Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, calling to order the regular planning commission meeting, city of riverbank for today, Tuesday, July 15, 2025. Uh, roll call, please. Chair Tidy Zamora here. Vice Chair Michael Sid Alterman here. Commissioner John Dyn here. And Commissioner Jones Stewart is absent. Commissioner Natasha Boso here and Commissioner alternate Ben Rubin is absent and commissioner alternate Armando Rodriguez filling in for Joan here. Any planning commission member or staff who has a direct conflict of interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

Chair, I don't have a conflict, but uh full disclosure, I attended a meeting last Saturday with Mr. Nuno, the consultant on this project, Vice Mayor Bassie, and three gentlemen from the neighborhood of this proposed project. It was strictlyformational. Okay.

Public comments. At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the planning commission board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of three minutes and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under state law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon. For record purposes, state your name and city residents. Please make your comments directly to the planning commission members. So public comments are open on anything not appearing on the agenda. Okay, seeing none, we'll close public comments. We'll move on to the consent calendar. All items listed on the consent calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the planning commission board unless requested by an individual planning commission member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the planning commission board. There are two items. Item 2.1 is the posting of the agenda. The agenda for the July 15th, 2025 planning commission meeting was posted on the city community center bulletin board, city hall north and south bulletin boards, post office, city website, and email to the library on July 10th, 2025. And item 2.2, approval of the July 15, 2025 agenda. This provides an opportunity for the planning commission or staff to recommend that an item be placed on the agenda for discussion or to adjust the proposed agenda to allow an item to be taken out of order. I will entertain a motion uh accepting the consent calendar.

So moved. Second. Okay. Roll call. Chair Zamora. Yes. Vice Chair Alterman. Yes. Commissioner Dinan. Yes. Commissioner Boso. Yes. And Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Approve by vote.

Motion passes. Okay. Moving on to the public hearing. We have item 3.1 which is an architecture and site plan review number 07-2024 and also involves resolution 2025-13. That resolution is going to be amended as published item four of the resolution which reads whereas the proposed project is consistent with the permitted uses of the mixeduse designation of the downtown specific plan which allows multif family residential uses that item will be stricken when it comes time to vote.

Good evening commissioners, good evening chair Michael contract planner with the city of riverbank associate plan with JB Anderson lings planning. uh before you this evening for your consideration is architecture study plan review ASP07 2024. So the subject property it's located at 2644 Moral Road. Subject property is approximately 2.4 acres in size and has a general plan land use designation of higher density residential and it sits within the excuse me within the R3 or multiple family residential R3 zoning district. So the applicant this evening is seeking planning commission approval for an architecture site plan review to allow for the development of a market rate 48 unit multifamily residential apartment complex. So the the image on the left is a a photo taken last week shows existing conditions and the photo on the right is an aerial image. Uh the the project site is outlined in red and the yellow triangle shows sort of the point of view from where the photo was taken along moral road sorry sweet thank you so here we get a look at the proposed site plan. Uh we can see that the subject property is is bounded by an MID canal to the west and it's kind of cut off but to the east are a few residential single family residential properties and also Quail Meadows mobile home park. Um as is noted on the slide, it shows the uh setbacks for the surrounding structures or for the structures, excuse me. Um on each side the setbacks meet uh the development

standards for the R3 zone. They meet or exceed the development standards for R3 zone, excuse me. Um the again the proposed project consists of a 48 unit uh multif family residential apartment complex. As you can see there, there are four standalone buildings. They are three stories tall and each floor of the buildings includes four four residential units. As proposed, there are 72 parking stalls and that also meets the requirements for off- streetet parking. Um, as a condition of approval, along the western boundary of the project site that spans along the uh MID canal, a 6-ft tall CMU wall will be constructed. And then on the eastern portion of the project site, a 6ft tall wood fence will also be constructed. So here we get just a zoomed in look of uh the proposed site plan for the buildings three and four. And what this is meant to do is to illustrate and to show you commissioners um the orientation of how each the patio um and the decks will be oriented. And the applicant worked with staff to ensure and provide um the most privacy possible both for new residents as well as existing uh residents in the area. So, you'll notice um on building three and building four, the outdoor space for each unit's oriented um north and south, facing north and south. Um and then we'll get a better picture of how those are closed in on each of all three sides except for how it's open. Um it's all closed in essentially on three sides. And then again, it shows the setbacks which meet and exceed the development standards. Um, additionally, you can see there in the in the in the road in the middle of the two apartment buildings is a ladder truck, which essentially is a standard practice. This project is referred to the consolidated fire

protection district. So, conditions of approval have been applied to this project, excuse me. And as such, both the layout, the site plan, and the circulation uh meets the standards of the fire district. Um what that dashed line shows um is that from hydrants to engine a maximum of 600 feet is uh well the maximum pered and so that that's what that illustrates. Um additionally this site plan also meets the requirement for a maximum of 100 ft of backing up and so that's why you see an engine truck there. Sweet. So here we get a first look at the proposed architecture. Um it's comprised of neutral colors mostly uh including tan natural tan and steel colored siding. Um we see that on all elevations you see those metal awnings for both architectural detail and functional utility. Um additionally uh you see that the apex of the roof it's kind of cut off. I apologize. Uh the apex of the roof is 41 feet and 1 inch and then the beginning of the roof is 30t 6 in. So that meets the uh development standards of the maximum height of 45 ft in that R3 zone. So here we get our first look of the architectural renderings from Moral Road. You see three of the four buildings there. And and there you can kind of get a better picture of how those uh patios and decks um are oriented and how they're closed in and only open on one side. Get another look. And also as these slides show that there are two points of access onto and off of Moral Road.

So, so as proposed, the floor plans are pretty um homogeneous in design. They're pretty similar. They all uh include two bedrooms, two bath, just under 1,000 square feet, and offer outdoor space, patio, and decks. And there also includes uh one on-site manager unit, and uh a trash enclosure, and uh one maintenance building. So this is the proposed landscaping plan. Um it's approximately 44,000 square feet in aggregate. Um it's comprised of a v variety of trees and shrubs. Trees include Chinese pistache, magnolia, and great myrtles and various uh sh uh shrubs that also provide screening for HVAC units. And then we'll get a look here uh at the southern the rear portion of the project site, the southern portion um that includes the the project as a whole includes a number of amenities uh for the for the residents to enjoy. But at this portion of the project site, uh it includes a lot of stuff. So it includes a dog park, dedicated dog park, um picnic ADA accessible picnic benches and picnic tables. uh large sha shade structure, excuse me. And then obviously the the big green over 3500 square feet of multi-use turf area. And so this project is both consistent with the city's general plan policies as well as the city's zoning ordinance. Now the the project has been designed to ensure that the scale of the the multifamily structures fit with the surrounding neighborhood and have been strategically placed to provide both a variation um or a variety excuse me

throughout the project site. The proposed project is exempt from SQA as per the SQA guidelines that you see there for qualified housing projects. So staff's recommendation to the planning commission is to adopt resolution number 2513 to approve this architecture site plan before you this evening. And with that that concludes staff's presentation. Uh I am here to answer any questions you may have as well as the applicant applicants architect as well. So thank you.

Curiosity question. In my misment youth in the Bay Area, there was a requirement for a three-story facility to have an elevator. Is this project assuming there'll be elevators in each complex? I'm I'm not aware of an elevator, but uh I think maybe the applicant can answer that. Thank you.

Um I had a couple questions. Uh, one of them was that. Thank you, John, for asking that. Um, I'm assuming I I didn't look that closely at the interior architecture. I'm assuming that the ground level units are are there ADA accessible for residents to come in there and move through with the path of travel and that? Yes, sir. Yeah. And then also, Commissioner, I didn't uh make mention of it, but there are ADA accessible ramps throughout the the project site.

Right. Right. Okay. Um I I just had a couple odd questions about the the site plan and that you showed that showed the park area. Um I maybe this is an older exhibit or maybe it is mislabeled. Um they show an existing chain link fence running along the canal. The the label there says existing chain link fence to remain or repair and that's contrary to one of the conditions of building a masonry wall along the east side of the MID canal. So is that is that just a mislabeling? So yeah. So that was submitted but that is misstated. It will be required to um construct and that's also a Modesto irrigation district standard condition right that yes

yes sir yes it'll be a CMU wall for sure and then I was just curious um to the east the single family residentials that's zoned R1 there I believe. Yes sir. Um I I don't remember if our code here requires any special barrier masonry wall or different fence when you're changing zones, but R1 R3 I think maybe doesn't.

Yes, S. I I'll jump in and clarify that for you. So if we had um different land uses like commercial, residential, that's where the trigger would be when you have basically conflicting um land uses. In this particular case, they look at it as um non-conlicting or cohesive land uses. So, no block walls required. The one situation along the canal, it's a requirement of MID just to protect their um irrigation facilities, right? And that seems like a good safety thing. Uh and I guess the the question then becomes the existing fence on the rear of those lots there and along the uh mobile home park is it's a little bit older. Was this did I hear correctly that this project is going to construct a new fence along the new sixoot fence?

Yes, sir. That's a condition of approval. So, all of the all the residents there would get, you know, new rear fence and that. Yeah. I need somebody to build behind me and give me a new fence. Thank you. Any other commissioner comments? I just have a really quick question out of curiosity. For buildings three and four on the east side where the setbacks are about 25 ft, th those windows are like what you call the clear story windows, right? They're just skylights so the residents on the other side just keep their privacy. Yes, sir. Yep. Precisely.

Okay, we'll open it up to public comments on this particular project if there's anybody here with a public comment. Uh I do want to mention that the commissioners did receive three letters um as well and we each got a copy of those letters regarding uh comments regarding the project. So public comments regarding the project.

Hello. Uh my name is Robert Calvo. I live at 5925 Newbrook which is the second house in on uh the east side that we were just looking at. And my question is uh two years ago I got tired of looking at the eyesore behind us and my fence was older to say you were lucky Michael to get a new tenant and put a fence up behind you. Uh I invested in that. I did it uh two code uh and seven foot installed professionally and uh I did it for privacy not to look at that mess and not knowing what was going to happen one day but it's only two years old and now we're talking about a six-foot fence when I have the newest fence professionally put in of the five houses on the east side. So, is I know uh I think the uh regulations changed in the city. Uh it was eight when I had my fence done. I think it's seven now. But is there any way we can make some type of consideration to because my neighbor on the south of me, he put his in himself last summer. His is 7 foot. So there's two of us with seven foot and there's three of us that have old, you know, bad shaped fences that they would be happy to get them replaced. I'm sure they would, but I'm wondering, you know, what what what do we do in a situation like this?

Josh, sure. Let me just add in real quick. Um, and I I don't want to put it words in the applicant's mouth. They may want to come up and speak on this issue, but in my experience on these items, um, I I think it'd be beneficial to build the the new fence, you know, within the current property boundaries of the apartment site. Therefore, allows the residents to either leave their fence in place or tear it down if they so choose. Okay. Who makes that decision? Um the the commission could certainly condition it, add that condition on. Um again though, the applicant may already be planning to do that. I'm just not aware if he is.

Okay. Can we get the applicant to make a comment on that please?

Thanks Kevin. I'm a project architect with RGA. We do architecture and engineering. We're from Chico and I came down three hours to be with you today. Uh on behalf of my team, we're happy to present the project to you and also of course our our colleague uh and client Annie. Um I was taking notes of questions and I want to answer them, but um I'm here to answer any questions. I think that's sort of the tone of of why we're here today is to hear concerns from commission members, from staff, and from neighbors, too. So um Annie is a local community member herself. She's a business leader here in the local area as well. Uh, and having worked as Annie for many many years, I know that her attitude is let's let's get it done. Um, which means let's listen to the concerns of everybody and if we have answers to those questions, we'll be happy to provide them to you. So, from the top, uh, we talked about elevators. Just a point of clarification on the accessibility part. The building code requires that we provide what are called adaptable units. So those units by default won't be fully accessible, but they have every provision inside of them that they can easily be switched over to an accessible unit um should somebody uh in need of those services want to reside on the ground floor um which of course is prescribed by the California building code. So full compliance there. Uh the fence along the uh the canal um sharp eye the the issue there was that we had submitted this project before the irrigation district had gotten back to us. So we intended we thought that it was going to be a requirement. We didn't know that yet. So, um the great way to solve that is a condition of approval and a center block wall there. Um on the other side, the the fence that goes up against the R1 zoning, uh the project plans, uh left that kind of open and uh I'll speak on behalf of Annie here that the intent is to do what's right. And if there is a dilapidated fence that's there, uh building a new fence is a requirement of the project. If that dilapidated fence does not want to remain in place, the owner of that home doesn't want to keep that dilapidated fence, it would be removed as part of the project. Um, of course, there would have to be agreements in place and Annie is happy to talk to those owners on a

case- by case basis. So, that's appropriate. Or if the council, excuse me, commission uh conditions that every fencil along there has to go away, that's probably a little more complicated, right? Because it's up to the individual property owners. Um, but uh, however, that needs to be conditioned or addressed as part of this approval. I could speak on behalf of Annie and say that we're here to do what's right, whatever the owners of those homes may think that is. Um, and then yes, you're right about the windows uh on on the buildings that face towards uh those single family residences. We tried our best to make sure that the architecture wasn't imposing uh both by the height, but also the configuration of the windows that face towards the east there. Uh so they are higher. They open only onto bedrooms. So there's not folks that are actually living or or sitting in their kitchen and looking out their windows in somebody else's backyard. Of course, bedrooms are only occupied during certain hours of the day. And those windows don't go down to waist height. They go about uh about here up to higher. So they're getting light in, but they're not letting people see in other people's backyards. Um I think that answers it. So don't no rules of uh play here, but uh I'm here to answer any questions whether I stand here or over there. Just shout out. Yes.

Yeah. Would you repeat what you said about the height of the windows? They're going to be above. It might be helpful to have a a slide of that. And I I don't have control. Well, I guess I do have control over that. Is it this guy here?

Let's go back. There was one slide, if I'm not mistaken, that showed the elevation of the building. Um, not quite visible in that view, but there's there's a good picture of it. Uh you can see on on the building that's closest to us. It's not the building in question, but it's similar to that. See on the left hand side of that building, uh there's a bit of architectural interest on that elevation. And there's those smaller windows. Those windows are at about shoulder height and above. And you can see that by looking to the right, those windows on the face of the building there, those are at about waist height and above. So we did our best to push them up.

Thank you. I just want to be sure that I understand the concern of the neighbor and the fence issue. Are you wanting all the fences to be uniform height? Is that what you're what you're asking? If they're all going to be the same height or whether there's going to be double fencing behind you Not because I don't think You know 15 whatever height you I'm pretty sure my neighbor

Okay. So, in clarifying his request was for the fences to all be the uniform height of seven feet versus doubling up the fence and having varying heights of fence was his request. Correct. Yeah. So, so now from our standpoint, can we condition the approval of the resolution for all fences to be the same height and to tie into the existing two fences that have been replaced? Is that something that we can do? Okay. So, would we need to make a motion and then amend the mo amend the the resolution at that point? Yeah, I'd recommend we just um make a motion including a condition that all fences on the eastern property line I believe so um be at least 7 feet or uniform 7 feet in height.

Okay. Are there any more public comments? Yes, come up to the microphone, please. Uh I'm curious what the demographic Oh, my name is Alicia. uh birthday and I live on Maril um at 2719. Um I'm curious what the demographic is going to be for these apartments and how it's going to affect um the pricing of my house.

I believe these are market rate apartments, so there's not going to be any restrictions as to who can who can live there. There's going to be subject to fair housing laws, everything that normally happens with multi-ousing, multi-unit housing. Yeah. Are there any projections on how it's going to impact the value of my home? That I don't know. Market conditions fluctuate daily, monthly, yearly. It just typically an apartment complex in a housing area reduces the the value of the home and that's a concern for me. How do I get more information on how this particular project is going to impact the value of my home?

Josh, yep. I don't I don't think that's quantifiable per se. Yeah, I'm not sure it is. Michael, did you have anything to add on this?

I can just say about the the site specifically. So, as it relates to the the city council, city council took action on this site back in 2017 as it as it relates to the city's um you know how we're going through the sixth cycle housing element. So, previously in the fifth cycle housing element uh the city initiated so such that it would be remain compliant with state law. The city identified this uh subject property that it could accommodate uh high density residential, meaning that it was prime for development at 20 units per acre such that the the proposed project before you this evening meets that standard. So basically staff at that time did analysis and said that uh a development at 20 units per acre would this site could accommodate that. Now, that impact on surrounding properties, um, I don't know if that was a consideration. I don't think that it was, but that this site specifically was, uh, the city initiated a general plan amendment to redesate the subject property from low density residential to higher density residential and to reszone uh, the subject property from single family residential to higher density residential or excuse me, multif family. So, um, I just FYI so that you're fully informed of the project site and its history.

Thank you. I think, you know, as a real estate agent, I'm familiar with market fluctuations and how things there's variables that impact a variety of things regarding property values. Um, to help address that, my question would be for the project, how is maintenance going to take place here? I saw that there was an on-site manager. Are they in charge of maintaining the property? Is, you know, what is the maintenance of the of the property going to be?

Um, yeah, good question. And and thank you, Alicia. Um, I'll speak on behalf of Annie here. Uh, she's a community member first and and a business leader second. She's proud of what she does in the local communities and and you could see that by going to any one of her businesses. Um, if you walk in the front door of any one of Annie's properties, it's and span. It's clean. It's maintained. The people there are professional and polite. Um, and I'm not speaking out of turn here by saying that I I have no doubt that this project will be the same. Um, to answer your specific question, there is a manager's unit on site. Uh we've also devoted what you could see in the far left there which is a small maintenance building uh to the upkeep of the properties. So the intent is to keep it the same way that Annie always likes it and maintain it as is required.

Great. Thank you. Any other further comments regarding this item? Okay. Okay. Then we're going to move um I'd like a a motion approving architectural site uh plan review with a resolution number 2025-013 removing item four from the resolution as it was published which reads whereas the proposed project is consistent with the permitted uses of the mixeduse designation of the downtown specific plan which allows multifamily residential uses and then also condition the resolution um to indicate for uh the fences on the east side to be all uniform height of seven feet.

I'll need a motion. So moved. I'll second. Okay. Roll call.

Chair um Zamora. Yes. Vice Chair Alterman. Yes. Commissioner Dyn. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. And Commissioner Boso. Yes. Approved. 50.

Okay. Uh, moving on to planning commission comments. Are there any comments from any planning commissioner? Uh, I'll just add that uh the groundbreaking ceremony for North County Corridor happened uh was last week and construction is underway. So, just everybody be warned and aware that there's going to be a lot more increased traffic and construction and maybe a little congestion going on there, especially in the eastern parts of Clarabel at Terminal. Uh it's a long-term project and so there there will be quite a bit going on there, but uh just make sure you're aware of it and and keep that in mind when you're trying to pass through that area maybe in the mornings and afternoons during the heavy commute times.

A little congestion. Any other comments? Okay. Any any referrals or correspondence to review other than the um two letters that I provided the commissioners before the meeting? Um, no other correspondents. Okay. And any staff comments?

I do have a couple of comments. Um, I also went to the North County corridor groundbreaking. So, it's it's kind of an an exciting project. I know there's varying views on it in the community. So, one of the things I've been trying to clarify with the county are road closures, impacts to our daily routine, taking kids to school, going to the shopping center, whatnot. So, I hope to have some further information the next few weeks I could share with the commission. Um, I think the the story I've gotten from the county so far is things are a little bit in flux. So, they're trying to narrow down exactly when those road closures will will affect us. Um, I wanted to mention a couple of things. Um, the housing element was resubmitted back to HCD on June 24th. That's a 60-day review by HCD. Hopefully, if there's no additional modifications needed, we'll have that back in front of the planning commission and city council in the near future for adoption. Um, the other thing I wanted to mention is that there's been an announcement in the shopping center of a new tenant um in in one of the larger buildings, which would be just east of the the Costco buildings that are under construction now. Um, we call it major 4. it was announced that that's going to be a Hobby Lobby. So, that's a little exciting. And also in the shopping center, just wanted to hit on that Raising Canes will have a grand opening August 12th. And that's all I have for tonight. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. And with that, uh, tonight's meeting is adjourned.