Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Altman. Chair Goss, are we ready or Vice Chair Goss, are we ready to call the meeting to order?

Yes, thank you. I call this meeting to order at 6.31 p.m. And let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam Clerk, please call a roll call.

Yes, Commissioner Marilyn Avalon. Present. Commissioner Eric Altman. Present. Commissioner Devette Muhammad. Present. Vice Chair Shelby Goss. Present. And Chair Charles Plummer is absent this evening.

Thank you. First up, we have presentations, and I believe there are no presentations on the agenda for this evening. Correct? Okay.

So we can move on.

Next we have a public comment for items not on the agenda Anyone who would like to provide public comment online? We have no public comments this evening All right, thank you I will close public comments Next director Cooper. Are there any agenda changes?

Thank You vice chair Goss. We have no agenda changes tonight. I

Okay, thank you. Moving to the consent calendar, I may have a motion to approve the consent calendar for the minutes of May 28th, 2026.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes of the May 28th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

I will second that motion.

Okay, can I get a roll call vote?

Yes. Commissioner Marilyn Avalon? Aye. Commissioner Eric Altman?

Aye.

Commissioner Devette Muhammad? Aye. Vice Chair Shelby Goss? Aye. Chair Charles Plummer is absent.

Okay. Next, we have a public hearing on an accessory dwelling, sorry, an accessory dwelling unit ordinance update. Director Cooper, do you have a staff report? I do. Thank you, Commission. And now, Director DePaulo. Director Cooper, please mute the director. I do want, is this...

We did receive late this afternoon a letter from Cal HDF And they apparently have some comments on our accessory dwelling unit ordinance. And I guess that's the reason we have public hearings, so people from the public and agencies can review the work and offer their comments. I haven't had a chance to review their letter apart from noting that they are suggesting there's some areas of the ordinance that might need amendment. So I went to all this trouble of creating a presentation So I'd like to give it to you But I do I think I would change my recommendation to ask the Commission to continue this hearing to your next Regular scheduled Planning Commission meeting and that way the city attorney and I can review the letter in detail make sure that we're addressing any valid comments that we've heard and fold that into the ordinance as necessary and SO WITH THAT, THE NEXT TIME I'LL HAVE A SHORTER PRESENTATION BECAUSE I'M GIVING YOU THE LONG ONE NOW. I'M REMINDING YOU WE HAVE A HOUSING ELEMENT. AND IT WAS ADOPTED AND CERTIFIED BY STATE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN 2023. SO IT'S ALREADY THREE YEARS OLD OF OUR EIGHT-YEAR CYCLE. I HAD A MEETING WITH THE NAPA SONOMA COLLABORATIVE TALKING ABOUT THE UPCOMING HOUSING ELEMENT CYCLE IN 2031. AND IT'S SOONER THAN IT THINKS BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE'LL NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT YEARS IN ADVANCE. AND SO THESE THINGS ARE ONGOING. uh... in our housing element today there is a very large list of uh... implementation measures and we've been working away on them diligently uh... i have one here for the uh... eighty you ordinance and this is a regularly updated ordinance uh... state laws constantly evolving uh... requiring new changes to see up to to speed but it is uh... part of just the housing element implementation programs of which there are over seventy So I guess if you break that down per month, that's maybe like one a month for eight years. Here is a list of the changes that we've made to the ADU ordinance. There's nothing really large. There's nothing significant in the way in which we would review ADU applications. uh... state law i guess uh... they're looking for loopholes that perhaps lesser cities might be using to get around the law we don't do that uh... but nevertheless we have to amend our laws and that we have just to accommodate some of these things so uh... it's interesting there is a new rule now that If you have a junior ADU, so this would be a smaller unit that is attached within the footprint of the house. And you can build a junior ADU where the bathroom is shared with the rest of the house. SO UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REST OF THE HOUSE HAS TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED. OTHERWISE, IF IT HAS ITS OWN RESTROOM, THEN YOU CAN RENT THEM BOTH OUT. SO STATE LAW FOLKS AT HCD SENT US A LETTER IN MAY INFORMING US ALL THESE DIFFERENT LAWS, AND SO WE'VE LOOKED THEM UP, AND THIS CAME UP AS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO MAKE A NOTE OF. We have never allowed less than 30-day rentals for junior accessory dwelling, because that makes it into like an Airbnb, and the purpose is for housing and not for transient use. So there's a slight wording change that helps make that very specific. It doesn't change what we've done, and perhaps even the language that's there now, but it's a specific language. The size of a junior ad you there was also a slight distinction to Clarify that it's equal or less than 500 square feet of interior livable space. I Guess that would exclude garages Because they're not per the building code. It's not considered a livable area but there's a distinction here about it being a size relative to livable space and We did exempt ADUs and junior ADUs from certain impact fees, and so this further clarifies that rule. When we get applications, we have 15 days to conduct a completeness review. uh... our practice is tended business days and so uh... the state law actually is is more lenient than our our current practice but we have to put this into into the ordinance to you see a lot There is an interesting aspect to accessory dwelling units if the application for it and the building permit doesn't meet standards We have 60 days in which to have hopefully the applicant corrects it But if that doesn't happen then state law says we actually have to literally deny the application I and then let them resubmit later on. I put this in the category of yet another distinction without a difference. We wouldn't kick people out of a system because they have to update their plans, but state law has a term of art that they put into the ordinance that requires us to literally deny them, which I think if someone's billing an ADU, I'm sure I'd want to be denied so I can get something right. So anyway, we work through that. There is always been a rule if the house For the accessory dwelling unit does not have sprinklers and some of the older ones don't then we are not allowed to require sprinklers in the junior and accessory dwelling units and so this there was a language clarification there just to make it perfectly clear and And then there's also a final distinction here. I believe it was also in the old ordinance, but there's a word term change. There are buildings and homes elsewhere, everywhere, where there may be code violations. And I guess some cities are saying you can't have the ADU unless you fix everything up. That's not something we've never done and wouldn't do. But apparently it does happen, I guess, in some cities, and so it has to be in the ordinance here that we will not deny an accessory dwelling unit if there are other code violations on the property. We work with people to correct them, of course, but we wouldn't go so far as to say you can't have your ADU permit. But the law says we have to make sure we say that. So those are the changes on this current update. Our last accessory dwelling unit update was, I think, a little less than two years ago. So they're pretty regular. So I guess if we hadn't done it for a while, I'd be talking about much bigger changes. So we're trying to, kind of like our iPhones or cell phones, keep it updated so we don't have any glitches. I did want to talk about, there was a workshop here about a month ago hosted by Napa County. They have a grant program for ADUs. And so I was part of a panel of among others who were really well versed in ADU worlds. But we did get a question from a member of the audience who lives in town, and he once asked if he could be allowed to build a stacked ADU, one on top of another. I hadn't heard of that before. I didn't know why that would be a no, but the state law today doesn't contemplate a two-story ADU. Now, it does talk about building one on the second floor of an existing house, like over the garage, over an existing house, but not standalone, freestanding two-stories. It hadn't come up before. So our ordinance doesn't permit that because our ordinance is based on state law, which doesn't allow it. But that doesn't mean we can't do it if we want to. So I've been pondering zoning regulations where how could this be allowed in a manner that would fit into a neighborhood without bothering the neighbors any more than one, you know, unreasonably. So if I think about the current ADU rules today, they allow a single-story detached ADU anywhere in the lot, backyard, three feet from the side yard and the backyard. So that's pretty close. But if you think about a single story, most homes have six-foot fences in between. So if it's a single story, most of the windows that are maybe infringing on the neighbor's lot are below or at the level of the fence, and then you have a pitched roof. so if you go to stories i could see someone being upset if it was three feet away there is a second story windows there's my backyard now i've completely lost my privacy so i can understand that because the two-story edu isn't required by state law we can create our own rules under which we would say okay so i've been pondering some of these uh... and that would be today you get a twelve hundred square foot detached so what if you took it split in half a lot eight hundred eight hundred and turn it on its end you have two stories eight hundred eight hundred so the footprint is eight hundred feet make sure you have a pitched roof because that looks nicer and then Separated ten feet from the side yard and backyard so not three feet but ten feet So you have more space in between? Maybe even have some room to be able to plant something along your fence for privacy Gives a little more breathing room Can I jump in with a quick chorus I Might have misheard, but I thought you had said that the current

standalone size is 1,200. So why would we do a stack that 800 which would give you 1,600?

It's a bigger number. It could be 1,200, six and six.

Well, but you're right. Yes. Yes. I'm just, you know, yeah, that was the first thing that.

Oh, well, you're right. Yeah. Maybe my math is off. Okay.

If I could jump in, I think the 800 came from the idea that the other minimum standard is an 800 square foot ADU that meets four foot minimum side mirror setbacks. So it's tapping into the other one of the other state minimums. is the idea of allowing two on top.

Got it.

Yeah. Thank you. Okay.

Okay. Thank you.

But I think you do raise the point. If we are going to allow something that isn't allowed today, we do get to pick the rules. Okay.

So that said, the thing that you mentioned initially of a concern of windows looking out, I see how you are somewhat addressing it. but can you, I mean, if we get to make the rules, can we say, Hey, no windows that look towards other property, they can look towards the, I don't know what you call it, the parent property of the ADU, but they can't look out at other properties. You could do a roof, skylights. You could do whatever you want to draw natural light in, but no windows on the side that face other properties.

You could do that. One of the rules for the building code with bedrooms is you have to have a window from which you can escape in the fire and for ventilation. So these are small areas. And you assume what I wrote here would be not having the doors facing the neighbors. So the front door would be probably in the kitchen or in a little seating area. And then the back part would be the bedroom and restroom. So it would constrain how they configure this relatively small area And given that the front part would be more of the kitchen living, with the rear and side being probably the bedroom and restroom. But there may be other solutions, but you do raise a point. We do get to pick the rules and But keep in mind that we're working with small areas that are probably constrained on a rule like that might have some consequences that might make them infeasible just because of the small area. I did have, just for fun, an example of what it might look like. Just to, you know... And there's an example of little floor plans. I guess a studio, small, if it was maybe 600 feet, you'd have perhaps more of a studio format, which then maybe makes it more flexible for windows. But if you have a separate bedroom, then don't know you have to I'm not an architect but anyway just kind of getting some ideas so I didn't want to bring this change to you today we're sort of cooking up ideas and thinking it through and wanted to just get your reaction on if this is something to pursue and kind of look at what might be issues of concern to the commission as we kind of work through this. It's not really on a specific timeframe, but seems like a good time to be thinking about it as we're making other changes to the ADU ordinance. And we can put that picture in the ordinance, make it look like that. This is, by the way, This is, believe it or not, this is an AI image that I specified and it turned out pretty good. Yes. So I guess I'm changing my recommendation to continue to your next regular meeting. We do have time. The city council agenda is full until September. So we could bring this back in your July meeting and it wouldn't pinch up against a planned council meeting.

and then uh... once it's adopted it needs to go to the state department of housing to be development and they'll have their little look through and let me know if i missed anything thank you director cooper house i like seeing what you guys are working i appreciate that uh... are there any commissioner questions and out of order

Is that unusual?

Commissioner Avalon?

I just have more of a trend in data question for you, Commissioner Cooper. What are we seeing in American Canyon regarding trends and homeowners applying for applications for ADU? Is it happening a lot in American Canyon? Like how many do we have? Do we have people lining up out the door wanting to build these units attached or detached to their homes? I'm just curious. What are the trends we're seeing now in our city?

It's hanging in there. It hasn't really risen as much as I would have hoped. We get around six or so per year. And so I think the reality of the matter is when people have a home, they have to become landlords, and they have to build it, too. So kitchen remodel puts terror in my heart, let alone building a unit and then having strangers moving in to my property So it's a life, definitely a lifestyle change and comes with financial risk and cost and effort. So it's hard. So I have sympathy for the state trying to find streamlined ways to make it easier for people. And I really have a lot of blessing for the county having grants to help people and the Napa Sonoma ADU Center devoted to help walking people through the process. It's it's I guess part of the effort too is getting the word out that these resources are available But at the end of the day it is a both You know a complicated technical issue financial and then lifestyle So not for everybody, but I'm glad there are some that it works for them The other Commissioner questions

OK. Are there any public comments?

There's no public comment other than the comment that written comment we received from Cal HDF.

OK. Thank you. So I guess given that, is there a motion to continue?

I would like to go ahead and make a motion to continue the public hearing for the accessory dwelling unit ordinance update to our next meeting.

Is there a second?

I second. Next regularly scheduled meeting.

Can we do a roll call vote?

Yes. Commissioner Marilyn Avalon? Aye. Commissioner Eric Altman? Aye. Commissioner Devette Muhammad? Aye. Vice Chair Shelby Goss? Aye. And Chair Charles Plummer is absent.

Okay, thank you. And thank you, Director Cooper, again, for that presentation. And the update from Count HDF also.

Thank you, and next time I can delete a couple of slides. You'll remember.

And we always need all of the information, all of the reminders. Moving on to business, looks like there are no business items, so we will move to management reports. Director Cooper?

Well, I do have some update for you that's even more recent than the table that I sent with the packet. And these are all kind of exciting in a way. The one that's maybe exciting in a bad way is the Napa Olympia mobile home park. Residents have received a very high rent increase. And so there is a very complicated and thorough process to consider it, review it, feedback, independence. So we're kind of working our way through that. We'll be having a website set up pretty soon that will be able to show all the process and where we are and what information is available with each of the process. But at the moment there were, as of yesterday, we received petitions from residents requesting mediation We've reviewed that, affirmed that there are enough residents who've signed it to move forward with mediation. If mediation is unsuccessful, it moves on to arbitration, and then the arbitration would be final. But in between that, there's a lot of... A lot of detail. So we're working through that. I know it's really important to the people who live there. It's a large increase. Apart from that, yesterday we received an application for pre-zoning for the Hess Laird property. This is earmarked in our general plan as special study. And so this pre-zoning would essentially fulfill what the pre-zoning was envisioning in terms of getting something in place that might ultimately lead to annexation. So there's some complicated issues with that, with the urban limit line and such, and we have our best and brightest legal minds working on that.

Which property is that where is that located.

It's north of the Paley Watson pro property on the east side of the highway just across the bridge. Which by the way the. Paley Watson property was approved for annexation into the city by laugh Co and we're in.

I guess it's not an appeal it's like it's a hearing the laughter process has what's called a protest hearing. So LAFCO sent out a notice to the people entitled to register concern, if any, and then that results in another LAFCO, not a LAFCO hearing, but a protest meeting set for a couple weeks from now. And they'll assess if there's a statutory protest or not. And depending on the outcome of that, the annexation will be done and approved, or it might go to a voter vote, or it may not continue. We are confident that it should go forward, but that process is going through as to the parallel Watson Lane annexation through LAFCO.

Do we know if people are protesting in advance or if they effectively are protesting at this?

We don't yet know. To my knowledge, nobody has submitted anything yet to LAFCO, but we don't have minute-by-minute-by-minute updates. But it's like a Prop 218 hearing where it's not counted until the end.

Right, right. So what is the date for that?

That I have to double check. It's the middle of July, but off the top of my head, I'm not sure which one. We'll circle back by email. Close enough. That's fine.

Thank you.

And that's all run through LAFCO. That's not one we're running yet.

Yeah, no, I get it. And then about a week ago or so, maybe less than that, I'm not sure if they necessarily paid their deposit yet. But anyway, it's recent. It would be a modification to the promontory project. This is in Watson Ranch, the only property not owned by AC1. And so they have some requests to amend some of their conditions of approval. So we'll be bringing that to you in a future meeting. Other than that, I think everything else is... But I had something to tell you because everything else is not a whole lot different than the month before.

Do you know when the grocery store is going to open?

You know, I actually had inquired with the property owner a couple of days ago. How's it going? The tenant is finding a contractor to build it. their permit was issued, I think, in March. So I contacted the property owner to see how's it going, because we haven't had any inspections yet.

If I can quickly follow up on that, and I'm asking this just because, you know, it's me, but I like that Commissioner Avalon referred to it as a grocery store. Do we know for sure that it really is a grocery store and not a liquor store with a little bit of groceries? And I'm asking that because if you look at the sign, the banner that they have hung on the building, it seems to put a bit of an emphasis on spirits, wine, liquor, et cetera.

The question was asked, uh... during during the review process for the permit in the answer was given as a grocery store but there are thresholds tip it from one to the other so perhaps we'll find out when it opens uh... uh... any other questions or updates

All right, well, thank you, Director Cooper.

Thank you.

And then moving to planning commissioner comments. And do any commissioners have comments or updates, good and welfare you'd like to share? No? Okay. All right, then. With that, I hereby adjourn this meeting at 7.01 p.m. Thank you, and good night.

Awesome.