Planning and Housing Commission - Regular Meeting

236 Foods and they're able to uh show them what we do here locally. So, I would take the pledge and I would encourage every other company to do so because again there's a lot of resources available with the city and the city is a great resource and has been a great resource for Latitude 36 Foods. So, take the pledge today or contact us to learn more.

Good morning everyone. We're here at City Park. We have our first big street clean up of 2024. We had about 50 volunteers come clean up the city as well as paint the skate park. It came out really great. It's good to help our community. I encourage everyone to volunteer with us in the future.

Our next cleanup event is going to be for Arbor Day at City Hall on March 16th from 9 to 11:00 a.m. We'll see you there. Most people look at Carbon Health and are like, "What is Carbon Health?" Carbon Health is the home of good health. We are here as an urgent care primarily. We have three providers that work in this clinic. We try to make sure that our teams are pretty fluid so that way everybody can do everything. School physicals, work physicals, pre-employment physicals, workers comp. If the employer needs a drug screen ahead of time, we do that as well. Vision All right. [Music] 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.

Thank you. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Individuals wishing to address the Planning and Housing Commission are requested to complete a speaker card and deliver it to the secretary prior to the item being heard by the commission. Please observe a 3minut limit for communications. Once called upon to speak, please state your name and city of residence for the record. For the minutes from August 11th, we'll look for approval. Miss Sanchez, are there any speaker cards for the public from the public tonight? We have no speaker cards. Madam Chair, do we have a motion? Uh, I motion for approval of these minutes and a second. Yes, I'll second.

Okay. Uh, we have Commissioner Cichelin making the motion and seconding by Mr. Woody. Please vote. All right. And that passes 300. Communications from the public. This portion of the agenda is intended for general public comments on items within the commission's jurisdiction that are not listed elsewhere on the agenda. Please note that state law prohibits planning and housing commission from discussing or taking action on these items. Please observe a threeminut limit for comments. Miss Sanchez, any speaker cards on this?

No, Madam Chair. Okay, we have no items on the consent calendar. The public hearings are items that have been publicly advertised for review and consideration by the planning and housing commission. The public hearing items this evening are three related applications so staff is requested to present them together. The commission can ask questions regarding each item, take comments, and vote on items individually. 6.1 is AHDB2024-00001 application for density bonus housing agreement for the development of 57 unit residential condominiums consisting of three affordable housing units located at 1717 Via del Rio in the R3 multiple family residential zone 6.2 2 TTM 38934 application for a tenative track map to create one lot on 2.82 acres for residential condominium purposes and fourletter lots totaling 0.04 acres for the construction of water quality management facilities located at 1717 Via Del Rio within the R3 multiple family residential zone. And last 6.3 CUP 2024-00003 application for a conditional use permit for the construction of 57 town home community condominium units on 2.87 acres located at 1717 Via Del Rio in the R3 multiple family residential zone. Applicant Louisa Felo, Meritage Homes of California, Inc. Brendan Daldi, the associate planner, will present these items together.

Thank you, Chair. Good evening, Chair Alexander, members of the planning commission. Brendan Daldy, project planner, and I'm pleased to present the item before you tonight for three uh applications. Starting off with conditional use permit 2024-00003, tenative track map 38934 and affordable housing density bonus 2024-00001 located at 1717 Via del Rio. Before you tonight's request, first request is for a conditional use permit for the construction of 57 town home townhouse condominium units, including three units to be dedicated as affordable at the very low income threshold. In addition to that, we have the tenative track map to create one lot measuring 2.82 acres and four lettered lots measuring 0.04 acres. Lastly, we have the affordable housing density bonus agreement for the management of the proposed affordable units. As always, I'd like to give the planning commission a brief background. Subject properties 2.87 87 acres zoned R3 has a general plan and land use designation of highdensity residential and that allows for a density of 15 to 36 dwelling units per acre. On the site right now is an existing church and will be demolished as part of the development. In addition to that, there's two uh existing telecommunication towers and those will be proposed to remain in place. Next, we have the development site plan. Uh starting up at the top on the left is building three. That'll be a 10plex front running via Del Rio. And then moving on into the interior of the site will be three additional buildings. That will be building four, five, and six. And those will be nine plexes. And then moving to the southeast corner will be buildings one and two. Those are 10 plexes as well. Fronting Avenue to Del Vista. Each building will be three stories, approximately 37 ft tall.

project site will also include tandem garages for all the two and threebedroom units and then a twocar garage side by side on the fourbedroom unit totaling for 129 total parking spaces on site. 15 of those spaces will be uncovered and those will be dedicated towards guest spaces. The remaining 114 will be dedicated to garage space. Moving on to the floor plans, we have three separate floor plans. Two variations for the twobedroom one. Uh these will be plans 2531 and 2531X. There will be nine of each of these units. Very uh minuscule difference in square footage here. So 1,300 ft square ft for the first one and then 1,268 for the second one. There's no difference in the second and third floors of these units. It'll just be a slight small square footage difference on the first floor relating to storage and garage area. Um, again, these are two-bedroom units, include a 75 ft deck, and will include a tandem garage at a at a bare minimum of 9 by40 foot dimension. Moving on to the larger unit, this will be the three-bedroom unit. There will be a total of 21 of these units, 1,496 ft will include a 75t deck and a 37 ft porch. In addition to that, it'll have a tandem garage at 9x40 ft minimum as well. This will be the largest of the three products, uh, plan 1638. This will be a fourbedroom unit. There will be 18 of these and it'll be 1,765 square ft. In addition to that, it'll have 110 ft deck and porch and will include a twocar sideby-side garage at 20x 20 ft minimum. On the top here, you'll see our product elevations. The front elevation here is the Templex product. This will be the largest product and most visible from both Vado Rio and Avanita del Vista. The project proposes traditional uh Spanish architectural style including Spanish

tile accents, concrete Spanish tile roofing, navy shutters, white stucco sand finish, and gritted vinyl windows throughout. On the bottom, you'll see the rear elevation as well. This is also the Templex product. This will be more visible from the interior of the site adjacent to those alleys. And again, it'll be 37 ft tall. Next we have the proposed landscaping. Total landscaping will be comprised of 26,217 square ft and totaling 86 new trees. 27 of these trees will be fronting via Del Rio and Avenue to Del Vista. That'll provide an additional buffer from the public right ofway in these new uhly proposed buildings. Um, in addition to that, we have a 17,793 square foot open space um, included in the project. And included in that open space area will be a tot lot and outdoor recreation area, barbecue, picnic, um, seating on the north interior portion of the lot. Next, we have our wall and fence plan. So, I want to start off on the northeastern corner adjacent to the Cronita Elementary School. That'll include a small 3-foot retaining wall with rod iron design on top. That'll be 6 ft from the finished grade to the top of this uh fence or wall. And then moving on to the northerly portion of the site adjacent to the existing highdensity residential. It's a reddish or purplish looking color there. That'll be a 6ft high block wall. These will be both gray in color and comprised of CMU uh block slump block. And then on the interior of the lot, you'll see all of these blue patio walls. These are just going to be short 3-foot uh high pony walls. These will be white white stucco finish and the same CMU block design. In addition to that, there are some other various proposals in here with the existing cell tower facilities. That's just a continuence of the rod iron

fencing that they have in place. They had to do a slight modification for the existing facility just due to the fact that they're going to include a lettered lot there for drainage purposes. And then they're going to modify the access through a various set of easements associated with the tenative trackm. And with that, we have the tenative track map 38934. Again, it'll be comprised of one 2.82 acre numbered lot for condominium development purposes. And then in addition to that, we'll have four lettered lots for water quality management facilities totaling 0.04 acres. These will be four different lettered lots located essentially on each corner of the lot. It'll be one adjacent to the intersection of Aanated O Vista and Via do Rio, then one modular wetland system on the southwestern corner of the project site. And then on the northeastern corner of the project site, you'll see that other lot D there um that's adjacent to the telecommunications facility. Um all these will be subterrain. You won't see anything above grade. It'll be a bio retention basin as well. Uh so properly landscaped. Wanted to give the planning commission just a brief reminder on state density bonus law. Uh when affordable units are proposed, it allows for the granting of waiverss and or concessions. In this case, they're proposing uh 5% of the development or three units in this case to very low income and that entitles them to one concession. So those concessions are based again off the dedicated affordability of those units. In addition to that, there's a density bonus agreement required with the city and that affordability restriction would be for a total of 45 years. Um, as part of the project proposal, the applicant qualifies for one concession and requests four waivers from Croninum Municipal um, code development standards. So, we'll start off with the four waivers requested. The first waiver is

going to be the waiver of an indoor recreation facility. The second waiver will be a reduction of the minimum front yard setback. The third waiver will be a reduction of minimum street sideyard setbacks. And then the fourth waiver is a reduction of the minimum building separation. And moving in the next slide, I'll get you a little bit more detail on how that looks. Um, their one concession that they're granted for was a concession from one of our municipal code requirements regarding the requirement of uh underground existing overhead utilities. Typically, those are associated with anything underneath 32 kilovolts, 32k volts, sorry. Um, and in addition to that, as part of the affordable component, they're allowed to use a different parking standard from our Corona municipal code, and that's stipulated within government code section 695 915P1. The applicant provided justification illustrating concessions and waiverss that are necessary to construct the affordable units. Sorry. Moving on. Waivers. So, we'll start again on the northwestern corner of the site. You'll see waiver number two there. That's going to be the most restrictive area and that's where we're asking for that reduction or the applicants asking for this reduction. It's going to be a reduction from the front yard setback requirement of 20 ft down to 18 ft. Moving interior of the site, you'll see the two separate the waiver number four is the reduction um from what the typical building separation requirement for a three-story building is 25 ft. On the upper portion of the site in between buildings four and five, it'll be reduced down to 18 ft or proposed to be reduced down to 18 ft. And then on the lower portion in between buildings four and six, it's proposed to be 22 feet of separation. And all the way at the very bottom, waiver number three is a request to

reduce the street sideyard setback, which is typically 15 feet, being requested to move down to 13 ft. On our next slide here, we have the proposed concession um regarding the utility and overhead utilities. So, this is kind of just a brief overview of of what the applicant is proposing. And in regards to the concession as well, cuz there are some telecommunication lines off Via Del Rio that will be proposed to be underground, there are some telecommunication lines that run from Via Del Rio across the street over into Burn Lane along with some other overhead electrical that's going to remain in place. And then every other electrical um along Via Del Rio running all the way down to the east, that will remain in place as well. You'll see the gray the green zigzags there off Aanita Del Vista. Those are a part of the uh street lights that are there currently. Those will be proposed to be underground. So, not all of the overhead that you'll see today is going to remain. There will be some undergrounding, but not all. And I want to just make it clear that off of Via Del Rio, all of the overhead electrical components will remain above above. And with that, we have staff's recommendation. staff recommends the approval of this project as listed on your screen here below of our recommendations. These recommendations are that the planning housing commission recommend to the city council that they pr find affordable housing density bonus 2024-00001 categorically exempt and recommend approval of affordable housing density bonus 24 2024-00001. In addition to that, we ask that the planning and housing commission recommended the city council approval of tenative trackm 38934. And lastly, staff recommends that the planning and housing commission adopt resolution number 2670 granting CUP 2024-00003 based on the findings contained in the

staff report and conditions of approval. Thank you for your time and myself and the rest of staff are available for any questions you may have. Additionally, I just want to give the planning commission just a heads up. The applicant also has a presentation that she will provide when she's called upon. Thank you. Thank you. Is it okay if we go ahead and see the presentation?

Yes, that'd be great. Thank you. Uh, good evening, commissioners. My name is Louisa Fletto. I'm with Meritage Homes. We're the applicant for this. Uh, just want to say thank you to staff. They've been great to work with as we've um worked through the entitlements on this project. uh very responsive, very helpful working through some of the different constraints we had and we're very excited to present this to you this evening. So, a bit about Meritage. Um so, we are a publicly traded home builder. We're the first fifth largest based on homes closed as of 2024. We were founded in 1985, so we're celebrating our 40th year this year. We operate in 12 states across the US, 31 markets and growing. and we've built nearly 200,000 homes as a company. Our Southern California division specifically started in 20 in 2004. Uh currently we have 14 actively selling communities, 11 that are approved and under construction and 21 in various planning stages. Uh operationally, we focus on market rate homes specifically for a first-time home buyer, first-time move up buyer. Uh something Meritage prides ourselves on is some of the different green features we showcase in our homes. Um so this is kind of what the slide touches on. Um two things that I do want to point out though are the spray foam insulation and our conditioned attics. So what that does it is for our town home product type which is attached living. It actually really dampens the sound that might permeate between units

and as well as having our conditioned attics, it actually helps keep your whole home a lot cooler cuz there's nothing exposed to the outside. Uh, Meritage Homes was proud to be uh one of the first national home builders to have all of our homes Energy Star certified. Um, we meet all title 24 requirements going above and beyond in some cases. Additionally, Meritage is, as I was saying, a proud recipient of some of uh the awards you see on screen. One of the things that uh we really pride ourselves on is that we participate in AVID ratings. And this is a third party service that builders large and small participate in. And it is a survey to new homeowners. And it's a one-mon survey and then a year-end survey. and our specific division here in Southern California has actually won um the highest award through AVID um for the last handful of years and we're really really proud of that. So I wanted to touch on something Meritage prides ourselves on and that's really that missing middle housing. Um, so for people who might not know, it bridges the gap between traditional single family homes and then your mid-rise high-rise apartments. And so whether that's doing um duplexes, town homes, you know, a stacked flat, it allows you to increase the density, but it spreads your development costs over more homes. So you're able to get we're able to keep our price point a little bit lower. We target that attainable rate and it spreads it out across more homes. So really kind of works with uh our buyers. So a bit about the project. I know Brendan I really appreciate the great presentation he did. So I just want to

share a couple images. Um this would be a rendering down that central PO space. Uh you can see some of the different activities going on in the background. So, it'll have the shade structure, seating, barbecue counter areas, and then as it goes farther to building four, that's at the end there, you get more of those active uses. This would be a view from Via Del Rio. Um, and the homes are elevated a little bit from the street view, but the landscaping and trees we think really help soften uh soften that impact. And I will leave it at that. My team and I are here to answer any questions you guys may have and I look forward to speaking with you more. Thank you for that presentation and thank you uh Mr. Dobby for uh your presentation um regarding ahdb2025001. Do my commissioners have any questions for staff?

I do. I'm going to try to keep the questions aligned to the uh three applications, but I'm not sure if I'm going to follow correctly on all those. Uh Mr. Dolly, thanks for the information. Um first question, what is the minimum number of bonus density units that can be applied for for the exemptions? Is it the two or three that

Yes, Commissioner squand? It varies based off of the percentage in which they're dedicated to and and it's tied to a percentage, not necessarily a total amount of units. In this particular case, they they had um proposed for 5% at the very low income threshold, for example, to be entitled to one concession. If they were to go to the low income, it would be 10% of the whole development. If they were to go to moderate, it would be 10% as well. And then if they wanted to propose for two concessions, they would have to double up their very low income threshold categories and so on and so forth. It kind of just increases based off of percentage.

Thank you for that. Yeah, it's been a while since we've seen that chart, so I just can't remember. Um the utilities, it was kind of interesting to see the utility slide. And uh could you explain maybe why portions of the utilities are moving underground um beyond is it just a cost issue but what's the rationale on some moving to the underground some not you can maybe give a more more detail on that.

Yeah if we could get the overhead utility slide back up please. Just in the interim, uh the concessions are specifically tied to a um identifiable cost reduction. That's that's what the con concession stems from. So in this particular case, our typical municipal code requirement will uh result in 32,000 uh volts to be underground. Anything under that would need to be underground. In this case here, if you see on the blue line and the red line, um sorry, the blue line's tied to telecom. So, we'll just focus on the red and yellow. Let me see. Sorry. 34. Okay. Okay. So the red line is the existing overheadce lines that will be remaining there along uh via del Rio and you'll see that running all the way from east to west. You'll also see a red line perpendicular to that running across Via del Rio that will be proposed to remain as well. the existing overhead telecom lines that will remain is further down um east of via del Rio up to the perpendicular line there. Those will remain running across via del Rio and then the blue line there is the telecom um overhead telecom lines that will be proposed to be underground. Just to further clarify, it's anything under 34,000. The reason I asked that, I I think this is the first time that we've seen a utility concession uh tied to density. And is that something that is new or is this just the first time that we've had an applicant request this?

This is the first concession that the city's seen and this is the first time in which it's been requested. Okay. So, it's so the utility concession is part of a table of allowable concessions. It's just that this is the first time we've we've weighed in on something like that. And and I guess the city too then.

Yeah, that is correct, Commissioner. Anything in that if they meet those um affordability thresholds based on that percentage and they're entitled to a concession. Anything in which it would ident and result in identifiable uh cost reduction, that would qualify as a concession. So, not particularly related to just utilities. In this particular case, the developer had um had the impression that this was going to be their identifiable cost reduction. It could be anything in which it would result in them not being able to obtain those affordable unit construction due to costs.

Right? So in this case, normally if this was a if this was not a a density bonus arrangement, uh this project would require the utilities to move underground. Would that normally Yes, that is correct. Okay. And on that, I had a question on that same thing. as you drive down Via Del Rio past this project site and you go past the school, all of those lines continue all the way through county and does that um play a part in it meaning they're all above ground east to west as you're driving in the area or does that not matter?

Yes, Chair Alexander. So the the municipal code requirement is is regarding the development itself and if there's any um increase in square footage that would potentially trigger that requirement. Um anything that's leading into the county or beyond that would be outside of the the project's immediate responsibility. Um so whatever is remaining overhead out in that area they wouldn't be conditioned to or required to if this was just a regular market rate development to correct. Correct. But just thinking that that's the standard going down via Del Rio uh in front of the school too. Uh they're all above ground. So um just this intersection, this project site, it made sense to me that those would stay above ground. There's my comment.

If I can just add a little bit because um the commission does not normally see requests for waiverss of overhead utility lines. are generally directly taken to city council and we have done waiverss for other projects if it makes sense and your example is spoton. The goal is always to get the overhead lines underground but sometimes it it doesn't work because you do have lines that will continue beyond the project. So it makes the waiver more palatable versus when you have other improvements where they've been undergrounding over time and to leave remnant areas up it's a little bit harder to justify. So in this case it was evaluated but just looking at the overall connection contiguous this was a palatable concession for us to make but I want you to know like we do have waiverss that come forward off and on but it's just normally not seen by this body. So in this case looking at it the portion that is in front of the school would not be under without this waiver. It would go below in the new development come right back up where it was.

That's correct. And then you would have to tie into a pull. So you have to find the right connection because if you have a pole that is offset maybe between the project site where one comes down and then it's offsite you can't necessarily go offsite to continue the underground. So you're putting up that poll to keep the under to keep that connection to the next one. Sure.

Uh can I uh ask for a little more clarification from Miss Ketta? The um what is what determines whether um a waiver like this um for a utility issue comes to the commission or goes directly to city council. Most of them go directly to city council because they're governed by uh title 15 of the CMC which is not reviewed by this body. But because you are reviewing a planning project under title 17, this was included as part of that. So this is why it came before this board. So those are when they go to the council, those are not necessarily for new projects that that are being built. They they are

okay.

They are. I had another question. If you possibly could pull up the landscaping plan that shows the walls and fencing, please. Um, yeah, actually that go back one. That would even be better right there. Yeah, great. Uh so the at the top the northeast corner uh so the portion of the applicant site that abuts the school if I'm correct cornita the that wall is a low wall with a metal open fence at top and I'm just curious as to why um if a housing area is ab budding a school why that would be the choice to have that wall there when The other abuing wall which is in kind of the cayenne color is a solid block wall. Is was that direction from the city to leave that um a low wall abuing the school or is that the applicant that chose that? Just curious on the thought process. And just to add that, I did see that the CNUSD uh approved it, whatever was presented to him for some reason, versus a solid wall,

or is that potentially a a code item that maybe drove that type of wall?

Yeah. Um, Commissioner uh, Sequelin and Chair Alexander, just to further um, answer your question here. So, they they designed a low retaining wall with a rod iron fence design. They didn't want to close it up. So, there's there's a little bit of a of a gap in between where the existing school wall is with their fence on top and where this proposed wall is. So, there's a there's a maintenance uh, situation that was occurred that had occurred with the uh, Corona district. And if you can, if I could request for past the thank you slide, just for one that one slide at the very end. Um, I'd like to kind of just weigh in a little bit more on that. There we go. So, this would be a cross-section or a view from Vod Rio looking into their existing design currently. So on the left you'll see an engineered cross-section that'll kind of show where their um line, you know, their influence lines from a structural perspective. Um but there's about a 7ft gap in between these two. And so what had originally happened is the school had built a retaining wall with their um fencing on top of it, not directly on line with the property. And so placing the wall there. I know this doesn't have any um particular um difference in the overall um height of the wall or anything, but this is just the 3-foot retaining wall that they had designed with the rod iron design on top so that they can get in there and maintain the landscaping accordingly. And this was this was what we had initially discussed with the applicant is is who's going to take care of the maintenance of this? And so that'll be taken over by the HOA and they had coordinated with Corona Norco um to maintain their schools portion of the property as well. And so that's where these two retaining wall 7 foot gap and gate come into play.

Right. Yeah, that's helpful. I don't I don't either went by so fast I didn't see it. But if you had a solid wall, you would almost have an alley effect. Correct. Correct. Correct. Lack of visibility. There would be concerns from the school side as well. Right. Okay. Thank you. that that makes makes sense to me. Um,

could you add on to that uh regarding fencing when you showed the uh solid red line or pink or whatever it was for adjacent to the Corona Park apartment complex next door? Do they also have a cinder block wall or what is the perimeter fencing for that community? Currently, it's just a chain link fencing back there, but on the Via del Rio side of the property, it'll be a a revamped uh block wall. There's there's an existing block wall there now, but it's a little bit shorter, but there will be a revamped uh 6 foot high CMU slump block wall that will be there on the north side of the project site. Correct.

Buted up against the other properties. That is correct. Yes. to the the highdensity residential property that's existing but without any space in between. No, there won't be any. It'll be right up on the property line. Thank you. Any questions further on the AHDB2024 for staff? I do have one other staff. Sorry. Um I think we asked this or at least I always ask this regarding um parking. Uh could you remind me what the uh policy is on ensuring that parking occurs in the garages?

Sure. So I I don't remember specifically which one it is, but within the conditions of approval, we did require that the CCNRs include language that frees up at a bare minimum a 9x40 ft dimension dedicated to just those um cars. So it doesn't get um used for storage or any other you know uses that wouldn't include storage of motor vehicles. Mhm. Okay. Yeah, that's what I thought. Thank you.

Okay. Um thank you. I had questions regarding the um R3 zoning. It's currently was it always R3? Is church just a a use under R3? Is that correct? Yes, I believe churches are allowed in all residentially zoned areas. Um whether with the approval of a cup or a minor CUP of some sort, but um it is R3 zoned. It's always been R3 zoned for for quite some time, at least to my knowledge. This isn't a change in land use or allowable density. Um in fact, this development here is is proposing 19.86 dwelling units per acre. It's allowed up to 36. Um, but there is no change in zoning on this one and churches are always allowed there.

Thank you. And regarding the 57 units, 54 are above moderate income, the three are very low income. It just seems to me they couldn't be further apart. Is that just an applicant's decision as far as what the income levels would be qualifying for? Yes, that would that would be at the developer or the applicant's decision. I don't know exact maybe when the when the applicant comes back up um to speak if needed then she can further clarify on that but to my understanding it's just the developers uh election.

Okay. And regarding the very low income the category itself I think I read somewhere is 31 to 50% AMI. Correct. And is that also a developer's discretion? Right. that's tied into the very low to go up to the 50% AMI versus anything lower towards the 31 threshold.

Yeah. So that the 30 to 50% of the adjusted median incomes actually the income limits are by um the housing department of community and development um based off of the Riverside County area. So I think that 30 to 50% window at the very low income threshold. It kind of varies by county and that's just their typical window. I think I read somewhere for uh the density bonus um and maybe if you could correct me is that when they apply for that there is one concession but unlimited waiverss how does that work?

That is correct. Yes. So the it's not necessarily tied to in this particular case because they dedicated 5% of their um units at the very low income threshold they're allowed to have one concession. For example, if they wanted to increase their concessions up to two concessions allowed, they would have to increase their um very low income threshold to 10% of those total units. And then if they wanted to get three uh concessions, it would be the very low income threshold of 15%. And so it kind of just increases there. But to further answer your question, yes, a qualifying affordable housing development is entitled to unlimited waiverss if they can prove that it would physically preclude them from obtaining their desired uh density,

okay? Or um affordable units. Um the wa the concessions are a little bit different because it's tied to um budgetary reasons. A cost reduction, identifiable cost reduction is what the concession should be tied to.

Okay. Thank you. And I and I know that you were explaining that to the commissioner before. Uh I just didn't put two and two together there. Um I guess um was this the section where we were talking about the um the conditions for them for the um the three affordable units. Is this the section or is that tied into one or the other? The TTM or this is it. Right. So, uh I see that in the um it talks about um the three units that the city has a right of refusal to be offered. Is that if someone buys one of the uh affordable units and then they sell it that at that point that first buyer gets to notify the city and they have right of refusal to purchase it. or how does that work?

Um the way that we set it up is the city has a right uh first right of refusal at the end of the term. So while that um affordable housing uh density bonus agreement is in effect, they have to sell it to another very lowincome uh house. So at the end of the 45 years,

then we can acquire it, add it to our housing stock if we want or you know whatnot, whatever is going on at that time. But during those that uh 45 years that the agreement is in place, the owner has to sell it to another and we have you know standards and requirements that will be on title. So the owner will know kind of what they have to do for that. Okay. So the annual reporting for the owners once they qualify, so at their one year mark, that's where they have to prove the documents that they've qualified

every year. Well, okay. So once you sell the house um to a qualifying household, we're not going to insist that they remain very low income, right? They've bought a house, they get to to continue living in it. But if they go to sell it, they have to sell it to another very low income. The annual reporting is to also make sure that they're living in the house or if they have um rented the house out that they also rented it to a very low income. So again, the idea being we want to make sure it's always being occupied by a very lowincome household. So the the the seller who's going to rent out their unit, let's say, they would it's up to them to ensure that they qualify under the right provisions that they originally qualified under.

That's correct. And it's not at the point of renting it out. It's at their annual report to do diligence to provide those documents. Um actually, so the way that we have set it up, even just renting it would be considered a transfer. And so they would have to come to the city and and prove up that the tenant that they're going to be. So we've, you know, tried to put some measures in there that our housing department will be a little bit involved in this um anytime it's rented or sold. And it's just the three units of the 57. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

And and then I guess I'll piggyback on that um with the the the right of first refusal. So that's at the end of the 45 years. Um, and then it can you explain how that works? Is that a is that a case where when the term is up, the city has a right to to to purchase those properties if they want? Um, and if the city does not act, then then the homeowners at that time can do whatever they see fit.

Yes, that's that's exactly. So there's a a time frame established in the covenant that's recorded against the property that before they transfer it at the end of the term, they have to give the city and I believe it's 60 days uh to consider whether the city wants to acquire the unit and if not then they're free to um you know the the uh affordable restrictions would no longer apply to that unit. Is is that triggered then only if the owner wants to sell after the 45 years or is that get does it get reviewed by the city at that time? Is is my question clear?

Yeah, I'm not sure. Are you are you asking if the city would always consider that you know they would come to us and then it would you know whether it's you know Joann's department or housing would then present that to the council and say is this something that you want you know to acquire. So so but I guess I'm just trying to nail down the mechanics of it. Is it it I mean is it triggered at the 45 year mark where the city then either acts or doesn't act or is it only after the 45 year mark based on what the owner does?

Only if there's an intent to sell the property. So if you have the owner that has no intent to sell the property then they don't need to be coming to us asking for first write a refusal. So it is based on an action. Okay. Thank you. That's what I was trying to get.

I think um I have a a question about the parking. Um that's probably my only stickler here is the parking. And how many of the units were fourbedroom versus threebedroom and twobedroom? Chair Alexander, I believe 18 units were dedicated towards the fourunit plan and 21 for the threebedroom I think it was. So basically almost 40% of the complex are going to be three and four bedroomedroom and yet the fourbedroom are the only one with four parking spaces in the garage. Is that correct chair Alexander? The the four bedrooms um will include a twocar garage and it's just a sidebyside twocar garage versus a tandem. So, it'll still just it'll be a 20 by 20 foot dimension of just two vehicles.

I thought I saw a diagram with four vehicles in a garage.

That was the That's the two-bedroom plan. Sorry if I didn't make that clear for you. Um, the two-bedroom plan includes tandem garages that are side by side to each other. If we could get that slide back up, it'll be plan 2531 and 2531X. There we go. So, the first floor plan, this what you're seeing right now is is two units. So, 2531 and 2531X are going to be on the first floor. They're tandem garages that are side by side to each other. And then the second and third are kind of um adjacent to each other. And that and that's the difference in the square footage is that

correct? like little hallway or the bot bottom part there. Yes.

So basically of the 57 units and you double it right for 104 parking um which is what they're going for except for the uh increasing to 125 or 127 I don't know there were several annotations uh on the U exhibits that varied between 125 127. So I just don't know. you only have 13 open parking spots. Where are the other cars going to go? Considering a three and a fourbedroom, uh just surveying the apartment complexes got um three bedrooms. Typically, one complex did a survey recently just closed. They have 268 apartments and their three and their four bedrooms have the average was four cars for three and four bedrooms. So, uh my question is it's going to spill over onto the streets. So, Avenue Del Vista this morning had about 120 cars both sides of the street, right? There isn't any parking on Via Del Rio next to the school because of the uh pickup and drop off policy. Across the street on the south side of Via Del Rio is half of the street says no parking from here to the intersection. And then you have the Sapphire and Aquamarine residences on the uh east side of the street. And if you go driving down there, it's bumper to bumper. If there isn't a driveway or a fire hydrant, there is no parking for them, let alone. Um, so the Corona Park apartments, uh, they know they have a problem with overflow. But when you drive Avenue to Del Vista, it's already full all the way down to the church parking lot. So, uh, uh, the church property rather, uh, and then the lane narrows down to one driveway. So, again, my question is,

where are all those extra cars going to go? Yes, Chair Alexander. So, this project, it's an affordable development project and so they're electioned by automatically they can utilize a lower ratio and so we worked with the applicant to get as many spaces as we could on site. Um, originally there there was a number of different spaces that were provided and we we were able to get an additional two on site on the northwestern corner to total up to 15. Um each car each each one does require a twocar garage or um two spaces per se. Um one and a half spaces for the two and three bedrooms and two and a half spaces is required for anything that's uh four bedrooms or more. Um in addition to that in terms of where they're parking, you're correct. Aanita del Vista on the um south side there. Um on the east side, they can park there. Um and you're the red curbing off of Vado Rio will remain as well. Um the applicant the developer is proposing 129 total spaces. If they were to go to what the affordable unit development um minimums are, the government code allows for 104. So they and per our municipal code, we'd require 164 spaces. In our discussion with the applicant, if they were to provide those 164 spaces on site, it would have resulted in them losing a significant amount of units, which wouldn't, you know, necessarily pencil out for them to develop the project as a whole. So, they kind of met in the middle in terms of getting to 129. Um, but in terms of parking, that's that's the furthest.

I I appreciate your explanation, and I know staff work with them to find the compromise. Uh this is the problem I have with density bonus which is state and post. Any other comments? Uh I I was interested in hearing a little more about the um affordable housing um you know with with that very low income level you know once these are completed uh what that actually looks like for somebody purchasing um purchasing these units. So that might be something we would hear from the applicant on. Sure. Um but right now as far as staff questions, I think we're done.

Uh I'm sorry, one one other question came to mind. Um Mr. Dalde, did uh looks like this initial application was in early 2024 based on the dates. Did the application for this process immediately come with a density bonus request or was that something that Yes, Commissioner Siglin. Uh, to the furthest of my knowledge, and I apologize, I don't have the the historic knowledge on this one, there was two separate DPRs that had came in. The first one initially, I don't believe had the um density bonus um stipulations in there. The second goound and the second DPR, that's probably referenced in the 2024 one did. So, from the beginning, it was it was known that it was going to be density bonus project.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for further? Okay, great. All right. U, Miss Sanchez, did we receive any speaker cards or written comments from the public for this item? We did not, Madam Chair. Okay. Um, public hearing is open if you wanted to speak. Now's your chance. Yes. No. Great. Did you fill out your card? Well, you'll need to come up to the microphone.

All right. Uh, I can hear you if you want to continue. Oh, you need to be recorded, which means you need to speak into a microphone. Do we have a portable mic that maybe we could bring to her? Go ahead, sir.

I live at 1686 Verl Lane, so I'm very close to this project. Um, as council member said, parking is horrendous in my entire neighborhood and a lot of it's because of the overflow parking from the apartments next door. As she said, there's literally no parking on Aanita Del Vista every day. What happens Thursday? Street sweeper day. No parking till 5:00 p.m. Where do you think they go? my neighborhood. So, it's a challenge. And the dem I've lived there since 1992, so I've seen the demographics in the neighborhood has changed. I've seen a lot. And there's a lot of multiple families living in a house, multiple cars. If you drive Sapphire Lane, which is the one parallel to Avanita Del Vista, uh I check uh Barrel Lane is actually perpendicular comes right off on second house from that Aanita Distraa. Uh that over those people overflow onto Barrel Lane as it is because there is no parking. you're going to find that there's four cars to every house minimum. And if the garage doors open, usually you see a fifth because I've driven and I've looked at it not only because of this, but why do I have this problem all the time? So that parking is parking mitigation is a problem. And I guarantee you 57 condos isn't going to help it. that's going to really put another a real problem in what we have. So that's I' I've driven it. So I pretty much I studied it. I looked at it. It's not

good. It's not good now. It's not good now. So and I I kind of fit the demographic. I have two daughters live with me. So we have four cars. I got two in the driveway. Hopefully I can get two in the street. So, it's no problem. That's I I I appreciate the chance to speak. That's it's pretty much my real concern about this project. Thank you. Thank you. Ma'am, did you want to speak? Very much. You're so welcome.

Hi, my name is Rebecca Clayton. I live on 851 Via Filipe right next to that empty space. Um, as it is, I take my kids to school every my grandkids to school and for me just to get out to Sixth Street takes me 15 minutes. So, I've they've got to be at school at at um 7 7:30. So, I have to leave at 6 because of all the traffic that is already there. And now to put these houses in this empty space is ridiculous. How many people of you live close to that area? Probably none of you because you're in the hierarchy. We're just the peeons trying to live, trying to survive. I'm a widow. My husband's been gone for 11 years. I'm lucky that I still have my house. And to try to fight this traffic is just ridiculous. Why can't we do something else with it? Why do we have to do anything with it? Because everybody wants more money. Is that what the thing is? Is this all about money? I can guarantee you it is. It's all about getting money to this to the city of Corona. And what does the city of Corona do for us? What do they do? Can any of you answer that? What's something positive that you have done for us? So, nobody's going to say anything.

Well, this is your chance to do your question. Well, I'm asking you a question. Well, it's not a question and answer type of format. You have three minutes.

Oh my gosh. You guys are ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. I mean, three minutes. I mean, I could sit here for hours and tell you everything that's gone wrong. I've lived here in that house for 54 freaking years. 54 years. And it's gone from simple life to chaotic to people just roaming the streets. Making sure that you pull everything in your house before it's gone the next day. Making sure that you have locks on your gates. Making sure you have locks on your windows. making sure that you've got double locks on the front door. So, it's it's not something that I agree with, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one. We all live in our own communities, but obviously some communities are better off than ours, and I oppose this 1,000 million%.

Thank you. Anyone else have a comment? You just step on forward. It's fine. Hi, how are you? Good.

I'm extremely nervous. Excuse me. Oh my goodness. Anyway, uh my name's Ernest Edward Gomez and I live immediately across the street there right on the corner of Kirkwood and Via Del Rio right in front of the school Coronate Elementary. So, um some of the red flags for me are first of all the safety condition. You know, I'm concerned about safety. We recently had some the pedestrian uh lights go up where we could cross and I want to thank the city very much for putting those up. But that's I I was a strong advocate to get those up there and I'm glad to see that something did happen, especially the speed limit there, the speed limit sign as you approach as you're going uh east to west. So that was placed there just uh via Bernardo uh just below that a little bit. So, I I appreciate you putting up that, you know, speed limit watch for kids 25 miles an hour because that wasn't there. Um, the other thing was, and I'm very glad that you mentioned the parking. I do agree. And along with all the parking comes all the trash. So, I know that we want to keep our city beautiful, but sometimes we just, you know, just holding folks that are parking their cars or at least all the debris that's left, uh, that does become an issue. we do walk the street up and down even via del Rio and um so so that that is a contentious issue you know all the trash that's left behind uh the other thing too that I wanted to point out here this is on the project conditions city of Corona um you have uh on item 38 it says prior to recordation of final map developer will fair for a fair share

of cost uh for it says cost of the county of Riverside Transportation Department of the Fight improvements as defined in the traffic impact analysis and they'll include a new traffic signals via Del Rio Po Grande. So, you know, I was just curious to know a little bit more about that if they are going to be putting traffic lights up. Um, in that location and let's see. Uh, I think that that that was about it basically. Uh, but but primarily it it's it's a safety for the kids, you know, just getting them to school there. And I was just hoping that uh we would have uh some controls where we could at least regulate and control traffic through there. And you're right, the ratio of units to the parking spaces. We will definitely have that overflow of parking in our community. So, thank you very much. I knew I had more, but I just was really nervous here, but thank you.

You did fine. Thank you. Someone else want to speak? come on out.

Yes. Hi and good afternoon, 1140 Sapphire Lane. My house is on a Veneta del Vista. My biggest concern is privacy because we have a pool. So, I saw the plan that there was going to be a three floor and you know what I mean? Like for me that's my privacy. I don't feel comfortable with a plan that's three stories. My, you know, I have kids. They go in the pool. Obviously, I have daughters and of course I agree with the parking. Excuse me. There is definitely I that's the neighbor and he's right. We're on Sapphire and we overflow pretty much the street of Barrel or Beverly, I'm sorry. So, that is definitely my biggest concern. And if it's a 57 plans that they're trying to make our condominiums. So, that's what I really wanted to touch on today.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. So, um, in your defense, I've been in the I've been in this room plenty of times and I've seen plenty of things that you guys have done for the residents. Um, that that I I understand her frustration about a lot of things. um these projects that kind of bootstrap, you know, low income, affordable or whatever, you know, clearly not looking in the public interest. They're looking in their own interest. That said, this could be what they could have done the same. They could have played the same game that uh Taylor and Citron did. So, looking at that, it's nowhere near as bad as it could have been. Um, but you got to really feel for the people in the in the neighborhoods around this. I'm over there quite a bit as part of my little my little side hustle that I do once a week. I'm over there all the time. And even trying to find a place to pull over to snag signs, it's very tough even to find a find a space. So, um, it's packed over there during the day. I can't imagine what it's like in the evening because I'm over there usually in the mornings. Um, you know, you kind of wonder if there might be some kind of a permit scheme for the neighborhoods or something to to to reserve parking over there. Um, you know, there's got to be some there's got to be something cuz, you know, it's going to spill over. You know, just it's going to be pretty impacted. Um, you know, they and you know, it's it's a shame. It does really have to come down to, you know, what they say will pencil and what they say won't pencil. you know, that the the parking that they could have had or would have had because they've got these, you know, three units that, you know, really probably something else probably could have been worked out, but they don't have to. So,

they're not. And, you know, to the previous speaker's point, you know, you guys aren't building it. Somebody else is applying and they've got certain rights under the law and you guys got to play the play the ball where it lies and you can you only have certain limitations that you can work within. So, thank you very much for your hard work. And if there's some if there's something, you know, that maybe the applicant could possibly help defer some of the costs or some of the drama for the neighborhood by maybe helping establish some type of a a permit thing, you know, some kind of a, you know, so they can have at least some some control of what's going on in their neighborhoods cuz man, you know, I what I don't want is a repeat of what happened over on is that Colette where the that really big apartment complex went in behind Home Depot and it's pretty underparked. So, they're spilling off into the neighborhood. People can't get their mail cuz their mailboxes are blocked off. Heard plenty about it in a council meeting a couple times. So, you know, we we don't need that situation happening all over again cuz that's that's kind of what I see going on here. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Anyone else want to speak? I have one more question. Can I do that? I think we you you had three minutes. Do concern about this using this facility that you're using. When it rains, you know that whole center floods, right? It floods. The rain is backed up. You can't go in there. There's puddles. It's not even a puddle. It's a river. So, are we just talking about putting houses along the edges or are we talking about filling the whole damn place? Oh, sorry. Filling the whole place up.

Thank you for your comments. Okay. Uh, no other cards. No one else wants to speak, we'll go ahead and bring it back to the dis. Um, oh yeah, we if we have questions for the applicant, could you come up, please? Sorry about that.

Thank you. Yeah. Uh, hi. Thank you, Miss Miss FTO. Um I can you explain a little bit how the the marketing um not specifically like the methods but um you know the the when these are sold to lowincome units low-income houses or households I should say um you know what that will look like I guess versus compared to the market rate.

Sure. So, uh, Meritage partners with a third party consultant, BCCDC. Uh, they're a affordable partner of ours who has the ex experience of finding and placing affordable um, qualifying households. So, we'll partner with them. We'll put together the marketing um program which will include um potentially mailers. If there's anything on the city's website that we can post to um you know if there's newspaper ads or anything like that, we'll we'll advertise these units. They'll typically host um like a FAQ kind of night to talk through what the process is since obviously there's a lot of different qualifying requirements to apply for one of these homes and walk people through what documentation is needed and all of that. From there, um we'll work with the city to determine exactly the process, whether it is a lot. Let's say, you know, we only have three homes that are designated at the very low. So if we get 10 applications, you know, is it a lottery system? Is it first come first serve of who meets the requirements gets it? We'll work with the city to determine which strategy to move forward with. Um the DBA does specify prioritizing existing Corona residents and I believe people who work in the city. So those will obviously have the first priority. So, we'll work with them for finding the initial home buyers and then um as the city attorney stated, if they choose to uh sell the home while it's still under the deed restriction, they'll have to find another qualifying uh household. And then so I guess what I'm trying to get a little closer to understanding is you know the my I think the way I I

understand the project there's three units that are for the um very lowincome households and it's one of each of the three floor plans basically. Um and then the rest of those will be sold to uh well I guess there's no income um requirements they're you know market rate but you um according to the you know the designation um in the in the AHDB they're they're considered above moderate I guess so so but those are market rate so I guess I'm wondering what what you know based on current valuations. What is a market rate versus a non-market rate for these units?

Sure. So, the price point of the affordable would be set in conjunction with the city and so the way that it works is I believe almost quarterly. Um, rates come out and different things and it can get adjusted. uh the price point can fluctuate because the way that the affordable home price is set is it takes into account what your HOA payment would be like your HOA dues, your insurance, all of that to cap it at essentially 30 to 35% of what your income is. So the price point comes down to what that rate is where the formula with all the different factors maths out essentially. Um, Meritage has no say in what those homes get priced at. Um, our market rate homes right now, um, if they were coming out today would probably be starting in the low sixes and then going up, but obviously that would be in today's market conditions.

So, that would be more for the the two-bedroom would be the that price point you're saying. Yeah. So, the two-bedroom would probably be starting in the low sixes. I I I have them ranging from the low sixes up into the low to mid7s for the fourbedroom unit right now.

All right. And then um yeah, maybe staff would be able to explain a little more the city attorney about how those um price if anybody can knows about how the pricing with with that 30% income. It's a it's a statutory um process for determining but um she had indicated correctly it it based upon the household and the income and there can only be a certain percentage that they can devote towards uh the housing cost. So it will be a very individualized assessment um based upon the statutory guidelines. And so one of one of the other factors would probably also be whatever the bank interest rate is at that time be because higher interest would mean would bump up the share of that.

I I I believe so again not my I I don't do that part of it but it is very clearly articulated in the statute. So there is a process. We won't be just making it up as we go along. It will be um set forth. Yeah. I I know we talked about a lot of this when we first had to put in language I guess for for the density bonus. Is that right, Miss Kleta? We did we have to adopt like changes to the municipal code for that. Right. But that's been a little while so trying to bring it all back. Okay. Thank you. Did you have another question?

Yes. Mr. FL a question. I kind of want to just characterize your presentation that you did earlier about going after that middle market of homes and I'm I'm reading through your your letter to the city that was provided with the application. Um my understanding it looks like you're in a potential contract with the land holder. Yeah, we're we're in escrow to purchase the property, but we have not closed on it. Sure. And is that contingent upon approval of these applications? Yes, that is typically how we negotiate it. Sure. Would you have even pursued this U parcel if the density bonus agreement vehicle existed?

Yeah. So, originally we did not actually have um anticipating using the density bonus waiverss and concessions when we first approached the site. Um, as we worked through with staff on different things, there were a couple items that came up where for us to make the project work, um, we had to push on some of the setbacks and different things like that. So, one of the triggering things that guided us in that direction was we first explored whether or not we could do a master meter for water services on this site. And it's not allowed for for sale individual units. And so we had to do individual metering. And to get the space required for the water meters on the site, we needed deeper aprons. And to get deeper aprons, we needed to push into the setbacks. And so it was kind of a trickle down of how we ended up incorporating affordable units to get the flexibility on some of the development standards.

And do you know initially from a parking ratio standpoint, uh, were you always having difficulty with achieving a parking account? No. So when we were first approaching the project and first exploring it, um we were trying to meet parking by code, but as we flexed on the site and had these different constraints, that's where it led us to needing to go with the density bonus uh regulation parkings.

So is there one item that was part of the concessions that was absolutely necessary or do they all collectively add up? It was I think more when we realized some of the constraints we had. Um the only solution was either going at risk needing variances and you know putting those up in terms of having having it be a more of a discretionary discussion versus utilizing um the state's density bonus law pathway. Thank you.

Thank you. anything. Thank you very much. Appreciate your answers. All right. With that, the public hearing is now closed. And if my colleagues have any other questions or comments.

Yeah. Um, I mean, I I know we talked quite a bit about the parking situation and and you know, this commission has worked hard, I guess, to do our best to to make sure there's adequate parking for for new developments. Um but but obviously yes this this with the uh density housing bonus um you know that that's a way that that we can't necessarily get it the way we want it. Um and we we I think we came across this also with the second street project which you were not part of the discussion. Um but but that was one of the issues that came up in that um uh that project as well. and and we we did talk about it a little bit during our discussion, but um yeah, I I I mean I mean um I I yeah, I think it this is it's better than it could be sort of as one of the commenters uh said, but uh not not necessarily as good as we would want.

Thank you, Mr. Yeah, I would just add in I I it's so hard to get away from parking, but the reality is it's it's been removed from our hands. So then you have to evaluate is has everything been done to alleviate that as much as possible in other ways, right? So is are the homes are the garages being used for parking? Um, I guess the only question I have and I don't I don't know if it's a function that the city goes through, but the reality is that there will be be people parking on city streets and that really isn't a requirement to have a parking analysis to do that. Correct. Anymore that's eliminated from our kit of tools to to ask. Um I I will say, you know, we do have a lot of applications that come before us and to varying degrees of completeness and um communication from the applicant themselves. And this certainly appears like both the city and the applicant have worked closely to try to solve everything they can. I think it's creative that this is the first time the utilities uh concession has come before us and and frankly I I don't know enough about it to to have an opinion on it. I would trust that the city has evaluated that and and since this is the first time that according to what was stated that all of these concessions from a utility standpoint have been with an application. Um, I guess I'm saying is is I'm I'm sure that staff has has done everything possible, but it's interesting that we're being asked to deal with uh utility concessions along with now parking and and other things and understanding that that's part of the

new laws that we have to deal with. Um, and I actually I wanted to make make go on one more point relating to the parking again an idea that one of the commenters brought up. Um, and I don't and I don't know if this is even feasible if the city allows it, but if a neighborhood uh is is having, you know, traffic or parking impacts from other neighborhoods, I mean, are they is there a permit system available, you know, to for a neighborhood to to try to implement? So, we do have Rosie here this evening and she's all too familiar with that question. So, we'll go ahead and let her have her answer that.

Hi. So, um, if you guys recall, I don't know if I've touched upon this before, but we do have about seven or eight, um, zones in the city. They're all really related to the high schools. One, um, I think it's Susan B. Anony's by an elementary and the other one is by the Skyline Trails and it is something I brought to council and it is approved by them and then after that it's called a district. That district is established. Then after that, the residents can petition to have their street be a zone and then that's when it will become a permit parking um I guess street. Does that have to be 100% participation? It's a majority. I think 67%.

Is that But it first has to go to council to be a district before it can be a zone. Is that required a minimum number of streets or homes? No, ma'am. Okay. And what what's the process where you said it has to go to the council first? The last time I brought it, I've only brought it once and it was when we established the downtown district and it was brought to us as a request from management to establish a downtown district as we were developing the downtown area. Um the other ones have been the schools, but it's something I can definitely talk to my public works director and see if that's something they would like to entertain and bring. But it does have to be a I'm sorry. Go ahead.

So I mean in a situation like this where you know maybe the residents nearby are you are worried about what's going to happen and want to explore that you know it's that would be different than city management proposing it. Um, I mean, would residents, not that I want to get, uh, their their council member inundated with uh, you know, uh, calls or whatever, but is that would that is that the best, you know, way for them to talk to either city staff or or their own council member about something like that?

I would actually invite them to talk to us, give us a call at um, the public works counter. We can definitely look into it. Um it's not something I would say no to today, but I have had other um residents ask in the past and we do have to evaluate it, ensure that it is hindering parking and it is for most of the time. I remember one resident reached out for one elementary school when we went out there to look at the site. It was only during 15 minutes during pickup. So it wouldn't be something that we would look at, but this is a different situation. Okay. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Um, could you I have one more question, Rosie. Is uh is it a cost to the residents?

Uh, not initially. I believe the first two permits are free. After that, it's $10 and it only allows them to have a permit for their cars that are registered to the address in that area. Okay. So, per household. Yeah. And it's a maximum of of $20. So, let's say you have four cars, you would get the first two permits for free and then you would pay a maximum of $20 for the additional permits you may need. Okay. Thank you. Go ahead.

Oh, yeah. I did something came to mind. There was a public comment about the fair share traffic signal improvement and I'm just curious at 6% is are there other contributors already and what's the status of that potential light at uh at that intersection of via Deloro Po ground? So the traffic study did do a warrant and that light is in the county. So Pel Grande At Rio and the warrant did not pass um and it's mainly due to uh not enough volume and it is a residential area. So we don't think this the county would entertain adding a signal in the near future. But if they did to help alleviate the school traffic in the mornings, uh they would only be responsible for that 5.8% of the fair share. Mhm.

Oh, so that's that fair share contribution is only if that were exercised. Yes. Otherwise that those where do those funds go if they're not used for traffic signal? Well, this is for the county. So, um Chris, can you help me with that? the fair share gets collected and then it's um saved and set aside until

Yeah, it's so if this is a county signal, the payment goes directly to Riverside County Transportation and they are responsible for how they will spend their impact fee monies or development impact fee monies from projects. So what they're saying is that they're looking at future contributions and maybe a signal will be needed in the future. If they have a spending limit within five years, they may go elsewhere with it, but it doesn't mean that they won't come back and put this signal in based on prior contributions.

Is that similar to when we had the latitude and Gloria? Uh there was funds that was put aside for the county to improve their portion of Loria and Liberty I believe up at the top and they held those funds for over a decade. They did and the developer actually worked separately with them to get some reimbursement on that. I remember that. And it's the same thing. They're also the county has a teascale Canyon widening project and the developer partnered with them to pay the fair share for the remainder widening in front of their site as well.

I remember that. Thank you, Miss Cleta. Um, one other question regarding the permit. So in the study to warrant whether a traffic signal would be considered by the county or processed through that this project would contribute obviously to cars that might be getting on the freeway uh for commuting. So they'll pass in front of the school contributing to maybe that morning pickup uh or maybe coming home uh maybe not coming home but definitely morning commute traffic. And if they go west to Sale Grande and then to the freeway, that would also uh contribute a after the project would be built. Correct. If a traffic study had been done.

Yes, that's how they determine that 5.8%. Okay. Thank you. And I want to remind the commission this project will be paying TOP as well, the transportation uniform mitigation fee for the county region.

I remember seeing that. Thank you. All right. Um I don't have any other uh actually I do have some comments. So today um I think we always um do our best to look at the impact to the communities when these projects come forward. Uh whether it's driving by. Uh, I actually sat in the church parking lot today and observed 30 to 40 cars in the church parking lot parking to go get their kids and thinking what would those uh parents do and uh there was a crossing guard over there by Coronita. So I went and talked to her and she was saying, "Well, if that goes away, then probably they will be burdening uh Burn and Avenue to Del Vista, which is on the south side of Via Del Rio." And those homes would probably be um those streets would be burdened with the cars as they park and go get the kids uh which is not as crowded as Aquamarine and uh Barrel and Sapphire. Um, regarding those streets, I either one either one of those communities, um, I don't think anyone has a chance of getting any parking over on Aquamarine and Barrel. They are slammed, uh, even in the middle of the day. But would encourage the residents to uh, pursue the permit process. I would like to see us recommend that traffic uh, would approve those um, based on the impact of this project uh, if we agree to it. Um, my concerns were also the fencing. Uh, Commissioner Cichelin, regarding the school and how would they uh what impact that would be for a threestory building to be budded up, I did see the 28T buffer for the alley to give it some buffer with the fencing and hopefully some landscaping will uh give

the kids some privacy. Uh I I have to mention that the city is was under penalty from the state for not adopting density bonus and to offset to uh take over our local control removes that. Uh we all have spoken about uh how devastating that is. Um but basically it's private land and uh it will be impacting the neighborhoods. So, um, private land and privately owned and projects that comply with general planned and the zoning, um, staff does a good job to, uh, check off all the boxes to, make sure they're in compliance. So, it is very frustrating to, uh, sit here with my colleagues and know that our hands are tied on some of these projects. I am in favor of affordable units. I think our community does uh need more affordable units to help out those with very low income, but at what cost? I am I am just the parking uh waving parking uh standards is ridiculous. Uh I still stand uh opposed to that. Although in this role um it has been checked off and it does meet standards. So with that, I'll I'll um ask if anyone has no other comments. Do I have a motion for a HDB2024-00001? Uh all motion that the planning housing commission recommended the city council that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15332 of the state SQUA guidelines and approval of AHDB 20 24001 based upon the conditions of approval.

Is there a second? And and then were we adding a recommendation about something? Is that what you were saying? Or would that be um just that the um traffic engineering would be considering um permit process by the residents both on the uh east side sapphire and aquamarine community and also the burn uh community which will be impacted by I do want to make clear that's not a condition of approval for the applicant. That is yeah that's just something she's recommending that staff evaluate. That's why I didn't include it. Just a suggestion on our part. Is there a second?

I will second. Uh, Commissioner Cichelin's uh motion. Commissioner Cichelin with the motion. Commissioner Woody with the second. Go ahead and vote. Okay, that passes 300. Moving on to our next item regarding TTM 38934. Do any commissioners have questions for staff? U I I do have a question I guess um that I think falls into the um TTM application. So, um I noticed on the TTM and in the staff report there's a mention of the um and it was in in the presentation as well, the uh cell phone uh facilities that are there um on the site currently and they will they will remain on the new um site plan. Um, and from what I noticed, they're kind of on the right side of the um, I guess along um, trying to get my map back on my screen.

The north border of the apartment complex to the north of it. Um I I think it runs along Yeah. the So it's it would be adjacent to the Corona Park apartments, I think. Um, and I and I didn't see it in in there and I maybe I just missed finding the right um exhibit. But what what since those are remaining um would the the HOA take ownership of those of that um because that would be on the on the property.

Sure, Commissioner Woody. Um so the these are set in place back in 2009 and 2013. uh one one's um mono palm 65 feet I believe one of them's Verizon and one of them's T-Mobile that one other is 55 ft um but to answer your question further these are these are um they have separate lease agreements and so the the ownership of those poles and the ownership of the maintenance won't change the only thing that will change as part of the tenative track map is the existing access easements couple are being proposed to be vacated and then there's one that's proposed to be extended and that's to accommodate lot D on the north northeastern corner owner there for their uh basin. Um but in terms of the ownership, there should be no change there.

But but I guess the the lease agreement stays in place, but then the the ownership of the the land. So the carrier is responsible for the maintenance, right? So the carrier um will still continue to maintain it just like they did when the church was there. The church doesn't maintain it. It's the carrier. So that will not change. But but then the ownership, you know, the church is selling the property to, you know, to the applicant who is then in turn selling it. So would the HOA then be getting payments from Verizon?

That we that we're not involved in. That's a private negotiation. All we could tell you is that the carrier will continue to do the maintenance responsibility, which is what we care about. Okay. Well, then maybe maybe the applicant can put a little more context to that for sure. Mr. Sling, any I do. Okay.

Okay. Uh, I had a question regarding the um conditions of approval. Quite a bit went into the grading process. when you're on site over there at ADV and VDR, the corner there, it's at a much higher uh slope and it slopes down as you go north towards the actual structure that's in place. Well, I guess is that dirt going to remain on site or do does some of it have to be trucked out or how does that work?

Sure. So, in in terms of their cut and fill numbers, it's it's going to be, you know, pretty similar to the lay of land you see out there. I understand when you probably went out there the church height is a little bit higher than what Via del Rio sees. Um I think the biggest grade differential and in the whole site is from Via Del Rio it's about 758 or 55 and then the building that's fronting via Del Rio will be about 4T higher. Um in terms of exporting and how that gets treated I'll defer that over to dev services to further expand.

Thank you. the the site proposes to actually uh bring in fill to the area next to around um V del Rio and uh towards the north uh western portion it's going to remain closer to the existing elev elevations and from there um the whole site is actually proposing to drain out towards the streets. So from the the northwestern portion it's all draining out to Rio del Rio and then down towards the front um of Venita del Vista it's um draining from the north western down to the northeastern um there. What is this one also catching some of it? I I guess I I don't need the details so much as what will that impact the neighborhoods as far as truckloads, what kind of fill, uh that sort of thing. What what's that construction activity um besides the actual building the structure?

Okay. Did you want to we we have someone standing up. They're proposing 3500 cubic yards of fill, which isn't very significant. Okay. That's that was a question. Thanks for volunteering and standing up. Um my question also was on the conditions of approval 41 where it talks about uh CFD and HOA. So both of those are going to be put into place for this project. Yes, that's correct.

Okay. It talked about uh number 42. Is there a land maintenance district set up specifically for the project or does it become annexed into another one or how does that work? The project will annex into the city's CFDs but there will not be a city maintained landscape area.

Okay, so that'll be all HOA for the common landscaping. Okay, thank you. I thought it was interesting on exhibit 12 for I don't think we've ever seen a trash staging route. Um so my question is does everyone just put out their trash can out in front of their unit or outside their garage or how does that work?

Yes, Chair Alexander. the trap trash staging plan. It's a little bit unique, but the biggest concern was the fact that we have alleys here that um at the ultimate is at 28 ft. And so fire wanted to confirm that even on a trash pickup day in case of an emergency, they were able to maneuver through the site. So we did request for a trash staging plan and they will be um placing those trash cans in front of their immediate aprons. Very thorough. Appreciated that. Um it talked about uh exhibit um 14 it talked about uh the yellow line for the telecom. So part of the project the telecom is going to go underground.

That is correct. The area adjacent to Via Del Rio that will be underground. The only telecom portion that will remain is heading further east and then um perpendicular running across Via Del Rio into 1801 burn.

Okay, those are all my questions that I had. So, if no other questions, um I think I wanted to go back to staff because maybe I might have found an answer to my own question and I just was seeing if staff can confirm. So I guess my my question regarding the cell phone towers um is and is uh you know if they were you know like I said if they would be taken over ownership would be would go into the HOA but it looks like from what I can tell from the map they would be part of lot one or would they be part of lot D? I guess that's what I can't tell. Commissioner Woody, the the cell towers will be located within lot one, but we also have the applicant here that can clarify what the ownership will look like and maintenance and all that stuff.

Okay. Thanks. Sure. We'll go ahead and open it up and if you can come on up, please.

Uh so we regarding the cell towers, we have been um working through that process. So the the original leases were with the church. Some of them are um single payment covering x number of years right at a time. So we will be working with the cell tower owners uh and carriers to update the leases. It will end up being to the HOA once the community is fully sold out. Okay. Thanks. Thanks for clarifying. Thank you. Okay, we'll go ahead and close it and bring it back to the dis. All right. Um, Miss Sanchez, did we receive any speaker cards or written comments from the public on this item?

We did not. All right. Well, then, uh, with the public hearing being closed, um, do we have a motion for TTM 38934? Uh, yes, we do. Um, I will motion that the planning and housing commission recommend to the city council approval of tenative track map 38934 based on the findings contained in the staff report and the conditions of approval. All right. Thank you, Commissioner Woody. And a second, please. Uh, I'll second the motion.

Thank you. Second from Mr. Sichelin. Go ahead and vote. All right. And that passes 300. Moving on to our last item, CUP 2024-00003. Any commissioners have questions for staff? I do have a a question on on page two, paragraph 4, there's an interesting comment that um the applicant was not seeking a density increase of the dwelling units per acre. Um kind of curious what what could this be based upon the fact that that could have been a request tied to this? Could there be even more units on the same acreage?

Yes, Commissioner SQL. Essentially, I I apologize. I don't have the exact numbers on me, but it'll follow the same framework as the concessions portion. So based off of the amount of uh percentage in which they dedicate towards affordable, they'll be um allowed or um upon request they can um include an increase in density bonus or percentage. So essentially, if it if it allows for 36 dwelling units per acre like this site, if they were to utilize uh x amount of percent at the very low income threshold, they may be entitled to x amount of percent and density bonus in terms of additional units beyond what the general plan and land use designation allows for.

Sure. So in a sense it's a trading game of more density more lower income units could have driven a higher ratio and we could see x number more units on the same acreage. Correct. And so and and what we're a tougher parking situation and but it didn't really apply here because they're already kind of at the low end of the zoning. You know zoning allows for a lot more. So they would have had a needed a totally different project I think to get above that what they're allowed. Yeah.

And most of my other questions here were actually picked up on the other two applications. I'm I'm good for now. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Woody. No other questions. All right. Miss Sanchez, did we receive any speaker cards or written comments from the public on this item? We did, Madam Chair. Mr. Morgan. Thank you. Please step forward.

First, I I want to I want to thank the applicant. Um I don't think I've heard somebody just come up and just say the thing that they had to say and be candid. So, thank you. And it it's it's refreshing and and I don't really think this is a bad project all in all. I mean, like I said, it could have been another mess like Taylor, you know, it could have been another deal, you know, sort of like what happened behind the mosque, you know, just where kind of jamming something in there where it didn't really belong. Everybody's known I I want to say it's been eight or 10 years that they've been talking about it and said that that the church was being sold and it was going to be town homes or apartments or something. So, the fact that it's town homes, they're going to be owned, you know, it's not completely overbuilt. 50 is not that crazy. I, you know, I live right by Santana where it was 10 and something, you know, so it's a lot bigger units and pretty jammed together. So, I don't see this thing being all that bad. The parking for the neighbors, I think, is the biggest thing. But, you know, like I said, I just I wanted to come up and and acknowledge that this is not this is way better than it could have been. So and and then again thank the applicant for being candid. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. And no one else. I'll go ahead and bring it back to the dis close the public hearing. Do we have a motion for CU 2024-00003? Uh I will motion uh offer a motion to proceed with the planning and housing commission adopt the resolution number 2670 granting CU 2024003 based upon the findings contained in the staff report and the conditions of approval. And I don't think there's any condition changes here on this one. There is not. May I have a second? I've seconded it.

All right. Motion by Commissioner Cicklin, seconded by Mr. Woody, please vote. All right, that passes 30. Written communications. Has the Planning and Housing Commission Secretary received any written communications from persons providing information or seeking action by the Planning and Housing Commission? No, Madam Chair. Thank you much. Uh, Miss Kleta, any reports? No reports.

Thank you. Thank you, uh, Miss Raymond for your attendance. Appreciated your input. Uh, commissioners, any reports? Any comments? No, chair. Nothing. All right. With that, I'll go ahead and close the meeting. Future agenda item for September 28th to be determined later. I adjourn the meeting. Next meeting, September 8th, 2025. Thank you.