01:15:22,840 --> 01:15:31,960
community sits for Frost Creek Villas. I also have very large concerns around the height

628
01:15:31,960 --> 01:15:39,640
of these units. We do not have a lot of outdoor space that is our own private space within

629
01:15:39,640 --> 01:15:45,640
Frost Creek Villas, but we do have small patios, and if we're talking about what sounds to

630
01:15:45,640 --> 01:15:53,160
be garage level up roof 40 feet, you've now got people on roof decks that are looking right

631
01:15:53,160 --> 01:16:02,280
down upon us, taking away our privacy and well-being, frankly, to have to worry about those kind

632
01:16:02,280 --> 01:16:09,720
of things. So I would like to know more about that. The parking is also a concern. I know

633
01:16:09,720 --> 01:16:14,800
that there are a lot of families that live on West Grant behind us and down where the

634
01:16:14,800 --> 01:16:21,040
cul-de-sac is, just down from where this property is located, and these buildings will happen,

635
01:16:21,040 --> 01:16:26,360
and they struggle for parking as it is already. The last thing, and this has been said, and

636
01:16:26,360 --> 01:16:33,440
I do appreciate you listening to the comments, is this seems massive for this. I think the

637
01:16:33,440 --> 01:16:40,680
lot is .76 in terms of the size, and what is being proposed in my mind feels like

638
01:16:40,680 --> 01:16:46,000
it is not going to fit in aesthetically at all, but rather be this incredibly large thing

639
01:16:46,000 --> 01:16:51,400
that has been fit onto a very small lot. And I would ask you to consider that for the

640
01:16:51,400 --> 01:16:55,720
community and for the people that have lived here for quite some time and pay property

641
01:16:55,720 --> 01:17:02,640
taxes and bought these homes a while ago. So thank you very much. Appreciate it.

642
01:17:02,640 --> 01:17:14,040
Thank you.

643
01:17:14,040 --> 01:17:19,400
Chair McKay, Vice Chair Barber, Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to comment on

644
01:17:19,400 --> 01:17:25,960
the proposed condominium project at 156 West Grant Street. My name is Anne Geary and I reside

645
01:17:25,960 --> 01:17:31,240
across Grove Street from the development site. I appreciate the effort that goes into planning

646
01:17:31,240 --> 01:17:35,920
new housing and I support thoughtful development that strengthens our community. However, I have

647
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:41,040
significant concerns about this proposal as I specified in my email to the Commission

648
01:17:41,040 --> 01:17:47,320
on behalf of myself and eight other Grovelofts homeowners. My first and enduring impression

649
01:17:47,320 --> 01:17:51,640
of this project is that the building's height and overall mass, particularly at the southern

650
01:17:51,640 --> 01:17:57,320
entrance, are inconsistent with the scale of the surrounding neighborhood, despite proposing

651
01:17:57,320 --> 01:18:04,440
the garages below grade at four levels high per individual unit with rooftop decks. This

652
01:18:04,440 --> 01:18:09,960
structure would certainly be a vertical anomaly in our residential neighborhood. Compounding

653
01:18:09,960 --> 01:18:14,840
the outside scale is the lack of adequate setbacks which continue, contributes to the

654
01:18:14,840 --> 01:18:20,440
project's sense of bulk and visual dominance. Plus, the street-facing facades are the

655
01:18:20,440 --> 01:18:26,280
backs of the buildings, intensifying and unwelcoming institutional presentation

656
01:18:26,320 --> 01:18:31,600
without sufficient setbacks. The structure comes across as imposing and out of proportion.

657
01:18:31,600 --> 01:18:36,200
In general, this project does not appear to follow the intent of the Grove Street neighborhood

658
01:18:36,200 --> 01:18:41,480
plan which was created to guide development in a way that respects the existing character

659
01:18:41,480 --> 01:18:46,640
of the area. This project does not meet those expectations and risks overwhelming

660
01:18:46,640 --> 01:18:52,600
nearby homes and streetscapes. When projects diverge significantly from these guidelines,

661
01:18:52,680 --> 01:18:58,160
this proposal does. It undermines both the neighborhood plan and the public trust that

662
01:18:58,160 --> 01:19:04,160
went into creating it. New development should enhance the neighborhood, not disrupt it.

663
01:19:04,160 --> 01:19:07,800
Rather than being a positive addition to the neighborhood, this structure may stand

664
01:19:07,800 --> 01:19:12,400
as a jarring presence that reflects poorly on the design process and on the community

665
01:19:12,400 --> 01:19:17,160
as a whole. I respectfully ask the commission to require revisions that better align

666
01:19:17,160 --> 01:19:21,800
the project with the Grove Street neighborhood plan, particularly regarding height,

667
01:19:21,840 --> 01:19:26,440
massing, and setbacks, so that any new construction contributes positively to the

668
01:19:26,440 --> 01:19:31,560
character, harmony, and livability of the neighborhood. Thank you for your time and your

669
01:19:31,560 --> 01:19:35,400
consideration. Thank you.

670
01:19:44,920 --> 01:19:48,520
I'll try not to be too repetitive, but there will be some repetition.

671
01:19:49,240 --> 01:19:55,240
Chair McKay, Vice-Chair Barbara, Commissioners Jeff Scott and Amanda, thank you for the opportunity

672
01:19:55,240 --> 01:20:01,240
to comment. My name is Tom Gerlach. My wife and I live at 506 Grove Street, directly across from

673
01:20:01,240 --> 01:20:08,200
the project. I also have concerns about scale. The general scale of our neighborhood is two

674
01:20:08,200 --> 01:20:13,080
stories, including the offices. The plan is specific about transitioning to office. There are

675
01:20:13,080 --> 01:20:17,480
two stories. This project is four stories. It's not consistent with the Grove Street

676
01:20:17,480 --> 01:20:22,520
neighborhood plan. The view we will see across from our house, which is what this is based on,

677
01:20:22,520 --> 01:20:28,360
what we can see, is the 44 to 45 foot high structure from the garage to the top of the roof

678
01:20:28,360 --> 01:20:35,560
on unit four. As the renderings show on sheets D04 and 06, this is a four-story

679
01:20:35,560 --> 01:20:40,200
structure with a solid concrete wall. Unlike the Grove Laws where the buildings follow

680
01:20:40,200 --> 01:20:45,480
the slope of the land, 156 is embedded in the hill and has a largely uniform and flat

681
01:20:45,480 --> 01:20:51,480
roof level. So the scale of the project will be established by unit four at the southwest corner,

682
01:20:51,480 --> 01:20:56,040
which is above grade, even though much of the northern end of the complex will be Grove Street

683
01:20:56,040 --> 01:21:01,160
grade, which I think is very creative and a great idea. But in terms of what we're going to feel

684
01:21:01,160 --> 01:21:06,680
from the building, it's from the southwest corner. In addition to the height of the project

685
01:21:06,680 --> 01:21:11,800
being too high per the 35 foot height limit of the neighborhood plan, the setback seem inadequate

686
01:21:11,800 --> 01:21:18,840
and the lot coverage is quite high. In my email of March 2nd, I requested the city conduct a focus

687
01:21:18,840 --> 01:21:22,600
traffic study for the project. I think that's been well covered. It's tricky now for us.

688
01:21:23,400 --> 01:21:28,040
And I try to describe that in that email. We just need to make sure that the complexity added

689
01:21:28,040 --> 01:21:35,080
by this new project and we both driveways can be used safely. I would also like to comment

690
01:21:35,080 --> 01:21:41,080
on the habitat preservation area. RHOA is the steward of the riparian area on the east

691
01:21:41,080 --> 01:21:46,360
side of the slough. Once it leaves Warren's property and comes under Grove Street, Mary Price,

692
01:21:46,360 --> 01:21:51,560
who lives adjacent to the slough and is here tonight, is deeply involved with our HLA landscaping,

693
01:21:51,560 --> 01:21:56,280
suggested the setback lines for the top of the bank is best best left unchanged.

694
01:21:57,240 --> 01:22:01,800
If there is to be a land swap, the inject objective in the land use code is clear. There

695
01:22:01,800 --> 01:22:06,120
should be no reduction in the habitat area or the functional value of the habitat.

696
01:22:06,760 --> 01:22:13,880
And I suggest that 14.7% reduction is material. She also suggests it would be helpful if Warren

697
01:22:13,880 --> 01:22:19,640
took steps to enhance the habitat by removing all invasive plant species and adding native ones.

698
01:22:20,760 --> 01:22:24,680
There's an issue, which I don't want to take too much time on, but this is the city's

699
01:22:24,680 --> 01:22:29,880
opportunity to do this. Once we have it, the city has nothing to do with the slough.

700
01:22:31,160 --> 01:22:34,920
I can't find and neither can marry where the city would have any legal requirement to keep

701
01:22:34,920 --> 01:22:40,680
that slough clear, except for public safety. So this is the time for the city to say we want to

702
01:22:40,680 --> 01:22:47,000
invest in habitat. As noted, there's going to be a lot of earth moving on the environmentally

703
01:22:47,000 --> 01:22:51,880
sensitive site that northeast corner by my calculations is 14 to 17 feet high for the

704
01:22:52,680 --> 01:22:58,040
retaining wall. I think it can be done. It certainly is normal, but it's 1,730 cubic

705
01:22:58,040 --> 01:23:04,840
yards with 504 yards reused to build the podium. So if you look at DO-6, you can see this,

706
01:23:05,480 --> 01:23:10,520
I'm estimating because it has the plants here. You're looking at a 5-foot retaining wall to hold

707
01:23:10,520 --> 01:23:17,320
the podium, which is what you'll see from 216A at Foss Creek. So that's part of the scale

708
01:23:17,320 --> 01:23:21,560
feeling that you have. And so there's a lot to be done on that site. It's all doable,

709
01:23:22,360 --> 01:23:27,880
but it's a lot. In summary, we are in favor of more housing in Healdsburg.

710
01:23:27,880 --> 01:23:33,560
This is the last available developer lot in our neighborhood. I think there are several design

711
01:23:33,560 --> 01:23:39,480
options to enhance the project, reduce the scale, reduce the cost to be consistent with the

712
01:23:39,480 --> 01:23:45,480
neighborhood plan, and still be economically feasible. Thank you. Thank you.

713
01:23:56,600 --> 01:23:57,240
Anybody else?

714
01:23:58,040 --> 01:24:10,920
Okay. Well, let's go to the applicant if you want to respond to anything or if we want to start

715
01:24:10,920 --> 01:24:15,000
with our commission comments up to you if you'd like that opportunity.

716
01:24:57,960 --> 01:25:10,840
I think I address the the comment on the, sorry, I think I address the shadow study and the

717
01:25:16,440 --> 01:25:23,720
shadows that would not be, would not appear at the Foss Creek residence.

718
01:25:24,360 --> 01:25:33,560
So I think we need to deal with, you know, the facts there and the issue of privacy.

719
01:25:34,360 --> 01:25:41,640
We live in a city and there are privacy issues and we've tried very hard in our design

720
01:25:42,200 --> 01:25:51,000
to allow the privacy of everyone around, including the people that will be the owners

721
01:25:51,640 --> 01:26:01,240
of this, of these properties. The issue of Foss Creek, I mean, sorry, the issue of drainage

722
01:26:02,600 --> 01:26:10,520
along the slew is something that we've discussed with the city. It is silted in.

723
01:26:12,280 --> 01:26:20,200
There has been flooding at the bridge on Grove Street in the heavy rains. So there is an issue

724
01:26:20,280 --> 01:26:27,400
of drainage and that's something that the city is going to have to deal with. I can't, you know,

725
01:26:28,040 --> 01:26:33,880
if it's plugged, if the, if the drain at Grove Street is plugged,

726
01:26:36,440 --> 01:26:41,880
we're going to have, you know, we're going to have flooding. So there's the issue and how

727
01:26:41,880 --> 01:26:48,600
do we mitigate, how do we ensure that drainage from Norton Slough gets to Foss Creek

728
01:26:49,480 --> 01:26:56,840
and it's blocked in several places? So is that a city responsibility? Is that the Grove Street

729
01:26:56,840 --> 01:27:09,000
lofts downstream into, into Foss Creek? Is that above Norton Slough to the north, underneath

730
01:27:09,080 --> 01:27:16,360
that bridge? But it is a problem and it needs to be addressed. There's an issue of the water table

731
01:27:17,960 --> 01:27:23,000
which needs to be studied. I mean, and that's coming up. As soon as I figure out,

732
01:27:23,000 --> 01:27:29,960
as soon as we figure out what kind of a project we have here, the foundation is going to require

733
01:27:29,960 --> 01:27:35,560
additional boring and additional soil studies to make sure that we're not into the water table

734
01:27:35,560 --> 01:27:40,920
and then what kind of a footing I'm going to be able to put there to support these loads. So

735
01:27:42,680 --> 01:27:50,120
that's coming up. We have, we've done an initial geology study which shows

736
01:27:51,000 --> 01:27:58,200
2,000 PSF for bearing capacity and these foundations, these spread footings are designed

737
01:27:58,200 --> 01:28:05,560
for that. So, but we'll see when we get to the final and we get the final borings

738
01:28:05,560 --> 01:28:15,000
underneath these structures. So drainage is an issue. Scale we talked about.

739
01:28:18,040 --> 01:28:25,320
Sorry? Oh, school bus. There's a lot of activity on that corner. Everybody acknowledges that.

740
01:28:25,880 --> 01:28:37,240
We planned a school bench for mothers to collect children. It's, again, we live in a city and

741
01:28:39,160 --> 01:28:54,040
there's traffic. And West Grant is a very narrow street. So, again, access coming in and going

742
01:28:54,040 --> 01:29:04,360
out in West Grant is a problem for ingress and egress into this property and it does nothing

743
01:29:04,360 --> 01:29:13,080
to change the traffic flow. So that's my comment about traffic and construction. We haven't really

744
01:29:13,080 --> 01:29:22,120
talked about construction but our construction man is here, our general contractor who will

745
01:29:22,120 --> 01:29:25,960
lead that is here. We've talked with the city about it.

746
01:29:29,240 --> 01:29:36,360
Parking can be achieved on the site and the scheduling of

747
01:29:37,720 --> 01:29:45,240
crews in and out of here can be accommodated on the site. That, I can assure you, is not a

748
01:29:45,240 --> 01:29:52,280
problem. Trucks coming in and out, yes, we'll have delivery of lumber and we'll have delivery

749
01:29:52,280 --> 01:29:58,280
of reinforcing steel and concrete trucks, etc. But all of that will be

750
01:30:00,000 --> 01:30:08,120
Taking care of onsite. And the contractors can park. We have plenty of parking space around

751
01:30:08,120 --> 01:30:17,680
the perimeter on the site. So again, I don't see that as a problem. I agree with the comment

752
01:30:17,680 --> 01:30:23,960
that was made that it would encourage the city to make sure that that's done correctly.

753
01:30:23,960 --> 01:30:36,800
And we do have a construction plan that covers that issue. The tree issue we've talked about,

754
01:30:36,800 --> 01:30:53,020
moving that line, moving that habitat line is, you know, we're moving in and out of

755
01:30:53,020 --> 01:31:05,200
raspberry bush and poison oak mostly. And there are a few trees that will come out. And therefore,

756
01:31:05,240 --> 01:31:15,080
heritage trees, which will be replaced. So again, as a developer and as an engineer, I don't see

757
01:31:15,080 --> 01:31:23,200
that as a main problem. And the impact on the bank will have no impact on the slew at all, in my

758
01:31:23,200 --> 01:31:30,360
opinion. So those are the, those that test my response to what we heard today.

759
01:31:30,360 --> 01:31:43,720
Thank you. That's all I have. I would, I would probably stay up there. We'll probably have some more

760
01:31:43,720 --> 01:31:54,560
questions and comments from the commission. Does anybody want to start? Phil? No? Go for it.

761
01:31:54,560 --> 01:32:07,160
I want to thank the neighbors. I know people who live on all three sides and who face the site

762
01:32:07,160 --> 01:32:11,720
directly. So I'm very familiar with the site. And I know that, I mean, I went over the other

763
01:32:11,720 --> 01:32:17,120
day just to look at the site and I couldn't find parking because there's no parking on Grove.

764
01:32:17,680 --> 01:32:27,120
And West Grant was all parked up. And I did end up on Grove about three houses down from the corner,

765
01:32:27,120 --> 01:32:32,480
the north of the corner. So, you know, I think about not just the people who are going to live

766
01:32:32,480 --> 01:32:36,360
here, but they're going to have guests. They're going to, you know, there's going to be deliveries.

767
01:32:36,360 --> 01:32:40,920
And, you know, there's lots of issues that come up because of that. So it's just something

768
01:32:40,920 --> 01:32:49,200
to be, I think, sort of hyper aware of. I guess gas could come into the parking area and park in

769
01:32:49,200 --> 01:32:55,880
front of your garage or something. But I just think that's going to be a continual issue with

770
01:32:55,880 --> 01:32:59,480
the neighbors over time. But that's, I didn't really want to talk about that. I wanted to talk

771
01:32:59,480 --> 01:33:05,760
about the design and a lot of the issues, you know, a lot of the comments that come up

772
01:33:06,720 --> 01:33:12,960
about the bulkiness, why it looks bulky. And I appreciate from the standpoint of the code,

773
01:33:14,240 --> 01:33:22,640
it may be fine. But I think someone mentioned the idea that the neighborhood is two stories.

774
01:33:23,360 --> 01:33:31,360
And even under the Grove Street plan for commercial, it suggests that it limits it to two

775
01:33:31,360 --> 01:33:37,200
stories. So, which is true, because down below there, below your site to the south, all those

776
01:33:37,200 --> 01:33:42,080
commercial buildings are pretty much two-story buildings. They may be tall two stories, but two

777
01:33:42,080 --> 01:33:52,000
stories. On your entire building, it appears like it is three stories throughout. And then,

778
01:33:52,000 --> 01:33:56,640
certainly on the south end, it appears to be four stories. And at 37 and a half feet,

779
01:33:56,640 --> 01:34:02,960
that's, you know, pretty close to being four stories. What I guess, you know, it's just one of

780
01:34:02,960 --> 01:34:09,520
those things to think about is you're building at the, like if you just take whatever, unit two

781
01:34:09,520 --> 01:34:16,720
right here at the corner, and you actually follow the contour of the site, and it would step down

782
01:34:16,720 --> 01:34:24,640
the hill, the issue is that the roof here on unit four and the roof here on unit two are

783
01:34:24,640 --> 01:34:30,080
essentially at the same height, but the ground has dropped off quite precipitously there. So,

784
01:34:30,080 --> 01:34:35,440
I think that's one of the things I would suggest is looking at massing in such a way

785
01:34:36,400 --> 01:34:43,600
that it mimics, sorry, that it aligns with the, with the contours. The other thing about it is

786
01:34:43,600 --> 01:34:52,320
that I think the, the, the array of materials. Now, I'm an architect. I love modern

787
01:34:52,320 --> 01:34:58,880
architecture. I have a house just up the street at 753 that I designed that had to meet all of

788
01:34:58,880 --> 01:35:05,200
these guidelines. Had to have the, the gable or hip roofs. It had to have porches. Had to have

789
01:35:05,200 --> 01:35:10,640
all of that. Now, I'm not suggesting that you have to do that, but that house that I designed

790
01:35:10,640 --> 01:35:17,280
is a modern interpretation of the historic houses that are there. So, there's definitely

791
01:35:17,280 --> 01:35:25,040
ways to do that. That makes this, you know, and I think the, the issue is that building one,

792
01:35:25,040 --> 01:35:29,760
while it may be two units, looks like one building, because you don't know where the units start

793
01:35:29,760 --> 01:35:36,640
and stop because of how the materials are, you know, oriented on the building. So that if you

794
01:35:36,640 --> 01:35:43,600
made it, again, you know, if you made a distinction where this then was repeated there and

795
01:35:43,600 --> 01:35:49,520
repeated there, not exactly design wise, but that you could actually read that there were

796
01:35:49,520 --> 01:35:55,920
three units, three houses there. So if you could read them in such a way, then that would break

797
01:35:55,920 --> 01:36:01,040
down the scale. Because I think part of it is that you've oriented this all very horizontally.

798
01:36:01,680 --> 01:36:06,160
And if you look at every other house and, and the grove across the street,

799
01:36:06,160 --> 01:36:12,240
they're all oriented vertically, not horizontally. The grove is a good example of,

800
01:36:12,240 --> 01:36:18,000
they may be all attached, but they look like individual units. So you can tell that that's

801
01:36:18,000 --> 01:36:21,920
my house, that's Fred's house, that's Tom's house, you know, I mean, you can tell the difference.

802
01:36:21,920 --> 01:36:27,200
Here, you can certainly tell on the corner, but this looks like a very big building because

803
01:36:27,200 --> 01:36:32,240
there's no start and stop, building two. There's no start and stop to where, you know,

804
01:36:32,240 --> 01:36:36,720
my house is and the next house is. I think also it's the horizontality.

805
01:36:37,040 --> 01:36:40,800
And then the roofs really, really emphasize that.

806
01:36:43,760 --> 01:36:49,600
So I think there's ways to do that. I think it's a shame that you have garbage that's out on the

807
01:36:49,600 --> 01:36:55,360
street side. I think it's sort of a shame that you can't put the garbage to the back

808
01:36:56,000 --> 01:36:59,520
and then have garbage trucks just come into, so you could just bring your cans out in the

809
01:36:59,520 --> 01:37:04,320
back so everybody could do that. But that's a whole issue that I don't quite understand

810
01:37:05,120 --> 01:37:11,840
because you've got, I mean, especially like this one right here, I guess that's Unit 3,

811
01:37:12,720 --> 01:37:16,080
where you've even emphasized the door to the trash with a little trellis structure.

812
01:37:16,800 --> 01:37:24,480
So that seems like an odd design decision to me, but you'd have to deal with the trash company

813
01:37:24,480 --> 01:37:30,800
to understand that. So I think that's it. I mean, I think that, you know, even though

814
01:37:30,800 --> 01:37:39,120
you're not required to be in the specific plan area because you're out of that area,

815
01:37:40,160 --> 01:37:46,480
this whole corner has all these historic houses. I mean, that's the hub of the historic houses.

816
01:37:47,120 --> 01:37:53,600
So there are ways to do that, again, so that maybe there aren't flat roofs. Maybe you have some

817
01:37:53,600 --> 01:37:58,640
gable roofs in there to sort of, you know, and that breaks down scale because if you have

818
01:37:58,640 --> 01:38:02,080
walls coming up and they go like this, it's different than walls coming up and going like that

819
01:38:02,800 --> 01:38:07,760
because you've caught a triangle out of that mass. So I think there are ways to

820
01:38:09,680 --> 01:38:14,960
mix, you know, to do a mix that, I'm not saying, you know, of course if you have a roof deck,

821
01:38:14,960 --> 01:38:18,400
you're not going to, you know, you can't have a gable roof, but there's certainly,

822
01:38:20,560 --> 01:38:26,160
you know, tower-like elements like this element on Unit 2 that could have a gable roof on it.

823
01:38:26,160 --> 01:38:33,120
So that you could, and again, that would start to relate to the scale and look of the other houses,

824
01:38:34,080 --> 01:38:39,600
still being modern, still being, you know, having the square. I'm not suggesting that you make them

825
01:38:39,600 --> 01:38:48,160
smaller, but I think there are definitely ways to break down the scale by looking at the

826
01:38:49,120 --> 01:38:56,080
architectural elements and the guidelines that are in the grocery plan and still do exactly

827
01:38:56,080 --> 01:39:01,440
what you're doing here, but it wouldn't feel nearly as massive because just because you don't

828
01:39:01,440 --> 01:39:08,000
think it's massive, it's a look. You know, it's a look. It may not be physically massive,

829
01:39:08,000 --> 01:39:13,600
but there's visual things that happen on all these houses, particularly like the house across

830
01:39:13,600 --> 01:39:20,320
West Grant at the corner is a very large house. I mean, I've been in that house. It's a very

831
01:39:20,400 --> 01:39:26,080
large house. I mean, it's probably 6,000 or 7,000 square feet, but if you look at it, it's broken

832
01:39:26,080 --> 01:39:34,000
down. There's a lot of breaking down of the massing with bays and, you know, setbacks and gables and,

833
01:39:34,000 --> 01:39:38,640
and again, I'm not saying that you have to design a Victorian house, but if you look at the,

834
01:39:40,000 --> 01:39:47,200
you know, design elements of those houses, you could definitely make this be, in my opinion,

835
01:39:47,200 --> 01:39:54,640
far more appealing and I think address what everybody has been talking about in mass scale.

836
01:40:06,400 --> 01:40:07,760
Who's next? Go for it.

837
01:40:07,920 --> 01:40:16,320
Um, so I'm the newest commissioner and I have not come across a situation like this

838
01:40:17,040 --> 01:40:27,120
where things, the conflicting setback and height aside, it appears to be in conformance,

839
01:40:27,920 --> 01:40:36,400
but the neighbors are very, very vocal about the scale in the mass. And so in my mind,

840
01:40:36,400 --> 01:40:43,440
that's hard to ignore. And there was one comment made that resonated with me, which is if we're

841
01:40:43,440 --> 01:40:51,920
going to build at this scale, it undermines the neighborhood plan and undermines the trust in the

842
01:40:51,920 --> 01:41:01,280
commissioners. And that, that concerns me. I personally think the architecture is interesting

843
01:41:02,000 --> 01:41:10,560
and I like modern architecture, but I very much agree with Jonathan that there has to be ways to

844
01:41:10,560 --> 01:41:20,800
break it up. And I would also encourage revisiting the egress and ingress because I think if there

845
01:41:20,800 --> 01:41:28,160
were a solution on West Grant, it would really be ideal for all of the neighbors. That's it.

846
01:41:32,240 --> 01:41:33,040
Thank you.

847
01:41:35,120 --> 01:41:48,640
Yeah, I'll try it. First, as an introductory comment, I am not terribly impressed with the constant

848
01:41:48,640 --> 01:41:56,000
claims that this thing fits the basic statutory standards of height, bulk and setback.

849
01:41:56,320 --> 01:42:02,880
We have a set of design guidelines that were created because a house on Second Street actually

850
01:42:02,880 --> 01:42:09,840
built by a planning commissioner fulfilled all those requirements and was just gigantic in terms

851
01:42:09,840 --> 01:42:17,280
of the neighborhood. There, in fact, is a provision in the general plan that says that

852
01:42:17,280 --> 01:42:24,320
basically building should respect the neighborhood that they're in, which goes to a lot of the

853
01:42:24,320 --> 01:42:31,040
comments and about height and bulk. So the fact that you technically comply with the biggest

854
01:42:31,040 --> 01:42:38,160
envelope that the city codes created is, to me, the start of a conversation, not the end of it.

855
01:42:38,160 --> 01:42:43,520
So I think we can keep going with the kinds of things that Jonathan said. The second comment

856
01:42:44,480 --> 01:42:57,600
I'd make is that I find the notion that we've squeezed these large buildings as close to the

857
01:42:57,600 --> 01:43:03,200
streets and as close to the neighbors as we can as something that deserves to be considered.

858
01:43:04,160 --> 01:43:15,680
I've got basically no big kind of concern about how close we get to the slu if we can protect the

859
01:43:15,680 --> 01:43:23,920
drainage. We can move those buildings quite a far downhill. And I would even say if we

860
01:43:25,120 --> 01:43:32,560
violate the 25-foot slu setback, welcome to the club because this planning commission

861
01:43:32,640 --> 01:43:41,840
has consistently allowed incursions into those setback requirements when necessary to deal with

862
01:43:41,840 --> 01:43:51,920
design problems. Foss Creek is chock-a-block with exceptions to those rules, including if you

863
01:43:51,920 --> 01:43:58,320
look at the shed, there's a little projection on the west side that actually goes out over Foss

864
01:43:58,320 --> 01:44:04,080
Creek. The city staff said, oh, that's a no-no, but the planning commission and this wisdom said

865
01:44:04,720 --> 01:44:11,040
it's fine, it looks fine, it's not going to hurt the drainage, it's not going to hurt any flood

866
01:44:11,040 --> 01:44:18,880
issues, and so it's a good design. So one of the things that would help accomplish a lot of

867
01:44:18,880 --> 01:44:29,760
the issues would be to move these buildings west basically and south and deal with a lot of the

868
01:44:29,760 --> 01:44:39,760
scale and bulk issues by just moving them farther from the street. In particular, I would like,

869
01:44:39,760 --> 01:44:50,880
if you take a look at the sheet C2, you'll see four X's on the Grove Street side of it,

870
01:44:50,880 --> 01:44:56,720
and they all amount to trees that are to be taken out, including that redwood on the corner

871
01:44:56,720 --> 01:44:59,840
and then three deciduous trees that go down.

872
01:45:00,000 --> 01:45:06,320
Down Grove Street. Leaving all those trees in place would, to me, do a tremendous effect

873
01:45:06,320 --> 01:45:13,060
on not reducing the scale of buildings, but reducing the way the buildings look and feel.

874
01:45:13,060 --> 01:45:21,540
And so from my perspective, I would like, when this thing comes around again, I'd like to

875
01:45:21,540 --> 01:45:30,380
see a plan that is approved by our city arborists that preserves each of those four trees. Most

876
01:45:30,380 --> 01:45:38,660
of it would, I think, be accomplished by moving the buildings to the west, and that would help

877
01:45:38,660 --> 01:45:47,700
with the scale, but I would not be in a position to accept the scale of these buildings unless

878
01:45:47,780 --> 01:45:55,660
those trees are preserved. With regard to Tom's traffic issue, I agree that it's a problem.

879
01:45:55,660 --> 01:46:03,860
I think if we could solve it by having the driveway on West Grant, I know that's going

880
01:46:03,860 --> 01:46:12,140
to amount to some other retaining walls and re-jiggering things, but again, there's plenty

881
01:46:12,140 --> 01:46:21,380
of land over there. I am not a fan of keeping what sort of a swamp and a kind of a place

882
01:46:21,380 --> 01:46:28,300
for, as you said, blackberries and a whole bunch of other kind of nondescript plants.

883
01:46:28,300 --> 01:46:33,980
This is not a biological preserve that to me is important to preserve, and if we could

884
01:46:33,980 --> 01:46:39,260
get a driveway that solves the problem, that would be fine. The other thing, Tom,

885
01:46:39,260 --> 01:46:47,340
that I would do if we can't do that is I'd put a condition in the final approvals that

886
01:46:47,340 --> 01:46:56,580
say that if the city public works head thinks that that left turn is a problem, that we

887
01:46:56,580 --> 01:47:08,580
mandate that the traffic coming out of that project be right turn only. That still leaves

888
01:47:08,580 --> 01:47:14,420
a problem with Foss Creek Circle and the driveway. I could see that ultimately being solved by

889
01:47:14,420 --> 01:47:21,860
making Foss Creek Circle one way. If any of you remember L label, L would turn over in

890
01:47:21,860 --> 01:47:28,440
his grave if that were the choice, but we could think of doing that. The best solution

891
01:47:28,440 --> 01:47:40,400
to me would be to have the entrance on Grove Street. The only other, I basically, I like

892
01:47:40,400 --> 01:47:48,720
the architecture. Jonathan, I don't know how you reduce that southern building without reducing

893
01:47:48,720 --> 01:47:59,320
the square footage dramatically. I'd like to, but if that can be done, it would be great.

894
01:47:59,320 --> 01:48:07,020
Each of these residents already have balconies. If we could do something to clean up the roof

895
01:48:07,020 --> 01:48:14,560
line or change the roof line, that would be a good thing to do. I don't think it's

896
01:48:14,600 --> 01:48:29,080
necessary to have rooftop kind of terraces the way this thing has. I think people can deal with

897
01:48:29,080 --> 01:48:34,680
their own balconies. The balconies are fine. They look to the west, which is great. They're

898
01:48:34,680 --> 01:48:46,600
fine. I think the last technical comment I'd have is that the windows, particularly the windows

899
01:48:46,600 --> 01:48:58,800
that face Grove Street, I think they're shown in the elevations. There are some brown walls

900
01:48:59,160 --> 01:49:08,320
and there are some gray walls. In each case, the windows are just little kind of, I'd call

901
01:49:08,320 --> 01:49:14,160
them nondescript. They don't have much in the way of indentations, at least as far as

902
01:49:14,160 --> 01:49:23,840
you can see on these things. They have nothing in the way of framing. It looks like, as

903
01:49:23,920 --> 01:49:31,440
someone correctly pointed out, it looks like the back of the building and anything we could do to

904
01:49:33,360 --> 01:49:38,560
make it more inviting, make it look not like the front of a building, but a much more

905
01:49:38,560 --> 01:49:45,360
architecturally thoughtful building would help. I think going to Jonathan's point,

906
01:49:46,480 --> 01:49:53,520
the entryway where the garbage is should be a much more intentional entryway to help

907
01:49:53,520 --> 01:50:01,280
break up those two buildings and separate them out. That's kind of where I am.

908
01:50:02,160 --> 01:50:07,520
Can I ask a quick technical question? We keep talking about setbacks. I see that the

909
01:50:08,880 --> 01:50:14,880
setback along Grove Street is only 10 feet. Why wouldn't you need a variance for that?

910
01:50:15,440 --> 01:50:23,040
Even in ORM, it's 20 feet. In the Grove Street plan, it says 30 feet. Why is 10 feet okay?

911
01:50:23,040 --> 01:50:30,240
That's the street side yard. The front is considered west grid. Why isn't it 15 feet

912
01:50:30,240 --> 01:50:35,440
if you have a three-story element there? Because it should be 15 feet in the center.

913
01:50:35,440 --> 01:50:42,080
No, because that's for an interior lot, the 15 feet. This is a street side yard of a corner lot.

914
01:50:42,640 --> 01:50:55,600
Okay. All righty. I know our job tonight is to give you some clarity for when you come back,

915
01:50:55,600 --> 01:51:01,040
so I'm hoping I can condense my notes here. I'll try to take it one bucket at a time.

916
01:51:01,040 --> 01:51:05,680
In terms of the design, I think we've hammered some of those points home.

917
01:51:05,680 --> 01:51:11,840
You've already heard from the community that while it may comply, it feels big. I'll leave

918
01:51:11,920 --> 01:51:17,520
it to your team to find ways with comments from the rest of the commission to possibly address that.

919
01:51:19,760 --> 01:51:24,640
I did just want to take a moment to... I think it's so easy during workshops and meetings to

920
01:51:24,640 --> 01:51:27,680
focus on all the things you want to change. I do just want to take a quick moment to

921
01:51:27,680 --> 01:51:34,400
sort of appreciate what I see as a good faith attempt. It's not a little things,

922
01:51:34,400 --> 01:51:40,000
but like the stamped concrete with the willow, right? Some of our design guidelines and

923
01:51:40,000 --> 01:51:46,560
area plan specifically call for incorporating art into that. While there may be a conflict

924
01:51:46,560 --> 01:51:52,480
using concrete, I appreciate the attempt there with things like that. It's walkable,

925
01:51:52,480 --> 01:51:56,800
it's bikeable. You clearly have an eye towards sustainability throughout.

926
01:52:00,800 --> 01:52:05,280
I guess I want to spend a little more time on the habitat preservation area

927
01:52:05,280 --> 01:52:14,320
and the heritage tree removal. I guess I'm still a little unclear on the need and intent around

928
01:52:15,120 --> 01:52:22,480
modifying that area. It seems to me that I understand the driveway width for emergency

929
01:52:22,480 --> 01:52:28,720
vehicle access. It also seems like Unit 1, there may just be a little sliver of Unit 1 that would

930
01:52:28,720 --> 01:52:36,240
otherwise be in the existing HPA. I understand that, but generally curious, again, back to my

931
01:52:36,240 --> 01:52:40,160
original question about orientation. If any other orientation was considered such that

932
01:52:40,160 --> 01:52:45,440
you didn't need to change that, just again as we're in this conceptual phase.

933
01:52:48,320 --> 01:52:55,200
In terms of approving that modification request, one of the points talks about

934
01:52:55,200 --> 01:53:05,920
specifically no significant or adverse impact on heritage-sized trees. Of course, we understand

935
01:53:05,920 --> 01:53:17,280
that, for example, tree number 22 is healthy and it is in the existing HPA but would not

936
01:53:18,160 --> 01:53:23,680
be in the proposed HPA and would be slated for removal. I just wanted to echo what

937
01:53:24,240 --> 01:53:30,080
Commissioner Lux said about, especially with tree number 8, I believe it is the redwood.

938
01:53:30,880 --> 01:53:38,720
I think that tree in particular, given it's a healthy redwood, could help and be in your favor

939
01:53:38,720 --> 01:53:46,640
in terms of helping to the perceived mass at that corner. It's already a very tall tree.

940
01:53:47,360 --> 01:53:51,760
I'd be curious to work more with the arborist around the critical root zone. We talked about

941
01:53:52,720 --> 01:53:59,440
to what extent can you cut those roots without risking stability and therefore safety for residents,

942
01:53:59,440 --> 01:54:06,000
pedestrians, that sort of thing. Then just a general comment on our heritage tree removal

943
01:54:06,000 --> 01:54:15,360
process. I want to be really cautious that just because we have a process to mitigate that at

944
01:54:15,360 --> 01:54:19,680
3 to 1, and I appreciate that, I don't want to set the precedent that that's always the

945
01:54:19,680 --> 01:54:29,360
default process. I would ask for a good faith attempt again to preserve those trees where possible.

946
01:54:30,160 --> 01:54:37,200
Alex, I'd like to point out that many people in town have been critical of the ineffectiveness

947
01:54:37,200 --> 01:54:45,600
of the heritage tree removal statute. I think there's been attempts to put more teeth in it.

948
01:54:46,560 --> 01:54:47,760
Thank you for that.

949
01:54:52,640 --> 01:54:54,880
All right. I guess wrapping up what I had,

950
01:55:00,000 --> 01:55:06,960
I think those are the main points for now. Also, just again, I want to thank the public

951
01:55:06,960 --> 01:55:12,560
and residents for being here and voicing your concerns. It's great to see the room filled,

952
01:55:13,360 --> 01:55:18,960
and I hope you'll continue to engage in the process as this moves along. Thank you.

953
01:55:23,120 --> 01:55:25,760
First of all, I just want to thank the applicant and Jeff for your time tonight

954
01:55:25,760 --> 01:55:31,520
in the presentation. I appreciate it. The first note I wrote down and then you actually said it

955
01:55:31,520 --> 01:55:36,720
is you took on a challenging lot. So it's one thing we agree, first of all, we agree on that.

956
01:55:36,720 --> 01:55:42,480
And I empathize with you very much that it is a challenging lot with a lot of hurdles

957
01:55:42,480 --> 01:55:49,360
and it's wonderful that you're going to possibly work with us on that. And I also find the building

958
01:55:49,360 --> 01:55:56,640
a very attractive content for a design. With that said, a couple of things for you. The comment

959
01:55:56,640 --> 01:56:01,600
you made about many buildings on Grove Street neighborhood are 2,000 to 6,000 square foot

960
01:56:01,600 --> 01:56:09,520
residences. They are, but they're set back way on the street universally. If you're going to

961
01:56:09,600 --> 01:56:14,720
stick with the flat roof, I don't think the elevations are doing you justice with like set

962
01:56:14,720 --> 01:56:21,360
back. You've put them as far back on the building as possible, but in the elevations it looks like

963
01:56:21,360 --> 01:56:29,280
they're right there. Maybe you could show it more artistically. And I concur with another fellow

964
01:56:29,280 --> 01:56:34,080
commissioner about maybe removing some of the shade structures, trellises and stuff just

965
01:56:34,080 --> 01:56:39,600
to like lower the massing up there for you. For the amount of square footage you're getting,

966
01:56:39,600 --> 01:56:44,720
it just looks like a heck of a lot more than the square footage that is designated that floor.

967
01:56:47,120 --> 01:56:54,160
In addition, I really would like to see every effort made for that redwood tree in the corner.

968
01:56:54,720 --> 01:56:59,600
I understand it may be slightly above grade, maybe an elevated planter with a bench built

969
01:56:59,600 --> 01:57:06,400
in, like celebrate it versus destroying it. I concur with my fellow commissioners out of the

970
01:57:06,400 --> 01:57:12,560
Perlman and considering the landscape, I appreciate Commissioner Lux for always giving us a history

971
01:57:12,560 --> 01:57:20,880
lesson. And I agree with his and anything that you could do to move the structures further

972
01:57:20,880 --> 01:57:25,600
back, even though it may require variance, I would also be in support of that. I think

973
01:57:25,600 --> 01:57:32,400
that is what you said, Commissioner Lux. And I am also, if there's any way you can work with

974
01:57:32,400 --> 01:57:36,560
egress off of West Grant and move the buildings around to have the egress off of West Grant,

975
01:57:36,560 --> 01:57:42,080
I just think it would be something else I would like to see. In regards to staff,

976
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:48,800
I don't know if it's anyone else's feeling, but in regards to condo building like this,

977
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:53,200
multiple units, I found the citywide design guidelines chapter six to be

978
01:57:53,760 --> 01:58:01,760
not super helpful. It was kind of like, all right, what do I do? I didn't feel like I had guardrails

979
01:58:01,760 --> 01:58:10,800
in place, to be honest with you. So if I am deferring to the Grove Street neighborhood

980
01:58:11,440 --> 01:58:19,520
stuff, this specific lot also has very little information given, but then it seems in the

981
01:58:19,600 --> 01:58:29,280
language to defer to the West Grant Grove Street district, there's language in there where it's

982
01:58:29,280 --> 01:58:37,520
kind of like, in what in doubt, refer to this. So you might want to look at that. And then

983
01:58:37,520 --> 01:58:42,000
if you're looking at that language, there's a lot of information given as far as like simple

984
01:58:42,000 --> 01:58:48,480
design features including porches, bay windows, trellises found in older homes. And then

985
01:58:48,480 --> 01:58:52,960
there's even language about an HD overlay for historic district, which is also kind of vague.

986
01:58:53,520 --> 01:58:57,120
So it just it brought up more questions and it did answers for me.

987
01:58:58,960 --> 01:59:01,680
That's all I have. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

988
01:59:04,320 --> 01:59:08,000
I like going last because all the good stuff gets said and I don't have to talk for too long.

989
01:59:09,680 --> 01:59:14,400
I think first and foremost I'll kind of reiterate what I said about kind of what

990
01:59:15,360 --> 01:59:19,200
Commissioner Barber was just talking about with the discrepancy between the

991
01:59:20,320 --> 01:59:23,680
is it in the plan? Is it not in the plan? What's the zoning? What the development standards? I

992
01:59:23,680 --> 01:59:27,440
think that's kind of like a baseline that I'd like to kind of see sorted out.

993
01:59:29,680 --> 01:59:36,880
But yeah, I think the architecture is modern and attractive. It's massive as we've heard. So

994
01:59:37,680 --> 01:59:41,200
not an architect, but I think we've gotten some good suggestions on how to

995
01:59:41,200 --> 01:59:48,960
kind of massage that side. I'd also think I mean it looks like the back of the building because

996
01:59:48,960 --> 01:59:57,120
in many cases it is the back of the building. The southwest facing balconies and architecture

997
01:59:57,120 --> 01:59:58,640
and windows and all that stuff is

998
02:00:00,000 --> 02:00:03,840
Something that I would like to see on the community facing side.

999
02:00:03,840 --> 02:00:10,480
It gives kind of like a closed exclusive courtyard, which I think in addition to the massing it's just

1000
02:00:10,480 --> 02:00:17,920
it's a little bit of a, it's a hard pill to swallow I think for this neighborhood as we've heard.

1001
02:00:19,440 --> 02:00:27,120
As far as the habitat thing and moving down, I think a give and take on habitat biology things

1002
02:00:27,120 --> 02:00:33,760
is good. I think we have a reputable study here that says you know it might have been recorded at

1003
02:00:33,760 --> 02:00:38,720
the time of the subdivision map. It doesn't seem like there's anything there for one reason or another.

1004
02:00:38,720 --> 02:00:46,480
If we're giving some on the habitat conservation area, we could potentially as

1005
02:00:46,480 --> 02:00:51,680
Commissioner Locke suggested move the houses down which solves the massing problem.

1006
02:00:51,680 --> 02:00:56,560
I think saving that tree and the bench idea is a fantastic idea. I think the tree

1007
02:00:57,120 --> 02:01:02,960
all those trees on Grove would solve a lot of the issues with massing as was mentioned.

1008
02:01:06,560 --> 02:01:11,280
And then yeah, I don't, I think it's probably a longer conversation with public works in the

1009
02:01:11,280 --> 02:01:18,960
city about the West Grant ingress egress. I think the as a kind of a last resort having a

1010
02:01:18,960 --> 02:01:24,560
write out would be good for the neighborhood and the circulation in the neighborhood. I think

1011
02:01:24,560 --> 02:01:29,520
if I was a resident there and I saw a write out only I would look around for cops and just take a

1012
02:01:29,520 --> 02:01:35,920
left anyway. So I think if we want to use that as a as a tool or tool belt, there's probably

1013
02:01:35,920 --> 02:01:48,240
longer conversation about some sort of design to discourage that. I think that is about it.

1014
02:01:48,400 --> 02:01:57,600
Yeah, I think just finally reiterating, it'd be great to have a very defined and clear project

1015
02:01:57,600 --> 02:02:02,160
description about what entitlements are needed, what development standards that we were viewing

1016
02:02:02,160 --> 02:02:06,160
this project against. Like I said, that's kind of a, I think a baseline assumption that I

1017
02:02:06,160 --> 02:02:11,440
would have looking at this project for a map and design review and all the other entitlements

1018
02:02:11,440 --> 02:02:17,680
that may or may not be needed at this point. Does anybody else on the commission have any

1019
02:02:17,680 --> 02:02:25,840
final comments? Yeah, I'd like to address mostly the people who live in the neighborhood.

1020
02:02:26,640 --> 02:02:35,440
I think you've heard that we understand your concerns. We propose some possible ways to address

1021
02:02:35,440 --> 02:02:43,120
them. Hopefully they will be addressed. But I think it's clear to me that if this project

1022
02:02:43,200 --> 02:02:49,120
proceeds and basically the form it is, it's going to be a big project. And I'd just like to remind

1023
02:02:49,120 --> 02:02:56,080
everybody that Heelsburg has lots of lots of places all throughout throughout the community

1024
02:02:56,080 --> 02:03:01,040
where single family houses are chock-a-block next to four plexes and eight plexes.

1025
02:03:02,160 --> 02:03:08,240
I live in a house that's five feet from a two and a half story house right next to me.

1026
02:03:08,240 --> 02:03:15,840
That's the way the city is. And I think that that this is not in the middle of the Grove

1027
02:03:15,840 --> 02:03:20,960
Street neighborhood. It's on the edge. It is a transition area. You can go south on Grove

1028
02:03:20,960 --> 02:03:29,280
Street all the way to the to the roundabout and not see a single family residence on the right

1029
02:03:29,280 --> 02:03:37,280
hand side. It's just right on the edge. And so some relatively big building, I think,

1030
02:03:37,360 --> 02:03:47,280
makes sense. So I think that if the developer can do something here, that would be great. But

1031
02:03:48,240 --> 02:03:54,560
I wouldn't hold my breath in saying it's going to look like the same thing as if there were just

1032
02:03:54,560 --> 02:04:03,760
two or three single family houses on that lot. It's just, I think the city is different in

1033
02:04:03,760 --> 02:04:14,080
that respect. You've heard a mouthful, I know. And I'm wondering if I can get a minute with the

1034
02:04:14,080 --> 02:04:20,080
architect or the designer after we're done because I have some thoughts that might help if they're

1035
02:04:20,080 --> 02:04:29,280
worth it. I would say that the Grove Street neighborhood plan has lots of text about design.

1036
02:04:30,240 --> 02:04:37,280
And again, it doesn't have to be historic, but things like Gable Roos and things like Bay

1037
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:45,200
Windows, you know, don't have to be historic looking. But I think you could get a lot out of

1038
02:04:45,200 --> 02:04:52,400
taking another, just another pass at reading those design guidelines. Because while it is a

1039
02:04:52,640 --> 02:05:00,560
transitional site, that corner has three historic houses right there. And then all of a sudden,

1040
02:05:00,560 --> 02:05:05,520
you've got something that to me now kind of looks like an office building. So, and it doesn't have

1041
02:05:05,520 --> 02:05:11,280
to. It doesn't have to at all. But I think if you could grab some of those kind of character

1042
02:05:11,280 --> 02:05:17,760
features and incorporate them in a way that still is quite modern, because modern does not

1043
02:05:17,760 --> 02:05:25,440
necessarily mean flat roof. I mean, flat roof necessarily means modern, but modern doesn't

1044
02:05:25,440 --> 02:05:31,520
necessarily mean flat roof. So, and even in the guidelines, it says flat roofs are discouraged.

1045
02:05:32,160 --> 02:05:38,800
So again, it's just, I think there's so many ways to get as much square footage and to,

1046
02:05:39,600 --> 02:05:46,160
you know, do a building, but to soften it in a way that really respects the neighbors,

1047
02:05:46,800 --> 02:05:50,480
you know, the neighborhood. I mean, the neighbors are the people who live in the neighborhood,

1048
02:05:50,480 --> 02:05:54,880
but the physical neighborhood. And I think there are ways to do that. And I think the

1049
02:05:54,880 --> 02:06:02,400
Grove Street plan has everything you need to help you kind of transition to something that would

1050
02:06:02,400 --> 02:06:14,080
be more acceptable to the community. Any final parting thoughts? Okay, I do want to allow

1051
02:06:14,080 --> 02:06:20,480
the members of the public to give another little comment if you'd like. Generally, for public

1052
02:06:20,480 --> 02:06:25,520
hearings we don't, we just do one public comment session, but because this is a workshop and maybe

1053
02:06:25,520 --> 02:06:30,400
you've been sitting there and thinking about new ideas or solutions as we've talked about

1054
02:06:31,120 --> 02:06:36,480
gable roofs and these types of things. Just want to make sure everybody feels like

1055
02:06:37,360 --> 02:06:41,040
they've had the opportunity to express themselves.

1056
02:06:44,800 --> 02:06:47,120
Please approach the podium.

1057
02:06:49,680 --> 02:06:56,560
I just have a question. Assuming there is another set of drawings and a different proposal,

1058
02:06:57,280 --> 02:07:03,120
how will those of us who were here today be notified of that so that we can take another look?

1059
02:07:04,320 --> 02:07:07,760
Great. Thanks. That is a great question for staff.

1060
02:07:08,720 --> 02:07:17,280
Some of that depends on the applicant. They could, as others have done, take all this

1061
02:07:17,280 --> 02:07:21,360
feedback and put together a revised set of plans and submit a formal application.

1062
02:07:22,000 --> 02:07:25,680
They could do the same. And if it's significantly different and they wanted the

1063
02:07:25,680 --> 02:07:28,960
benefit of additional input from the commission, they could schedule another workshop

1064
02:07:30,000 --> 02:07:35,520
or they could certainly do what they had done prior to this evening and hold a neighborhood

1065
02:07:35,600 --> 02:07:43,120
meeting that allows the neighbors to see and hear what changes they have or haven't made in response.

1066
02:07:44,640 --> 02:07:50,320
Great. Thank you. Would anybody else like to make a final public comment?

1067
02:07:56,160 --> 02:08:02,320
Okay. Does the applicant feel like you've received enough of our feedback for the night?

1068
02:08:05,600 --> 02:08:14,720
A final comment from our group. First of all, thank you for your feedback.

1069
02:08:15,520 --> 02:08:26,800
It's instructive. And I think the conflicts in the... We've attempted to bring together all of the

1070
02:08:28,160 --> 02:08:35,360
different documents that govern the development of this site. We have honestly made an

1071
02:08:35,360 --> 02:08:46,880
honest attempt at doing that. And we're not... I'm not trying to create a structure here that

1072
02:08:46,880 --> 02:08:56,880
exceeds the height. We understand the setback problem. We understand the massing problem,

1073
02:08:56,880 --> 02:09:02,320
the height problem. We try to get a building that fit the height, even though it's taller

1074
02:09:02,320 --> 02:09:12,240
on the street, part that you actually see certainly satisfies the requirements.

1075
02:09:12,240 --> 02:09:18,240
And if you look around the neighborhood, if you look at the documents that are in

1076
02:09:19,200 --> 02:09:29,520
the planning document, Queen Anne's and Craftsman and all of the various styles you see

1077
02:09:30,480 --> 02:09:38,240
in the historic district, there's maybe a total of 10 buildings, maybe, that satisfy those

1078
02:09:38,240 --> 02:09:44,800
requirements. And all the other buildings are some other variation. You go to the industrial side,

1079
02:09:44,800 --> 02:09:51,440
you go to the winery, you go to the new ones up on Grove. They're all very different.

1080
02:09:51,440 --> 02:09:56,480
And they don't meet... I mean, you look across the street and you look at a 30-foot

1081
02:09:56,480 --> 02:10:01,520
setback. Those homes look beautiful. And I totally agree with you. In a historic area,

1082
02:10:01,520 --> 02:10:10,640
and you have a 30-foot setback, it's wonderful. But if I go across the street to the Grove

1083
02:10:10,640 --> 02:10:17,040
Lofts, for example, there's a 30-foot setback, but it's a paved parking lot. So how is that

1084
02:10:17,600 --> 02:10:24,800
consistent with the design guidelines for the Grove Street? I mean, the Grove Street,

1085
02:10:24,880 --> 02:10:30,880
the Grove Neighborhood Plan. So there's a lot of inconsistency. And I'm not here to say,

1086
02:10:30,880 --> 02:10:35,920
you know, that's wrong, that's ugly, and that's whatever. That's not my purpose here.

1087
02:10:37,120 --> 02:10:44,080
I wanted to present a solution that Healdsburg could be proud of and that would be happy

1088
02:10:44,080 --> 02:10:52,000
to have in their community and will certainly take into consideration the public's and the

1089
02:10:52,000 --> 02:10:58,640
neighbors. I mean, we're going to be a neighbor. So I'm certainly sensitive to that. So we'll

1090
02:10:58,640 --> 02:11:06,320
definitely take that into account. We'll consider what has been said. And we'll see what we can do

1091
02:11:07,520 --> 02:11:12,960
to mitigate some of the concerns. And again, I would like to thank the commissioners for

1092
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:20,080
their time. And I'd like to thank the public neighbors. Believe me, I'm a neighbor, so I get

1093
02:11:20,080 --> 02:11:32,080
it. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Okay, so that concludes our workshop. We don't have any, there's

1094
02:11:32,080 --> 02:11:36,960
no director's report or anything in the thing or, okay, cool. Well, then we are adjourned. Thank

1095
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:46,960
you, everybody.

1096
02:12:06,960 --> 02:12:16,960
Thank you.