Parks, Recreation & Open Space Commission - Regular Meeting

Call this meeting to order. Um, planning staff, please uh have a roll call. Yes. Um, Commissioner Pilch present. Commissioner Pearson present. Chair Mloud is yet to I don't know how you say his name. Mloud has yet to appear, so he's absent at this time. Um, Commissioner Mamin, yeah, that we have a And here comes our chair. And so, uh, he has arrived.

Let Let the record show that the chair Yes. Let the record show that the chair has now arrived at 7:02.

Okay, so we've done roll call and call to order. We've done that. Um I will read the land acknowledgement. City of Albany recognizes that we occupy the land originally protected by the Confederated villages of Luchon. We acknowledge the genocide that took place on these lands and must make strides to repay the moral debt that is owed to this indigenous people, specifically the Aloney tribe. We thank them for their contributions which have transformed our community will continue to bring forth growth and unity. City of Albany commits to sustaining ongoing relationships the tribe together build a better future for all that now make this and with that uh we could move on to exparte communications I have none uh consent calendar approval of minutes one item does anyone wish to pull that item from the consent calendar. Does any member of the public wish to consent calendar? We should check online just in case.

I'm seeing none at the time. All right. Um, seeing as no one that from the consent calendar, does anyone I move to approve the consent calendar? Second it. Second. Okay, we'll go to a vote. Commissioner Mman, I'll abstain since I was not part of the meeting. Okay, fair enough. Yes. Yes.

I vote yes as well. That item's been approved. Uh item number four, public comments. For persons desiring to address the commission on an item that is not on the agenda, please note that city policy limits each speaker to three minutes. Is there anyone public comment at this time? I see no one online. I don't believe that there is anyone who wishes to speak in the audience.

Okay, we'll close item four and move on to item five. uh 5-1 planning application PA25-051 807 Elbert Avenue design review to construct a new 620 square foot second story and demolish 9 square feet to the right staff do presentation for us

yes we do chair uh good evening commissioners and members of the public and the applicant my name is Mera Han associate planner with the city tonight I'm here to present design review application PA250 5051 at 807 Talbot Avenue. So, let's start as usual with the project location and context. The subject lot is located on the east side of Talbot Avenue between Washington Avenue and uh to the north in Solano to the south. The lot is developed with a an approximately 1,256q ft two-bedroom, one-b singlestory home constructed in the bungalow style in 1924 with a detached onecar garage constructed in 1988 at the rear and right southeast corner of the lot with an area of about 2500 square ft. project site is substandard both in size and um in width where a minimum lot area of 3750 square feet is standard per the Albany municipal code. The residence has an existing non-conforming uh uh front yard and left north sideyard setbacks where 15 and three feet is required by the code respectively. Uh the existing front porch has an existing non-conforming uh front yard setback as well uh being at six feet uh 4 in from the lot line where a minimum of 9 ft is required. Uh the property has seen several re renovations throughout the years. Uh one of them is the is onetory rear edition which was approved in 1994. Uh, previous owners also illegally converted the detached garage into a secondary dwelling unit and landscaped the previously existing driveway. Other accessory structures include a sauna, small sauna at the rear and 14 foot shed on the right side of the house. Uh, a current building permit application to legalize the AD conversion at the detached garage is underway.

So moving on to the site plan, the project proposes, this is a very straightforward u application and we see these almost every month. The project proposes to construct a new 620 square ft second story towards the rear of the existing house which is shown here uh inside the blue dotted lines on this slide uh both on site uh plan in elevation view. Um and um uh it also includes the demolition of a small portion of the um of the porch on the right south side of the existing uh porch as I said and removal of the shed and sauna towards the rear. Um again uh the building permit application to legalize the conversion at the detached garage is underway which is shown in the super super light blue at the right bottom of that site plan. Okay. So in on elevation, so as you can see here, the proposed second story is designed to be significantly recessed from the non-conforming first story front facade, making the project conforming as well as recessed from the left north wall and flush with the rear and right south side. So uh the project conforms with all uh required minimum setbacks. Um it would result in a 1535 square foot two-story four-bedroom, two- bath residence with a maximum height of 22 uh feet 11 in. So the project as designed complies with all the objective standards. In terms of building design, as me as as mentioned previously, the new second story is considerably set back uh from the existing front facade and features a variation of plan depths on the north and south sides which provides articulation and visual interest. It also uh proposes to match the existing architectural style and not only that but also the materials with wood fins at

the walls, uh composite uh shingles to match the existing roof and wood trim at the recessed windows. uh project proposes no new windows on the north side and places those on the south side at at a size distance um and location that minimizes direct sight uh into neighboring properties. Um staff has not received comments from the public regarding this project as and so we are moving forward with uh staff recommendation. Um we staff recommends that this planning and zoning commission review and approve the proposed project subject to the findings and standard conditions of approval. Um after we sent uh the packets to the commissioners with the conditions of approval, we met with the applicant and uh we are proposing to um make an addendum, small addendum to um condition of approval number nine uh to provide the alternative to the applicant to retain the existing curb and restore the previously existing driveway, which right now is landscaped if it is compliant with um our code in terms of driveway width and length. And uh this can be taken care uh through the building permit phase. Um and then if they were to restore the driveway uh if they decided to take advantage of that alternative um we uh would add a standard the standard uh question um condition of approval for parking on the driveway which pretty much reads that um let me just it's a standard condition of approval. We add um so if the driveway is restored, vehicle parking on the driveway shall only be permitted if no part of the vehicle one extends beyond the property lining to the public right away or two comes within one foot of the back of sidewalk or three constitutes a

visual obstruction exceeding 3 ft in height within 20 feet five 25 feet sorry of the intersection of any two street line. So that's basically standard language that we add to most of our um applications. However, on the packet that you received, we hadn't added it because we were asking the the applicant to remove the to to to remove the the curb cut. So after talking to the with the applicant, we realized staff was made aware that there's a way to make the driveway compliant uh during the building permit phase. So, uh, with that, staff recommends that the commission approve the proposed project subject to our findings and standard conditions of approval with this addendum.

All right, thank you for the presentation. Are there any questions for staff? A question. So in terms of the driveway, if I'm reading the plans correctly, it looks like there's only seven feet between the property boundary and the home. Is that stand? Like that's not enough for a driveway,

right? Which is the reason why we had proposed to include that first version of the condition of approval to remove it. However, let me show let me see if I can show uh the plans here. And we have the applicant here as well in case that you want to um ask him any questions. Let me just pull up the plans and share with you all. Okay, there we go. Okay. Share the plans. All right. Okay. Okay. So we have the plans here. Um so basically if you see this area right here right where it's 711 and the minimum is 7 and a half of width right the code uh our section of the code that uh regulates parking um says that a driveway should have an area where a car could be parked that is at least seven and a half um wide by 16 ft deep. So basically this area right here which was previously approved and already existing would serve as the access to the parking area right here.

Right. But because it because the porch comes out it's only seven feet and so you wouldn't be able to get back to that 7 foot. Exactly. Which is why we are placing that other condition of approval that they shouldn't park um in that area. um because it's too short. And so are you proposing to remove the curb cut?

No, we're giving the applicant the option to either remove So let me read you the the revised condition of approval. Number nine would be the building permit plan set shall show the removal of the curb cut with restoration of the curb, gutter, paving, planting strip and sidewalk and the removal and landscaping of the driveway. That's one option. Alternatively, the curb cut may be retained if the building permit plan shows the restoration of the driveway that leads to a parking pad with minimum clear dimensions of 7 and 1/2 ft by 16 ft. The driveway within the front yard setback shall not exceed 7 feet in width, which uh complies with another section of the code that regulates access to a driveway. So we're basically by doing this we are giving the the applicant the option um and then at the end of the condition it says landscaping in the in the front yard area shall be retained except for direct access to the residence and a code compliant driveway which also meets um language in their code.

I see. So you're saying if they redesign the project to have 7 and 1/2 ft then they can retain the curb cut. That is correct. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. Of course. Thank you. Any other questions? Stop. Yes. Um, so I didn't see an existing uh first floor plan. Uh, but I assume that the first floor will be considerably altered uh or no because there is the addition of stairs. Right. Right. So, proposed upper floor. So, basically here.

Oh, there is the far diagram. Okay. I didn't think I think it's on the next other way. Go down. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right there. They're they're both lower. That's the performance of the existing.

So is it is it um so there's must be the addition of uh stairs uh which aren't in the current plan aren't in the current house correct. Um is that the only change in the first exist in the first floor? Maybe the applicant can answer better. I have to press this. Okay. Good evening. Good evening. Green. Good evening. Yes, I'm the uh the applicant. So, happy to answer questions. Are you the owner or the architect? I am the owner. Okay. Yeah.

And yeah, so that was my question is just whether the exist how much change there's going to be in the existing first floor plan. So um in the diagram we would see if in the existing far diagram that we see here uh that is the okay

the stu the study nook in the wall that's uh just to the west of that where it says study nook and I can approach it closer if you'd like. Uh and that that will be removed and that's where the stairwell will be placed. Uh and the hallway is a three-foot hallway so that's what accounts for the setback. So when you look at the proposed second floor addition, the stairwell approaches uh from that area.

So you can see now in where there was a study nook, it says stairs and then there's a the closet's now a pantry, but it's still essentially the same. My angle is bad for reading this, but I have it here. I'm just trying to find which page it is. Give me one second. Okay, I'm sorry. Could you repeat that about the closet?

Sure, no problem. Um, so the uh if we were to scroll up on the uh PDF document where it says uh study nook uh and then closet uh north of bedroom 2, that area is where the stairwell will be placed uh with the right rise and run to get you to the second floor edition. Gotcha. Okay. Okay. So that and that's the only change then in the first floor. Uh correct. Okay. Y All right. Uh that answers that question then. Thank you. That's all I had.

Um I guess I have a question for the applicant while we have you. What was the thinking on the upper floor with no windows on the north side? Um the uh placement on the north side um

on the second floor. Yeah. First floor. I understand. So there are there are no windows on the proposed upper floor on the north side. Uh principally because of our window narrative states that that is our neighbors. Uh they have also had a second floor addition and that's basically their bedroom because I've gone on my roof and had to do some work. Um so for those reasons we decided for privacy to only place windows on the east uh west and then of course the south uh and the the south orientation the window in the primary bedroom uh is set back from where our neighbor to the uh south is such that we would not be looking into their home either. And that's in the window narrative further down in the document if you'd like to read it.

So you couldn't do that? So you couldn't do that on the north side like staggering windows with your neighbor? Um I mean I guess we could but I thought it was just the best case scenario for for everyone involved. Uh we did receive comment from our neighbors to the north and they were very pleased with the process. Uh they reviewed the plans and I mean he sent me a text message says looks really good. I can provide that if you'd like. Okay. Anyone else have questions for staff for the applicant? Um, okay. Thank you. Yeah. I just want to enter else you want to add too?

Yeah. I just want to enter for public comment. Uh, Mera Han, your associate planner, has been extraordinary, collaborative, helpful, and very patient with the entire process. So, she is uh I wouldn't be here without her, and we're all very lucky to have her. So, I just want to make sure everyone's aware of that. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for sharing that. We all agree. Okay. Terrific. Um, we should open this to public comment. If there's anyone online who would like to comment on this item, please. I am seeing no um attendees at this time that are

okay. Then we will close public comment on this item and move to commissioner discussion. Anyone thoughts start? You could I I'll I'll just I just have a quick comment. I had I thought the project was perfectly fine. I missed the part about the missing north side windows. Um uh so I do think that that um makes that elevation a bit stark. Uh another alternative uh to not having windows is having obscure windows. having windows with, you know, frosty glass so that you can't see through and then you'd uh you'd still get light but you wouldn't have privacy concerns. So, uh I wonder if my other um commissioners would would consider making that a uh condition of approval. That's my only comment. Yeah, I I also noticed that blankness of the north side wall, but the existing setback is just 8 in from the lot line and they have recessed it back another three and a half ft or so. So I think I'm not sure like what is the gap between two structures.

Thank you uh Mr. Nick for that comment because I didn't consider the aesthetics of the north side wall. Indeed, if you're walking uh on Sal Talbet towards Salano, you would probably just see the side without much aesthetics. Um we're certainly open. If uh I don't know if we can pull up the diagram, but currently on the north side of the first of the current house, there are what we call the slit windows that open up like this. So, it creates privacy, air flow, uh etc. So, I mean, I'm open to considering that. Uh I was it was simply designed that way for privacy for our neighbors. Um but we would be open to that or if it's not a condition uh if we're then allowed in the permitting process to add it, that's something we could explore as well. So

all right. Well, we'll we'll keep discussing it. Okay. If not along the whole face of the building, you know, you can consider having a window at this in the front portion. You can like as you walk along the street you see you know not all face of the building like you would see part of that maybe 1/4 or something and having some window some penetration there I think would relieve you know provide some relief there you could you could consider adding a window to the bedroom front bedroom sidewalk so for for the just to understand the perspective of the discussion of the commission that's principally for aesthetics from from the street.

Fair enough. We really should keep this to commissioner discussion at this course. Let me ask you to comment then we'll do so again. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Not like we have a big agenda. We place the just just for the commissioners so you can see we put the elevations up there so you can discuss it further if you need to. Yeah. Or you can look at the first I think sheet which has a street view that shows all three buildings together and looks like they are qu cut quite close each other. They are somewhat close but no closer than many properties that

right? Yeah. So you know um that blankness would not be that visible you know and if you have like a window in the front portion that I think could be enough and it could be the blank like frosted window or a real window depending on how it compromises the privacy of the neighbors. Yeah. Other than that, I don't have any comments. I support this project. Thank you. Thoughts?

Yeah, I mean I I um I didn't notice this when I was reviewing the staff report. I thought the project looked looked um you know, made a lot of sense. But yeah, just seeing on the upper floor not having any windows like I mean aesthetically but also for light, you know, coming into the stairwell or into the bedrooms like add to your energy efficiency if you have light and air. So, I mean, I I I would be in support of um a condition of approval to, you know, revisit, you know, at least one or at least two windows along that along that side.

Okay. Well, I would agree with that. I I I think the blank facade sort of looks worse to me aesthetically than with windows. Um and I I I really would support adding windows to have light in the stairwell. And I think two windows would be appropriate. And whether you wanted to put, you know, obscure glazing on them or have them, you know, be kind of higher up clear story type windows where you just sort of looking up more at the sky or roof lines. Um, so I would support a condition having two windows basically in the stairwell. Um, because that's going to be an awfully dark space otherwise. Very dark. Yeah. I think just for I mean you have skylights but um I think windows would also definitely I would support that otherwise I have no problems and I appreciate you pulling the upper floor back and you know it's tough to build on these little lots if we want to help you know improve your property and you know live there uh more comfortably. Yeah, I do appreciate the effort to pull it back a little bit. That does give you a little space for the neighbors already. And so having a couple of windows there, I don't think it's too close. Closer than we see on a lot of properties where we have three feet or less on the bottom floor. So that's all good. And I think the other side of the property with the windows, we could have a motion to have two windows um stairwell area. I would be very happy with that.

Okay. Is there there's no further discussion? Just one question I forgot to ask staff. U the front wall uh at the minimum setback requires setback the front wall of the second story does it right at the setback? No, no, no. It's way it's it's considerably pulled back. If you read the staff report, you will see that um it is let's see so the current house has let me see let me just show you the site plan. So you see this difference right here so it's 8t almost 8t and 5 in uh further behind the setback. Exactly behind the existing setback. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. I think it could be you know that room could be a little bigger. Currently, it is just 9. Currently, it is just 9 ft 5 in. I don't see any reason why it is pulled back so much. You can have another foot added to that room that could make it more usable. Um, so are you saying to move the wall

to make that room more usable? If you go to the floor plan, second story floor plan, Go go go to the next uh floor plan. These are just F diagrams. Go to the next sheets. No floor plan which shows dimension. Go further down. Down. Yeah. Down. Down. Yeah. Uh go down. Yeah, there it is. Uh go slide. Yep. So you can see that front bedroom number four is just 9 ft 2 in wide. So if you put a bed there, you know, you would just have like 2 ft on either side or even less.

I think they're close to the max F. They're at 48%. They could get to 50. You can get to add two more percentage points. Yeah, they are. Okay. So that's the reason you got it. Okay. That's part of the problem. Yeah. uh the have a problem if they move the wall forward a little bit the option if they go over the max F then does it require that

um if it it already goes over the 0 55 however the code says that whenever ever the strict application of that F resulted in a in a house smaller than 1500 square f feet then the commission may approve an F up to60 and this one is 5999999 F. So, um, right there. Yeah. Yeah. So, there really isn't an option. There isn't really an option the FAL. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Even Yeah. on small lots, it's not easy. Exactly. It's It's a very small lot. Um,

well, have a motion. Uh, I can try. I think the consensus was to approve planning application 25-051 uh with the additional um condition of approval to add two windows to the stairwell area on the upper level north side and the addendum to condition number nine and the additional condition number 47 of about the driveway. So, it's Oh, okay. Is that um is that see is that could just state that it's the additional conditions of approval as proposed by staff in the staff report. Thank you. Make it a lot easier for you.

Yes. Yes. And additional conditions as proposed by staff. Have a second. I have a second. Okay. Let's vote. Yes. Yes. Yes. I vote yes as well. Your project's approved four to zero. Um there is a 14-day appeal period. If their story pulls up, they next two weeks appeal period is over. Congratulations. Thanks for coming.

Um with that planning application PA25-051 807 Talbot Avenue has been approved. Uh item 5-2 has been postponed and continued. Yes, that's to a date uncertain or date certain to a date uncertain at this time. We're working with the applicant at this moment. Okay, fair enough. Uh item six, new business, election of new planning commissioner, commission chair.

Sorry, could we just go back to 52? Um, you mentioned it's um it's because of I think public outcry. You said uh I didn't say public outcry. I said community concern. Oh, that's very different than public outcry. Yeah. Right. Well, thank you for the correction, but um does it have to is it in in line with the comments that we've already received about the project? Yes. Okay. Gotcha. Thank you. You have to take public comment on that one because it's already been noticed. We did receive comment from neighbors because of the notification. Yes. But I mean, do you have to take public comment if anybody's online? No, because it's continued. You continued.

I suppose if anybody did come and couldn't come at another time, we could open this item as part of the public hearing, hear that comment, and close it and then that would go on the record for the next hearing. We have no one here and no one There's no one online. Okay. Well, then we won't open that at all. We'll move on. Not needed. Not needed. Yeah. Six. Okay. And they will work out their issues and bring it back to us.

Okay. Fair enough. Let's do item 6-1. Election of a new planning commission. Well, we for the new commissioner, we should say that we have been having a uh tradition of the chair serving two years instead of just one. Uh we don't have to continue that tradition, but I hear that you're you're ready to step down. Uh I'll do whatever, but I think it's time to

Okay. Um, I we could uh we could have more discussion and go through the nomination process as well, but I'm ready to propose a motion to appoint Commissioner Mman chair and Commissioner Pearson vice chair. That is my motion. Thank you for that. Uh, but I would like to continue as a vice chair and I would rather uh nominate Commissioner Pearson as a chair. Oh, okay. Well, no second for my motion then. Oh, okay. Okay. Well,

that's all you have to do. Okay. So, you're I'm you know, I don't mind, but uh you know, I mean, share the share it. Let other people, you know, get the experience of it. I mean, it's being ceremonial. I've got to tell you, there's not That's a lot of like behind the scenes work. Oh, he's he's he's kidding you. He has a lot of power. Okay, great. Okay. Well, we need to make a motion. All right. Well, I'll withdraw that motion uh and move that uh we appoint Commissioner Pearson as chair and Commissioner Moment as vice chair.

I will second that. Votech. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. As well. Great. Well, that was easy. You did them in one spell swoop instead of separating them out. So, I really appreciate that. That was beautiful. Well, it wasn't that hard. I enjoy doing it, but it's, you know, definitely I understand the logic, you know, letting other people do it. points. All right. Okay. Uh, item seven, announcements. Staff, any announcements for us?

I just wanted to make sure you knew that we are working on the fifth commissioner. We do have several applications and um, they are being reviewed and we hope that there will be someone coming on board shortly, not the next meeting maybe, but within a month or so. Okay, great. Uh, and well, uh, I guess your announcements, just a question for staff. Will we be seeing um the is there a yearly yearly report due about our housing element um anytime soon?

There is the APR that will be due very soon. And um I um we are not starting that process yet, but we will be and we will bring that to you. Yes. Before it goes to HCD, we actually have to go to council for direction to submit it. So we'll bring it to you first. Okay, great. Thank you. Nothing further for me. I guess the only other question I would have is what policy items you see coming up in the next year outline.

We are currently Yeah, we're currently working on updates on the ADO ordinance. So, coming soon. Stay tuned. Okay. Um that's closed. We'll close item seven and adjourn the meeting. And our next meeting will be February 11th. Okay. And I I notified staff that if we have the second meeting in February, I won't be able to attend that one. Okay. Fair enough. Okay. Turn. Thank you everyone. Thank you.