Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. 07:00. Commission and staff, are we ready to begin? Yes. Okay. So call to order. Welcome. I'd like to call the Planning Commission meeting in order to order and ask that we rise for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge

allegiance to the flag

to republic, I will now let me see. So I will now ask staff to explain the meeting process. We'll then proceed with roll call.

Pursuant to Saratoga City Council's remote public participation policy, Members of the public may participate in this meeting in person at the location listed on the agenda or via remote attendance using the Zoom information listed on the agenda. Public attendees participating by Zoom are automatically muted and are not viewable on camera. I will now call the roll. Commissioner Cauzer?

Present.

Srutharan? Present. Hassan? Present. Brownlee? Zeng?

Present.

Vice Treasurer Merata is absent. Chair Lee?

Present. Thank you, Cindy. Oral communications on non agenda items. Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items.

However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding oral communications. At this point, I would like to open public comment on non agenda items. Staff, can we can you please explain the public comment process and announce our first speaker? Francis? Are you there?

Richard Leithead, can you hear me?

Yes. Now we can hear you.

Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Had a little technical difficulty.

No problem.

This meeting, if you wish to be a speaker on any item, if you're in the theater, please fill out a speaker form and submit it to the staff at the dais. If you are online and wish to raise your hand, please use the tool in Zoom. We have no hand raised online.

Thank you, Francis. And we don't have any speakers in the audience here either. All right. So this concludes our communications on non agenda items. So the first item that we have here is the approval of the minutes. Are there any additions or corrections to the minutes? Seeing none, does any commission member wish to move approval of the minutes?

So moved.

Second. Seconded.

Thank you. Would staff please conduct the roll call?

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

All right. The next item on the agenda for today is for the staff to do annual progress report about 2025 general plan housing element.

Yes. This is really an informational item. It went to the city council in March. Every year, the city needs to report its progress towards its housing element. RENA targets, regional housing needs allocation, over the eight year period from 2023 to 2031. So we're almost at the halfway mark. 01/01/2027 will be the halfway mark. And we're doing Okay. Our accessory dwelling units are helping quite a bit. And we are doing really great on all of our housing programs. And so I'm happy to provide further information.

Thank you, Cindy. Is there any questions for the staff from our Commission? All right. Seeing none, we will move forward with to our third item here. It's public hearing.

Applicants or oh, sorry. Before I I do that, any interested person I want to talk about report on appeal rights. Any interested person objecting to any decision on this agenda may file an appeal application with the city clerk within fifteen calendar days of the date of the decision. Alright. So now we will start public hearing.

Applicants or their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statement. All interested persons may appear and be heard during this meeting regarding the items on this agenda. If items on this agenda are challenged in court, member of the public may be limited to raising only issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the planning commission at or prior to the close of the public hearing. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicants and or their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statement.

All right. So we want to start with application ADR 20 five-forty eight. So we'll start with staff report.

Thank you, chair. For this project, which is on a vacant lot currently with no street address at APN 36632006 on Rolling Hills Road. The applicant is requesting design review approval for a new two story residence with attached ADU and for a variance to locate the home with reduced setbacks. The approximately 6,462 square foot project site is located off of Rolling Hills Road in the Hillside Residential Zoning District. It is a completely vacant site.

The site is significantly smaller than is typical for the HR Zoning District, which has a minimum parcel size of two acres. The site also has a long frontage and very shallow depth. Average slope for the site is about 18%, and surrounding uses include single family homes on much larger parcels. A total of 15 protected trees are located on the property, and nine are proposed for removal. Here's the site plan.

New construction will consist of a thirteen eighty four square foot two story residence with a 999 square foot attached ADU. The driveway and access for the home will come from the front off of Rolling Hills Road. Both stories of the development would have reduced setbacks of four feet for the side and rear with the granting of the variance. Without reduced setbacks, the regular setback standards of the zoning code on this lot would use up virtually the entire depth of the lot, leaving a building footprint too small for residential development hence the variance. These are the front and rear elevations for the home.

The overall height of the project will be about 25 feet as measured from the average natural grade to the topmost point of the roof. Here are the side elevations for the home. And the applicant provided a color materials board for the project. The exterior materials will include white vertical wood siding and wood trellis screen, over gray stucco, windows of black aluminum frames and dark spandrel glass, aluminum door with glass panels, and a wood panel garage door, and black fascia roof. So these are the required design review findings that the commission must make to approve the project, and more details on these findings are included in the staff report.

And then these are the required variance findings that the commission must also make to approve the project. So staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt resolution number 26009, approving the project subject to conditions of approval. And that concludes staff presentation.

Thank you, Kyle. Is there any questions?

Yeah. Just curious as to how such a small lot exists in the hillside. If that's not standard, is it was it an SB nine split or it just exists?

Yeah. It it wasn't subdivided recently at all. I don't know. I tried to look through the records. I couldn't find exactly when it was created. But it's definitely been around for for at least at least a while, a few decades at least. And it is a legal lot.

Okay.

Hillside development subdivisions can be kind of awkward sometimes.

Kyle, I have history to the Hello, commissioners. This is Tyler Kovic, the architect for the project.

Tyler, if you could wait until public comment. We're just going over questions Thank right you.

I have an answer to the commissioner's question when I present.

You'll get your chance. Thank you.

In the image I see, there appears to be a blue line. Is that a stream? And if so, what's the impact of the house? The house I mean, I I worry that the house sits on that stream or something like that.

There's not a protected creek on the property. No.

You want to, Kyle, you want to show the map? The The parcel map.

Yeah. Can put the site plan back up.

Like in the staff report, there just seems to be a blue line, I don't know what that is.

Oh, yeah. I know what you're talking about. That shows up on the the GIS. But that's not a it's not a protected creek. I believe it's just an ephemeral drainage channel there. So it doesn't kick into creek protection setbacks or or anything of that nature.

So it's underneath the ground, basically.

Yeah. It's not a protected creek.

I understand the figure. Was any research done to show that it's not a danger to the house or anything like that?

Well, the project obtained geotechnical clearance and engineering clearance. Grading and drainage was submitted and reviewed. So all all those aspects have been cleared. Yeah.

Right. Coming, sir.

Yeah. I have a question. So basically, the entire district the zone area is in the R 40. Is R 40 it's r zone. Right?

Hillside residential.

Okay. Mhmm. Yeah. So, basically so this is this is a very small lot. Right? So what makes us from exemption from the the minimum so, basically, it's a very, very small lot. It's it's has exemption from, you know, from the all the other rules, city code to the to the building building code. So what actually make that exemption exist in our city code?

What? An exemption for the lot itself or for the development? For development. Well, this case, the only exemption, the only, you know, variance they're needing from city code is for the reduced setback. Everything else, they're they're complying with our development regulations and they'll comply with the building code. Yeah. But I

just said it's in on the Hillside. So the regular lot size is R40. Right? So basically, it's a very large lot. But this is a very small lot. Right? So I also read some article. It says it has it's basically the owner bought from the auction, some kind of auction, you know, auction site. So so my I just don't want to understand why city were approved for such a small lot in the 40 zone to let them to build the house, a single family house? That's my question.

Well, it's a small lot. It is a legal lot. Okay. And, you know, within the Hillside Residential District, within any residential district, single family residential district, you know, being able to construct a primary dwelling in an ADU is a permitted use by Wright. Obviously, of the lot being so atypically small and imposing the normal setbacks as would be applied by the code, if you apply those setbacks on the lot, you're going to basically eat up all of the lot area.

Okay. So really there's no way to construct a home on this lot without obtaining a variance. In situations like this are in large part what the variance code exists for in cases where you have very irregular lots, irregular sizes, topography, things of that nature, where strict enforcement of the zoning code is going to make development infeasible relative to what you'd expect from any other lot in that zoning district.

Yeah. So basically, I just, you know, read it from the article. It says the substandard of parcel was created prior to the 1978. Because of that, our city code fifteen dash thirteen zero six zero exempt the from the minimum loss size requirements for the HR zoning. So is that our city code that should allow allow that? This is code there because it's supposed the the parcel was built in before nineteen seventeen nineteen seventy eight. Is that the reason? Yes.

So that's referring to Okay. The parcel itself. You know, under our current zoning ordinance, if you were creating a new parcel with the Hillside Residential Zoning, the minimum size for it would be two acres. So you couldn't legally create a lot like this currently. So that code's referring to the fact that this was created, I think, as you said prior to 1970. 1970. Yeah. Yeah. So at the time when the code was was different, I don't know what the, you know, exact regulatory system was then. But it was kind of created legally and grandfathered in, essentially, as a legal parcel. Okay. So it's about the site itself as opposed to, you know, development that's allowed on it is a slightly different question.

Okay. Thank you.

To follow-up on the question that Herman has, I think at the beginning of the staff report, there is a mentioning about under Housing Accountability Act and the parcel proposed for multiple units, I mean, than one unit, is that also a reason? Isn't one of the reason that we create this exception?

Yeah. So that Housing Accountability Act point in the staff report, that relates to the fact that because this project is proposing two residential units, main home and the ADU, it is technically a housing development project. And so therefore, it's of interest to to the state and to the Housing Accountability Act regarding how how cities can can allow or render projects unfeasible. So that's language that we have in there on the recommendation of of the city attorney for we have it in the staff report for any, again, housing development projects or anything that's

Mhmm.

More than one unit, basically.

So what you're saying is this is actually is independent from the variance that will allow the setback, the minimum setback for the lot.

Well, it's related in the sense that ultimately the commission in deciding to approve the variance and the design review is deciding to approve what is a housing development project. So therefore, provisions of the Housing Accountability Act are are relevant here, particularly in, you know, quoting the the staff report language. The standard of no personal or subjective judgment by a public official, uniformly verifiable reference to an external or uniform benchmark, criteria unavailable. So there's just limitations with how the commission can deny or render infeasible a housing development project, basically.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any others more questions?

Just one quick question. In attachment four, project plans, it looks like the way the original lot has been divided is and there's numbers, one, two, three, four, five, and the current lot is starred. What is number five? It seems like a tiny unusable lot.

Like a tail.

Yeah. It's like a tail. Yeah. Doesn't doesn't seem to belong anywhere.

What page of the plans was that? Yeah. What, what was your question again?

But that one is not related to this project. Right? Yeah.

Yeah. That might be something the applicant can better answer related to the photo board. Correct? Yeah. Page 11 of the attachment.

Okay.

Just speak closer to the

Oh, sorry. No additional questions.

All right. All right. Thank you. So hearing no questions from the commission, from the staff, the applicant now have ten minutes for opening remarks. Is our applicant online?

Hi there. Yes. Yes. I am online.

Good

evening, commissioners. Do I have the bill it's not letting me turn on the video the video. Okay. Great. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Tyler Kovic. I'm a architect and a builder for this property and representing and the current applicant for the project. Thank you for your time tonight, and certainly here to answer any questions. And I have a few small talking points, but hopefully just trying to give a narrative to how the project came about. And, of course, answer any questions to the unusual nature of some of the lots on the property.

To briefly answer the prior commissioner's question about the small tail on the lot, That is owned, I believe, by the same property owner. And there has been no discussion of developing that lot to my knowledge. It's it's very, very small. Let's see. To start from the top, this this project is on behalf of my client, Nathan Fernandez.

And he grew up in he he grew up there, went to the local high school. And he's had severe his sincere regrets tonight. He's finishing an epilepsy fellowship in Manhattan between a three hour time difference and twenty four hour cold shift, he and had to prioritize the rest for his medical duties. He left the community twenty years ago after graduating from Monte Vista High School to pursue a career in medicine. He's returning home to Saratoga this fall to serve as an attending neurologist at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center.

He and his fiancee have been designed the home with us, be practical, beautiful, and deeply respectful of the neighborhood. And along with Kyle, Kyle's been extremely helpful with helping navigate such a challenging lot. We've done our best to certainly honor the spirit of the code for quite a while. The lot and its design of the the ADU were actually larger than the main home because the ADU was one of the few things that seemed to comply with the zoning regulations for setback because ADUs are granted reduced setbacks with the state. So, anyway, once again, I just wanna thank Kyle for working through what's been about a a year long conversation back and forth with his department.

The clients one of the history elements of the lot to know is that one of the reasons why it's an unusual nonconforming lot size is that it predates most of the lots in the neighborhood because it has a small pump on the property. And the pumps serve the local neighborhood as kind of a a fire pump and, I think, a domestic water source. Some of the design intent well, certainly, the pump sits in the setback, and so we're not really touching it. And we hope to keep it in the ultimate landscape as kind of like a rusted metal object that maybe you've seen probably in other places, certainly in Saratoga, but in Gold Country and things like that kind of honor the history of a place. Couple more things to say.

They are they've named the house Villa Le Oud. It's named by a French Arabic word oud, which is is the word for a dry seasonal creek referencing the dry riverbed that traverses the edge of the property. And once again, that there was a pump station called Rolling Hills Mutual Water Company that operated off of the property and one of the reasons why why the property is in unusual shape. Jason and Madeline see themselves as steward of the land that's historically served this neighborhood, his family that lives on a joining property. And they hope to create a legacy for Ruling Hills and look forward to being active members of the community, and they appreciate your thoughtful considerations today as they begin the next chapter of their family.

So just wanna emphasize that this is for a local who was a young man moving back to settle in a home with his fiancee and live close to his father and mother. And we're we've been designing on behalf of those clients, and certainly, that is the intended use of the of the building. As you may have seen, a lot of the emphasis has been getting if you saw the floor plans of getting the user up off the ground and into at least some light, there's kind of a variable quality to the oaks there, and a lot of the oaks that have been cited for removal are actually quite unhealthy. We've been working with an arborist to preserve all the healthy oaks as possible on the property and still create a sense of privacy for both the neighbors and the future owner. And let's see.

And then finally, the building really emphasizes privacy towards the street as much as possible. It keeps windows high. And most of the openings are faced back towards the seasonal creek bed where it's just a

fuse of

forest for privacy for the unit users and for folks on Rolling Hills Road. And I think that probably concludes my presentation, and I'd certainly welcome any questions you guys have about our design process, the design outcome, and any elements that might concern you concerning the property. Once again, we've tried to honor the spirit of the code, albeit with a very challenging lot size that left us with this very narrow triangular output. And the building really is a reflection of not only the shape of the property itself, but the setback constraints that we faced throughout the last year of design with the city.

Alright. Thank you. Is there any questions for the applicant?

I have a question. Can you hear Okay. So my question is

Get closer. Get closer to me.

Oh, sorry. Okay. So my question is like, is it such a overall the attached ADU plus the the main structure over the square footage is gonna be a category is about 2,300 something or not not more than 2,400 square feet. So it's it's such a small house, small small parcel. Why we still have a attached ADU? Why we just make us a whole house instead of a attached ADU?

Is that question for me, sir, or staff?

Yes. It's for for you, for applicant.

Not for Kyle, for me, Tyler. Correct?

Yes. Yes.

Yes. Why do we have to make an a to you? We we were under the assumption to meet with a lot of the lot constraints and still accommodate parking in the main structure. So parking covered parking is required per the zoning ordinance. And a lot of the living space on the 2nd Floor is actually the ADU.

And though the downstairs is classified as Main Floor, it also includes a parking space for a car, which is required by the code. That I can't through this history and and kind of lot coverage and FAR, this is what we ended up. The client appreciates and wants the flexibility of having two separate living units and plans to accommodate that with, you know, firewalls and other code accommodations with the building department to make it compliant. I would say that he doesn't plan to currently rent it out to my knowledge, but that is an evolving conversation as he grows his family. And they have other family members who live close by.

And so I think that having some other place for folks to stay when all visiting, they're they're kind of compounding properties. They're four of these small properties united. There's one, but they actually have two others that are close by. Is some hope so that his sister or his brother could gather during family activities and and other moments where, you know, having a separate bedroom and a little separate space is useful.

Okay. Fair enough. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions from the commission? Seeing none, now we're open to for public comments. We do not have anybody here in audience. Francis, is there anyone online?

I don't think we're hearing you, Francis.

Sorry about that, Chair Lee. There are no speakers online.

Thank you. Thank you, Francis. Now we will move on for the closing remarks. Applicant, you have five minutes for closing remarks.

Sure. I'll just keep it brief once again. I really appreciate everyone's consideration, and we've enjoyed actually our time working through this challenging lot with the city of Saratoga. And and in particular, Kyle's continued observation or or help being solution oriented on what what was definitely a challenge to work through the code. And once again, we're we're really hoping to make a contribution to a really unusual leaf shaped lot that's kind of in tough environmental shape and improve it for the better and hopefully add a new neighbor to the neighborhood.

We we we think it could be a beautiful piece of architecture and a nice contribution to to to this area. We certainly plan to, you know, do a lot of fire hardening and water capture, environmental sustainability elements to it. And I would I would say that the client's very, very passionate and excited to be part of the building and design process himself. It's been kind of a dream of his for his entire life.

Thank you. Okay. So now is there any discussions from the commission?

Yeah. I I have a concern about this, you know, the setback rear rear setback and the side setback. I think it's around the garage. Right? So I think they are gonna build a garage with such setback four feet. Okay? And also the rear setback four feet. So that means the garage is caught going through the garage very close to the property line or the neighbor's property line. So I'm just wondering, is that gonna be impact the neighbors, you know, because every time you drop cars through in and out of the garage, it's so close to the property line. I have a little concern on that. You know, if I'm the neighbor, I will also have a concern on that.

Did you have a question related to that?

Oh, yeah. I have a question. Basically, I have a comment. It's not really a question. So, basically, the garage. Right? So, basically, the main the main living area in this 1st Floor, the attached ADU is the 2nd Floor. So attach the garage is very close to the to to the rear setback we are talking about. Right? And also side side setback. That means it's very close to the property line. The cut in the out is very close to the property line.

So Yeah. Yeah. The garage is, you know, with the reduced setbacks, it's located fairly close to the property line. Uh-huh. It's almost impossible not to have it fairly close to the property line. Once you adhere to the 30 foot front setback, which those are pretty inflexible, then building basically anything is gonna be somewhat within the vicinity of that rear property line. Luckily, in this case, the home on that adjacent property to the rear Mhmm. Is pretty far from the property line. I don't know exactly, but I think it's a good 80 to a 100 feet at least. And it's pretty well forested down there as well.

It's a femoral drainage channel. There's a lot of trees there. So it shouldn't constitute any sort of nuisance to the adjacent property owner.

So the owner actually is aware of this situation. Right? They knows about it. Mhmm. Okay. I don't see any owners comments or anything. So

Yeah. Haven't received any neighbor comments for this project.

So Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. My understanding is it has been notice has been sent to the neighbors within 500 feet?

Yeah. 500 foot radius noticing as as a standard.

Alright. Any other comments? Nope. Okay. So are we I can make the findings for this variance approval from the staff report.

And I think is there any

I can second if

you Yeah. Would Okay. Good. Okay. So roll call.

Commissioner Cauzer? Yes. Commissioner Sutoran? Yes. Commissioner Hassan? Yes. Commissioner Zeng?

Aye.

Chair Lee? Aye. Motion passes unanimously.

All right. Thank you, Kyle. All right. Let's move on to the next item, Application FER twenty six dash zero zero zero one. May we have a staff report, please? Thank

you. For this project at 19249 Citrus Lane, the applicant is requesting FINCE exception approval for an existing nonconforming unpermitted concrete wall approximately five feet in height within the front setback area of the property. So the approximately 42,000 square foot project site is located at 19249 Citrus Lane in the R 140000 zoning district. It is an interior lot with frontage on Citrus Lane. The site contains an existing residence, detached garage, and latest site improvements.

And surrounding uses include primarily single family homes on similarly sized parcels. And no protected trees are proposed for removal. So here's the site plan showing the fence or the wall. The wall is located along the front of the property, about seven and a half feet from the property line and about 12 and a half feet from the edge of the actual street. Attached to the wall is also an existing three and a half foot tall driveway gate, approximately 22 feet from the street.

And the wall is not located within any 50 foot required site triangles for street intersections or 12 foot required site triangles for driveway intersections. Here are the wall elevations. The wall varies from about four feet to six feet in height as measured from the finished grade with eight inch tall columns at about 12 foot intervals. Here's a photo of the wall. It is a concrete wall with decorative stone cladding.

I believe this was taken from the interior of the lot. And you can see the line of trees that are in between the street and the wall. So these are the required fence exception findings that the commission must make to approve the project. And more details on these findings are also included in the staff report. So staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number twenty six zero ten, approving the project subject to conditions of approval. And that concludes staff presentation.

All right. Thank you, Kyle. Is there any questions for the staff? No questions? So now we have we move on to the applicant.

You have ten minutes for opening remarks. There's a button I can push so we can hear you. Hello? Yes.

Hello, commission. So I'm Frank Cho, father to Jordan, Corey, and our son Lauren Cho, and husband to Janice. So, we fell in love a lot. I think one thing that isn't shown over there is that it used to be one our house is subdivided. Our neighbor, it used to be one parcel of land.

So, the whole wall is one piece. So, we want to when we first bought the house from Bob and Gigi, we fell in love with, like, just everything about it, and we wanted to change nothing about the house. Unfortunately, the original house was quite small, and we wanted to do an extension, but it turned out that the house was in a setback, and we were forced to kind of do a little bit of remodeling. Through this process, because it's considered, you know, something new, we were told that we needed to go and change the wall. And, that kind of broke my heart a little bit.

Sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. That kind of broke my heart a little bit just because one of the reasons why we really fell in love with the house is at that time our daughters were quite young and Bob and Gigi had told us that there were seven weddings actually on the property. And, that really resonated with me as a young father to those two beautiful girls and now with a third. And so, want to keep it, the neighborhood as close to as what it was when Bob and Gigi were there, when Rochelle was there, Nancy was there, Don who's still there, and Andrew. And we hope you really take that into consideration. We don't want to change it. And we want to keep the character

that And we for the safety of our kids as well. And also the protection of the trees. Our children have played in the front for many years before we started remodeling the house. And it was definitely the way that the lot is sort of oriented, it's meant to have people closer to the front of the house. And from what we've talked to with our arborists, it's quite detrimental to a lot of the redwood trees along the fence as well just to even try to change it.

So, we love the fence and we want to keep the neighborhood as similar as what, and beautiful too. It's a rock facing fence as you can see, or the wall I mean.

And Like I was saying, it's a subdivided lot, so our neighbor, it's exactly the same.

It goes from the corner of Highway 9 all the It way

goes from the corner all the way through. So, it would change the character of what the neighborhood looks and feels like as well.

All right. Thank you. You can stay. Is there any questions for the applicants from the commission? I do have a quick question.

Yes.

So are you saying that the fence, the stone fence, was there when you bought the house?

Yes, was there from

It's an existing fence.

It's been there for like at least thirty years.

Because we know our neighbors quite well. They're all almost all original neighbors to From

the 70s. We have proof From

60s and 70s.

Yes, 60s and 70s. So, have proof up until the 90s. But then before that, like Nancy and Don, they're like, it's just kind of been there. So, like, at least 90s we have like photographic proof of that.

Okay. Thank you. Alright. Yeah, you can go back to your Okay. Seats Thank you

very much.

You. So now we're open to public comments. I don't see anyone here in audience. Francis, anybody online?

Nobody is online, Chair Lee.

Okay. Thank you. So that concludes public comments session. So now, applicant, you have five minutes for closing remarks. You can if you want, you can come. If you don't you want to skip, that's fine. All right. Thank you. So, okay. Any discussions from the commission?

I like the face. It's a very beautiful face.

All right. Okay. So I also I can make the findings from staff's report. Is there anybody who want to make a motion? Okay. Thank you. Anybody second? Thank you. Roll call please.

Commissioner Kauser? Yes. Commissioner Sheerhan? Yes. Hassan? Yes. Singh? Aye. Chair Lee? Aye. Motion passes unanimously.

All right. Congratulations. All right. Now we move to director's items.

Well, thank you so much. Thanks for your leadership. Chair Lee, you did a great job. Commissioners, thanks for everything you do. Cindy, always do a wonderful job leading your team up here. Appreciate that. Kyle, it's been your night tonight. So we've had some good ones. As part of the work plan for the Planning Commission was a discussion of talking about builders' remedy projects that may be coming. And so tonight, since Kyle's here, we're going to have Kyle just talk about a project that may be coming next month, more than likely will be coming next month, to the Planning Commission of Builders Remedy Project on Oak Place.

This is strictly only talking about the facts of the project, not getting into the merits, but it's more of just a brief overview to make sure that you're all informed of the project. And so when you do talk to your constituents, that you can help us spread the word. That's the big intent, and to keep our community informed. So, Kyle, if you don't mind, one more time tonight to just talk a little bit more about your upcoming project, that'd be great.

Sure. Yeah. So this is, I believe, our smallest builder's remedy project. It's only a total of four units. It's on 14486 Oak Place.

That lot is only about 7,500 square feet, so pretty small. They're proposing a subdivision into three lots with a single family home on each one, three stories. And one of the lots would have an attached ADU deed restricted for the low income component. So it's definitely an infill project. It obtained a AB one thirty exemption, which is one of the new state secret laws, which has just made the determination for that recently. So now it's ready to move on to commission for

approval. Is that for our next meeting?

It should, yeah. Barring any unforeseen setbacks, it should go in the May meeting.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Kyle, Commission. And Francis, thanks for everything you did tonight.

That's all I have. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Brian. Commission items. Any commission items? No? All right. I think that concludes today's fund commission meeting. Meeting adjourned.