Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Will you both meet? Good evening. I'd like to call the meeting of the Planning Commission of September 14th to order. First off, we'll pledge the flag. If I could get people to rise, so we'll.

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

Thank you. With that, I'll do a roll call. Commissioner Harbaugh? Here. Commissioner Roach?

Here.

Commissioner Havel? Here. And Commissioner Tiernan is here. Have we heard from Grinke or Stuckenbroker?

We have not heard from Commissioner Grinke or Commissioner Stuckenbroker at this point. We do have a quorum. Yeah?

OK. The first item before us, I think I have called it to order. So approval of the final agenda. Can I get a motion?

So moved.

I'll take that a second. Okay. We'll vote on it. So Commissioner Havel? Aye. Commissioner Roach? Aye. Commissioner Haber?

Yes.

And then Commissioner Tiernan is an aye as well. So we have on our agenda public comment, and that would be for anything other than 200 San Marin Drive, if somebody wants to approach the Planning Commission. OK, if not, we'll move on. So we do have one thing on our consent calendar. I was not in attendance at that meeting, so I will be abstaining from it. But I will entertain a motion to approve those minutes or to amend them if need be. So moved. Yeah. Second. Okay.

Okay.

All right. Any discussion? Are we okay? No, it's fine. Okay. We'll vote on the motion. Commissioner Havel? Aye. Commissioner Roach? Aye. Commissioner Harroff? Aye. Okay. And then I am staining. So we have a relatively new commissioner, Ken Harroff. Do you want to say something to the public? Welcome to the Planning Commission.

Yeah, I can very briefly. This is actually my second meeting, but the first one was so long ago, I can't even really remember it. We've not been that busy lately. Anyway, my name is Kevin Haroff. I'm a three-year resident of Novato. having moved from Larkspur and the Greenbrae neighborhood down there. I'm an attorney. My practice is getting wound up a little bit now that I'm 72. So I don't have to work as hard as I used to. At least that's good. While in Larkspur, I was also on the planning commission for the city of Larkspur for two years, I think. And after that, for eight years, I was on the city council for Larkspur. So I've got a little bit of experience with city government, although not the city of Novato until now. So that's probably about all you need to know.

For now. I appreciate that. Welcome. So the next item on us is unfinished or other business in which we have none. So we're up to the public hearing tonight. This would be 200 San Marin Drive residences. I think Senior Planner Zitelli is going to present this.

Yeah, good evening. So this item is a public hearing for a proposed development of eight single-family attached homes at 200 San Martin Drive. Tonight, the Planning Commission is being asked to provide a recommendation to the City Council on the project, specifically on resolutions for a general plan amendment, a zoning map amendment, master plan and precise development plan, or PDP, design review, and a tentative map and exceptions request. The project consists of eight single-family homes. Each has an attached two-car garage. Three additional guest parking spaces are proposed at the end of the private street. And the maximum height of the homes would be 37 feet 8 inches and include three stories of garage and living space. One of the units is proposed to be affordable and would be offered at a moderate income level. So the rezoning for the project has been submitted pursuant to State Senate Bill 10, or SB 10, which is a state law that went into effect back in 2021. However, this is the first SB 10 project for the City of Novato. The law provides a process for urban infill lots to be rezoned for up to 10 housing units subject to the lot meeting qualifying criteria. An example of that criteria would be the lot not being located in a very high fire severity zone, being located within city limits, etc. In addition to the rezoning request, the requested general plan amendment is required to make the land use designation of the site and the zoning designation of the site consistent with one another. SB 10 states that that rezoning, as well as any necessary general plan amendment, are not considered projects for the purposes of CEQA. So in other words, CEQA cannot be required for the rezoning and the general plan amendment. The applicant has also requested the site be rezoned to plan district, or PD, which requires preparation of a master plan and a PDP. The city's municipal code says that a master plan and PDP constitute a rezoning. Therefore, these entitlements are also not considered projects for CEQA purposes under SB 10. But those remaining entitlements are design review and tenant map, which are subject to CEQA. And they qualify for the infill development exemption. The project also includes two exceptions requests, which are further described in the tentative map resolution. Those exceptions are to forego undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines along the San Maran project frontage and reducing the width of the proposed private street to 26 feet, where a 28-foot width would be required by the municipal code. And staff supports granting these exceptions requests as further described in that resolution. There's been two DRC meetings for this project, or design review commission meetings. A workshop was held on April 15, and a hearing was held on June 15. At the workshop, DRC recommended some changes to the project design, including suggestion for different plant species. And at the June 17 hearing, DRC recommended the planning commission and city council approve the design review for the project. Planning staff are recommending Planning Commission make the required findings to recommend the city council approve the requested entitlements. We're here to answer any questions. And then I'd also like to introduce Jeff Doherty. He's the project applicant, and he's here tonight and has a presentation as well. Thank you.

Excellent. So let me first poll the commission, see if they have any questions about the report or what you just said. Anything? Are you okay?

No, go ahead.

We're all okay. Okay, so before we get on with the public hearing, this is a good time to announce if we've made site visits or had any interaction with any of the principals. I have visited this site. I walked it this weekend, as well as previous times. And I did meet the applicant, at least one of them, I think a couple months ago at a social function. Didn't talk about the project per se, but I did meet the individual.

With that, I will open up.

Well, if we can get the applicant to come up and tell us about your project, please.

Thank you. My name is Jeff Doherty. I'm a local Marin resident. I'm the project developer here at the 200 San Marin townhomes project. First, thank you for being here tonight. Thank you, Caitlin, for the great introduction and the thorough staff report. Much appreciated. First, before I get into it, I just want to say I'm excited to finally be standing in front of you presenting this project. Obviously, there's been a lot of work and community feedback that's been incorporated that I'm hoping to explain. But I think we've ended at a project that's really additive to the San Marin neighborhood. I'm also very excited about the opportunity to provide eight homes to families in the city of Nevada on what's currently a vacant lot and has been for 40 years. I think the opportunity to reutilize that is pretty unique. So I'll start with that. Caitlin gave a great project overview, but I figured I'd give quick project background, just some additional context on how we got here. Again, Caitlin also went through SB 10, so I might skip through the entitlement and zoning section quickly, but happy to come back to that during questions. There's also some unique site constraints here that really governed how we ended up with the current site plan. So again, happy to give a quick overview, and then come back to that if you'd like. I'd also like to just go quickly through the feedback that we've gotten over the last 18 to 24 months from the community, as well as the city, that's been combined and incorporated into the plan you see tonight. And then finally, I'd just like to welcome up Ian Murphy with BDE Architecture to go over the design that we've presented.

So just some context.

200 San Marin Drive, as you saw if you visited the site, the corner of San Marin and San Andreas drives is a blue circled site. It is obviously very well located for in-field site directly across from Harvest Market Grocery Store, the Bay Club, high school, elementary school, easy access to outdoor space. The green space just to the south is the Nevada School District site, also potentially coming up for housing development. What I also want to highlight here before we move on from the context is the site is surrounded by other townhome-type developments. Just to the south is a condo townhome project. You also have one to the north here across the street, as well as the town home community as you move towards San Marino High School down San Marino Drive. The property today looks like this. Well, it's probably a little bit more brown today, but it is a vacant flat site. The context and history here, as many of you know, is it was a former gas station in the 80s. It was completely remediated with the underground storage tanks removed in the 90s. Basically, that cleanup work as well as existing zoning is kind of combined to be the reason it's still a vacant lot today. What I mean by that is it took us until last year to get a full sign off from the water board that this could be used for residential use. And then only recently has the state laws really allowed you to put residential on a commercially zoned site. Otherwise, formally, it would have been pretty complicated to do so. So a combination of those make it possible to do residential here. What also is unique is you have relatively flat, well-located site that's not in a high fire hazard zone, not in a flood zone, not in a wetland, no heritage trees. This is a site that we should be utilizing for housing in our community. Entitlement overview, as Caitlin said, we're using SB 10. There are a few other paths. What we liked about the SB 10 path is we essentially could use the underlying zoning, but do residential here. So how we thought about this was we took the underlying commercial zoning requirements for the Nevada Municipal Code and basically met all of them except for saying, hey, we want to do residential here instead of commercial. The only exception to that is floor area ratio is obviously higher than what you'd have for an office building with a parking lot. And that's mainly due to the fact that the state laws that we're using require a minimum density as well. We have to do at least six units here. And so with that, we just needed a higher FAR to make a feasible site. But otherwise, we're meeting the requirements. We're exceeding them. So with all those requirements incorporated, we came up with this site design. I'll have Ian go into that in a little more detail in a little bit. The site where these buildings lay out were basically governed by the different setbacks. On the sides, you have the city required setbacks. In the middle, that drive aisle is required by the fire department. That left the building footprints that we have. Happy to come back to this later and go into it in more detail. And of course along the way we've been talking to and incorporating neighborhood and community feedback both through informal meetings as well the formal neighborhood meeting to collect feedback these were the top concerns that were brought up during those meetings and So I'll go through the top three quickly, because I think they're important. Architectural style. As you may know, the Nevada Municipal Code requires us to pick from six styles. We picked the Mediterranean design style. We then took that to the community meeting and heard, hey, maybe there's some different opinions on that. We then presented to the Design Review Board four different options of the design. and ultimately settled on the design that's before you tonight. So there's been a lot of thorough vetting around that and, I think, discussion with the community, which has been great and helpful. Obviously, height, privacy, and shade have all been concerns with these being three-story buildings. These did, well, I'll say, they did initially have roof decks. I thought that would be a great amenity for this type of housing product. We did remove those. And we did step back the buildings in excess of all required standards. We also are proposing to put in eight-foot-tall privacy fences, which is the max allowable height under the municipal code. I think it will be a great addition in terms of privacy. And lastly, just in terms of traffic safety, this is all designed in accordance with Caltrans standards in terms of site setbacks from that.

turn.

As you may also be familiar, there's a corridor study going on with Samarin Drive that may change how that intersection functions. What we've agreed to with Public Works for now is we're going to be changing that yield sign to a stop sign so there's not a quick pull through that intersection. And then we've kind of agreed to work with the city on whatever that intersection becomes in the future. I guess lastly, parking. We are exceeding all standards for on-site parking, even though potentially you could do less. So that's been the neighborhood feedback. Design review feedback kind of brought those same changes, including the architecture that I mentioned. I'd say the two main things that they asked us to change were some additional facade changes and orientation to the frontage along San Marin Drive. We did reorient one of the units to actually face San Marin Drive and have an entrance there instead of a flat wall, which I think is a nice articulation. The second major update from the designer view was making sure that we had all California native plants We're going to be planting over 20 trees on the site. Currently, there's zero. But just making sure that those are all native species was an important update. So again, happy to go through. There's obviously more of any of that in more detail, but those are kind of the key changes. So with that, I'll hand it off to Ian.

Good evening. Thanks for the opportunity to present this project to you tonight. I think Jeff covered a lot of the reasons why this project is really appropriately sited for where it is. It's a perfectly transitional site where we're bound on a kind of main corner with three other commercial sites. We have single family to the right of us on the plan that's on the screen right now. And we've got a large scale housing development in the future with the Nevada School District site. So it kind of is a nice meeting of all those uses here with the higher density housing. While it is conjoined townhouse design, there's only two units attached in each instance. So it's sort of a lower density, more highly articulated version of that typology, which I think is more appropriate next to the single family housing. It's an enlarged plan. We've got four pairs of two townhomes with a central drive aisle with driveways and two car garages for each, as well as three additional parking stalls at the end of the driveway. This was highly coordinated city fire department and other city staff to make sure that we had something that was going to be both compliant and functional and saleable in the future. We have a fairly large setback from the street, which is going to be lushly planted with new trees and other native plants, as well as coordinated stormwater on the back of the site. closer to the existing housing and Novato School District site. Since the last meeting that we had in design review, we've coordinated entries to the townhomes on the right-hand side of the plan to have a more cohesive entry experience around their yard in the back. These are the general elevations as well as the material palette that we're proposing. In keeping with the objective design standards for Mediterranean style, we have taller proportioned linear windows, balconies, barrel tile roofs, corbel designs, wrought iron elements. They're all in keeping with the residential use that we think will stand out in a really positive way in the neighborhood. We worked really hard to articulate these facades in a way that was both appropriate for the Mediterranean design but also added a lot of texture and character. Here's a view where you can see some of the ins and outs that I'm talking about where we have lower roof elements that stick out and really go beyond sort of the flat housing that you may see in some other developments. You can also see an illustration of what we're proposing for the lush landscape setback off the street to try and provide some buffer for these houses. I'm going to go back to the rendering for questions as we move forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Is that the extent of your presentation? Good. OK. So commissioners, do we have questions of the applicant of what just got presented to us? Yes. Commissioner Roach, somebody you could approach?

So I have a, for either of you, I have a question in regards if we could go back to the slide that shows the entrance on the San Marin Drive.

The plant?

The actual picture if you could go forward once if I could look on the top left Is that the entrance on the San Marin Drive for that townhome?

Do we not have a picture of that change that was made Yeah, hold on one second Let me get to the elevations hold on one second I think this is it, the upper left.

OK, there you go. Sure. Got it. Thank you. Then if we could go back to the, I'll call it the fourplex, the four squares, we could shoot back there. The plan? Yes, please. Thank you. Not to Go back a little bit. Sure.

I'm just gonna go to the enlarged plan.

Okay Thank you right there Okay, so Please help me out if you could I'm looking at the south west corner And if I see the sidewalk For the Townhome there and Does that go in? I'm missing it. That is a door going into the residence, or where does that sidewalk lead? Do you see what I'm talking about?

Can I point?

Sure, point. Yeah, go ahead. Are we talking about? Correct. Not that one, but correct, right there. Yes.

From the parking area, there's a sidewalk, a gate, and a sidewalk that leads to a side door to that residence.

Great, thank you. Got it. And then relative to the northwest corner, the smaller of the eight town homes, was there any discussion at any point in time with the city relative to the potential changes? And this might be more of a city question that I'll come to you on, but as the idea of the San Marin Drive redo gains momentum, I don't know what type of infrastructure is underneath that curve, if there is any at all. And this is a hypothetical, but was it ever discussed or was the conversation bridged of, hey, what if we make that a hard right turn at this point in time and make that townhome the same size as all the rest? Is that conversation broached?

Yes. So actually, the previously approved project had a hard right turn corner. And so yes, we discussed it. The city wants to leave the round turn at this point in time until the Sandman Drive plan has been worked through.

OK. Those are my initial questions. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you.

Commissioner Harroff? I don't have any questions at this time.

Perhaps I do have a question for you, Jeff. So in light of the design of most of San Marín being re-sawn, and I'm not exactly sure the architecture style, but why did we choose to go to Mediterranean versus what's largely out there?

JEFFREY COKERMANN- So we actually share a photo. Here's a context of some of the surrounding buildings. You kind of have stucco, the Mediterranean roof tile, What this has, I guess, been described to me as is like California ranch. The styles that we're allowed to pick from are kind of these three. Unfortunately, that style doesn't really fit in exactly to any of these three. We felt Mediterranean was close. And then, yes, that was a big discussion both with the neighborhood meetings as well as the Design Review Commission, like which direction do we go. And so, yeah, we presented four different options within these styles, and Mediterranean was the one that was, I guess, voted on.

I see. I see. OK, did you want to elaborate?

I think also given the three story nature of the buildings, they lent themselves to this style versus the neighboring ranch styles are obviously single family homes. It's not as compatible.

I see. I see. OK. And now my understanding that we're going to underground some of the utilities, but once you need authorization or approval from the city before, the PG&E will talk to you about that.

Is that accurate?

Yeah. So the utility line is actually a pretty big issue for developing this site. So that utility line that runs, if I can find a picture.

Yeah, the length of San Marino.

The length of San Marino. kind of two issues with it. One, it's just an outdated equipment. So we're not sure exactly how PG&E is going to or what they're going to say when we go to underground it. But then two, there's a power pole in this intersection. And what our consultant has said is once you underground two power poles, you become required to underground basically this whole intersection. I think which would be a millions of dollars and not feasible for this project. So what we're requesting is that there's no Underground requirement or showing on our plans right now is to underground through The end of the driveway because that's compliant with fire department access requirements. So they don't want that power line either But PG&E won't give us their official read on it until we have an approved project from the city.

I

That sounds a little frustrating. So it is currently in that island, right? The power pole?

Yes, there's currently a power pole in this island right here. And then there's one at the corner of this site.

And so what you're suggesting is that it just come from the current pole underground into your property?

Yeah, so we'd underground basically just to right before the intersection. So we'd get through the end of the driveway, have clearance for the fire trucks. but then not trigger undergrounding all the utility lines through the intersection.

Okay. Fair enough. Thank you. Yeah.

Thank you. Does that mean I'm kind of familiar with the intersection, but the power poles that you're talking about, are you stating that there would be Two then, one on either side of the driveway, is that correct?

So right now there's this pole in the pork chop and then this pole here? Yes. We would be undergrounding from the existing pole and then inserting a new pole before the intersection.

That will also tie into the one in the intersection? Yes. Okay, I gotcha.

Yeah, so you'll still have that overhead line above the existing intersection.

So the addition of one?

Addition of one.

Good luck with PG&E. Thank you. OK. Unless there's something else, we'll move on to the public hearing. Fair enough? OK. OK. With that, I will open the public hearing. I do have one card. And I would request that if members of the public want to come and talk to us, fill out a card so that we get the record straight of who the speakers are. So with that, Susan Wiernick.

Good evening, everybody. I think you all know me. Kevin, I'll introduce myself, Susan Wernick. I'm also a former planning commissioner and council member for the city of Novato. I have lived in the San Marino neighborhood for 35 years. I've been a resident of Novato for 44 years. And I drive by this site every single day. I have to say, I'll start out by saying I am delighted to see a project again, because we already approved a live work project over seven years ago. that never got built. So delighted to see a project. I like the site plan overall. I like the project. And I think it'll be lovely to do something built there. However, I take huge issue with the Mediterranean style architecture. This does not fit in San Marin in any way, shape, or form. So this would fit beautifully in Hamilton, but it doesn't work. It's going to stick out like a sore thumb. And I got to drive by this, and my neighbors behind me are going to have to drive by it all the time as well. And again, this would work in Hamilton. There is not a single building. I don't care what these guys say. There's not a single building like this in San Maran. The how you clad a building, I studied interior design for many years. There's a million ways to do it. I know that we have objective design criteria now that we deal with, but I'm sure city staff can work with the developers on cladding this in an architectural style that fits with the neighborhood. If you all take a look at the former school site at the top of San Carlos, it was an old 10-acre site that was redeveloped over 20 years ago. The developer in those days sat down with all of us in the neighborhood. And we told them, since most of this was going to face development on the other side of the street, we just didn't want it to stick out like a sore thumb. Take a hint from the architectural style of the neighborhood. Totally, yes, you can update it. make it look so that in 10 years, everyone doesn't say, oh, when the hell was that built? So this is what I'm concerned with. This doesn't look like the shopping center. It doesn't look like the office buildings, the single family homes. There is nothing like this. There's no tile roofs. All of that design, that's all in Hamilton. It's not San Moran. I think this is an easy thing to fix. I don't think it's a hard thing to fix. I hope you listen. I hate to have to keep coming back and screaming. I am, again, not opposed to the project in any way, shape, or form. I just want to see this fit in and complement the neighborhood, not stick out like a sore thumb. And thank you, and I appreciate your time.

Thank you. I see we have another person approaching the microphone. Yeah, welcome, sir.

Hello, Planning Commission. Hey, guys. My name is Casey Ward. I'm a Nevada resident and parent of two young kids who attend San Ramon Elementary. It's not too far from the site right here. And I'm here in support of this housing project. I think smaller size projects like this one are a no-brainer for Novato. I think this project makes a lot of sense because it's located near schools like my children's, grocery stores, recreation spots, making them an ideal home for new families. And personally, I think the designs look fantastic. I do not, respectfully, don't think they're a sore thumb whatsoever. I think they would stand out as something beautiful for the city of Novato. And I would rather not slow down the project for the aesthetic reasons, because subjectively, I do think they look very nice. Also, from what I understand, the developer here behind this project is a local guy who lives here in Marin and who has been extremely cooperative with the commission and other stakeholders in the community throughout the approval process. In my opinion, we should encourage and support smaller sized developers like himself who have a connection to our community and a vested interest in building something great. For those reasons, I urge the Planning Commission to please approve this project. I think it's a good one. And while I'm here, I can't help myself. I would also like to encourage the Commission to pay attention to the forthcoming San Marin Corridor Study that the city recently hired an engineering firm to conduct. This study will examine the length of San Marin Drive to understand possible design improvements to help improve car traffic, make it move more efficiently, and at the same time make it safer for people to walk and bike along. I am highlighting this to you commissioners because I hear a lot of complaints, mostly online, that any new housing development is going to be an increase in traffic and be just a nightmare for everybody. But I truly believe that with the right design of a street, making it safer, We can welcome new neighbors without assuming that they have to drive their kids to school. If we make it safe at this intersection in a long Samaritan drive to get kids to school in the early mornings, we can alleviate some of these complaints. We do not have to add cars to our intersection. I am so relieved to hear that the developer behind this is so cooperative as well with the Public Works Department He's totally open to new ideas at this intersection. So that's very important to think about if you're going to have any developer come into the site. So I very appreciate his cooperativeness. And that's my comment. Cheers. Bye.

Thank you much. So if there's anybody else from the public that wishes to talk to us about 200 San Bernardino Drive, this is your opportunity. With that, the public hearing is closed. Bring it back to the Planning Commission. Commissioners? Questions?

Yeah. This will be for the city. Garbage pickup. How are we going to address that? Will there be Sunday night, no parking, Monday 6 AM to Monday noon? Because if you have the trash bins, They need a place to go for the garbage truck to be able to load it up. Or will that garbage truck have the capacity to be going down the private road? I'm not quite sure what else to call it.

So our understanding is that each one of these homes will have their individual trash carts, similar to a single-family home, and those would be taken by each homeowner out to presumably either San Marin Drive, similar to the other homes along that corridor where trash trucks could then pick up trash at that point. I'd welcome Jeff if there's a different approach to that to explain that.

That's generally right. We've got approval from Recology that they can pull their truck into the private drive and pick up trash just like any other home.

Okay. I was kind of concerned about the logistics on that one. Appreciate that. No problem. That was one of the concerns. Then I was wondering about, okay, so we put in a stop sign on the curve, correct?

I believe that is the plan, that potentially there would be a stop sign put into that right turn lane.

And then with that said, if we're looking at that right now, oftentimes when I live nearby, and if you look closely in between where that car is parked, closest to the property, and the people walking, believe it or not, you have cars moving into that, parked into the entrance of that curb is where I'm going with this. So you may want to consider having no parking from this spot to some other spot. I don't know, but it's something to raise awareness on so that individuals don't think that it would be okay to park the car up next to the stop sign or something along those lines so it becomes problematic. And then also, along the lines of no question is really a bad question, as long as it has some logistics to it. The idea of why the pushback on extending it out to the corner, what was the reason or the thinking behind that?

So the reason why this project is in condition to have that frontage improvement at this point. So what's happening now is this San Marin corridor study. So this is a full length of the roadway review that the public works department will have a consultant start here pretty soon. And so the idea is to just leave the street conditions as is for right now and let that process determine what type of intersection improvement is warranted here. Many different options, squaring off these corners to a traditional 90, intersection roundabouts any number of different approaches that you can use here so going through that process will yield an eventual design for something to install here okay thank you

Commissioner Harroff, any comments or questions?

I just wanted to follow up on the public comment about the architectural compatibility of the design of this project with the surrounding neighborhoods, because it does look like it's kind of incompatible. So I was curious to know what both the applicant and staff thought about or how we all got to the point where that particular design approach was adopted.

Yeah, so there were some other designs proposed.

And you had a slide, I think, showing some of the alternatives.

Yeah, I forgot. I apologize. If it was at the DRC workshop or the hearing, I think it was at the workshop. Jeff's team brought some other designs, not Mediterranean. Ultimately, this was the design recommended by the DRC after that workshop and that hearing. So that's how we moved forward with this one.

OK, and can maybe elaborate a little bit about what you understood the considerations for adopting this particular approach were at that level?

Yeah, I think it was. a little bit of there's not one cohesive architectural style for the entire San Marino neighborhood. They did tie in some elements such as paint colors, trim, that sort of thing that matched the surrounding neighborhood as well.

Are there any other properties that have a similar look and feel to this project?

I think they had a few examples in their slides that they brought to the workshop. Tile roofs being one that Ian mentioned a little bit earlier, so some elements. I'm not aware of any full-blown other Mediterranean project in the immediate neighborhood.

OK. Any other sense in terms of what the public interest would be and how this would look? Any other feedback you've received?

None. No. OK. Yeah.

Thank you. You wanted to weigh in?

Sure. I'll defer to you for now.

Yeah. Anything going on, Curtis?

So yeah, this is one of those projects like someday somebody's going to look at it and go, whoa, how'd that happen? So I think we can agree on that, whether it's this architectural style or another architectural style. We've got a 37-foot vertical surface on the street. How tall you all think these roofs are or this ceiling is? What is that? 15 feet maybe? 20?

Closer to 20, 25 maybe.

All right. So tack another 15 onto the top of that. So just call it twice this. So you're a pedestrian walking your kid to San Ramon. Hey, Johnny, let's go to school today. You're looking up. 37 feet. That's huge. That's massive. What's the nearest, highest building to this? I mean, that's taller than Harvest Market. So this thing's going to stand out. I'm sorry, I'm not going to call it a sore thumb, but it's going to stand out. It's going to be distinctive. I mean, however you want to market it, it's going to be bold. It's going to make a statement. Yep. So the question is, what kind of statement? When this thing gets built, what are we looking at? I'm amazed at the design. It's hard because there's all these new state laws that sort of neuter us. They prevent us from really providing any sort of meaningful input on the design. And we had to update our codes to do that. So I can appreciate where the developer's coming from. I can appreciate the frustration of community members, perhaps, and even developers. Scott Wiener's shoving this down our throat, and it's unappreciated. And frankly, it's not going to solve the housing crisis. So I reject that argument that this is going to somehow tip the scales of the market. Yeah, I don't know. I'm not really enthused about this. I can understand where the design is coming from. I can understand trying to fit the parking in and trying to somewhat constrain site for eight units. That's my first brush out of here. I'm having a hard time.

So if we're talking about height, what is the setback from the sidewalk to the building? Eight feet?

Yeah, it's pretty variable.

Kind of find a plan that gives us the full... But the point being, it's not literally next to the sidewalk.

No, it's set back from the sidewalk, and in many cases, there's trees between the sidewalk and the building itself.

Got it. And for the record, there are roofs that mimic on San Andreas across the street from that. Also, yeah, you could call it a I wouldn't call it a sore thumb, and I don't think it's a middle finger to the neighborhood either. I welcome this. I think this type of design is warranted at that corner. You take a look across the street at the office building that's basically empty, the one-story piece. Nothing's going on there. It's the aesthetic that might be disconcerting to people. It's also the aesthetic that is part of the challenge and the fun. And if we'd look hard at the town homes that are next to it, maybe something like this will help them and the property owners to improve their aesthetics as well and to keep the neighborhood vital and active. Also, because of the limited size and the footprint, you have to go up. I really like the idea of converting this to residential. It's great. It's good to see Harvest Market and the mall over there active. I think this can help that. It is tall. It is a bit of a jump. But I don't know if that's necessarily a bad thing. And I think the individuals that are opposed to it, I agree with you in principle. But if we're looking at the area and the properties that are right next to it, is that really what we want also? And that's a legitimate question. Do we really want that one story building across the street that's basically empty for years on end now? I'm not so sure of that. And if this can help bring the corner a little back to life, it's worth having that discussion. In terms of the project, I don't know if the aesthetics should be the determining factor on whether this goes forward or not. The city put six different, what would we call it, development aesthetics together. And I have to believe that that was well vetted. And if it was well vetted, and the choice was made, and the developer is local, I would have to believe that they have sensibilities to the area. And working with the city, I want to weigh in with that. ask you to do everything to make it a sore thumb, but I sure don't see this as a sore thumb, I'll tell you that.

So let me pose a what if to staff. So one of our resolutions is to approve the design review if, for whatever reasons, let's say it's deadlocks. What does that trigger?

So there are a few choices here. You could certainly adopt or recommend adoption of everything but the architecture or the design review. to the council, and then the council can make the decision whether or not to accept that recommendation. If they were to, then it would probably include direction to the applicant to pursue another architectural style. Whether or not that had to head back to design review commission and then back up through this process would rest with the council. Another potential option is to perhaps discuss with the applicant the other architectural options that were considered but not presented here, and then perhaps the Commission could make a recommendation on one of those. Council for adoption. So we've modified the resolution to reflect a different architectural style and take that forward Now that obviously presents a challenge for the City Council. They have two different different Commission recommending one design and another with an entirely different But it is choice and they ultimately have the final decision.

So Okay, so assuming other approvals happen, it could be an isolated item that just that gets dealt with.

It could be. It's often a circumstance where we have a master plan that's adopted that you have general architectural guidelines. You may not have the final details, and the final details come back through a process. So this could be set up where Assuming the site design stays fixed, so where the units are, how big they are, et cetera, and architecture being the only issue, that architectural style could be baked into the precise development plan with an observation that the final details go back to the Design Review Commission for a decision. So there's also that.

So it wouldn't preclude them from going forward, for example, with PG&E and saying, yes, we have an approved project. Let's deal with utilities.

I would assume if the master plan and precise plan are down to the level of at least stating an architectural style, perhaps not having all of the detail, I think that would probably get them on their way with PG&E. I think having some certainty to the site plan is really helpful there. Building height is going to be important. So in terms of the undergrounding situation here, there's also a fire district component in terms of what type of equipment they bring in to service this site. So I think the more certainty that can be created in the master plan around site design and height, the better. And then architectural details could perhaps be baked in at the end with the final review by the design review commission.

And I will say that I am not really comfortable stepping into the role of design review. I mean, that's why we have that committee and have them do the role that they do. The game has changed somewhat in that there's those styles the objective standards that become the sort of templates of the styles are getting around in and I have done I think Planner Zatelli had said that California whatever the California ranch the style that is not one of the six is there's actually other styles that have been articulated and So let's assume we deadlock and design review says, you know what? Tough luck. We think that this is a totally appropriate design. Let's just go forward with that. It lands in the city council.

So if this were to head back to the Design Review Commission, it would likely head back with direction from the Council to reconsider the design. I would hope that the Commission would understand that direction and would focus on the architectural style that's preferred. So let's say, for example, the Council said, you know, what we believe would be acceptable here is a craftsman style. then I would hope that the Design Review Commission would work with the applicant to put out the finer details of that Craftsman architecture and then approve the project. Question? Yeah, Commissioner Roste.

So was that the Craftsman style is one of the six styles?

Yes, so there's six styles that the city adopted as part of its objective design standards. That objective design standard process had an architectural consultant that was part of it. And what that consultant did is they went throughout Marin and looked at the prevalent architectural styles. And what you see here are the six architectural styles that they recommended. Now this is from all over Marin County. The consultant was working on standards for, I think, nine different agencies collectively. So we have the six different styles up here. there there's no guidance or objective standards on what particular style is acceptable where it was basically taking the perspective that where housing law overtakes discretion any of these particular styles would work or be acceptable and be reflective of development in the county got it and in terms of for the fire department

Is there any priority in terms of what type of roofing they would like to see?

I don't think they assign priority unless the project site is located in the wildland urban interface. And help me out, Caitlin, is this located in that area? No. So only where there's wildland fire hazard mapping would there be a preference for a noncombustible type of roofing material.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, any further discussion? I would throw one other option out there.

The other option is to perhaps continue this item, give the opportunity for the applicant to hear the commission's final feedback on the matter on architecture, and then perhaps they can regroup if the decision is to, or if there's a desire for a different architectural style for the majority of the commission. I would certainly, you know, for Chair Tiernan, I would invite the applicant to give their opinion on it. They may actually want a recommendation and simply to move on to council. Yeah, let's do that. Jeff, if you want to come.

Well, I had a few more questions. Oh, I'm sorry. Let's proceed with, and we'll get to you.

So I'm curious, so Design Review seems like they're asleep at the wheel as far as massing and community character goes, but I'm curious to know what the school district thinks of it. I see that Mr. Nell is in the audience, and I don't know if he's willing to speak to this. But this is a huge departure from the prevailing massing community character, architectural styles in the community, size and scale. So I mean, you're not compelled to come up and speak, Mr. Nell. But I am genuinely curious what the school district has to think. Have you received any comments from the school district? I have not. OK. Because, I mean, someday they're going to be looking to develop their site. And this is going to be something they point to. So I don't know. I'm just kind of curious about what, if any, they thought. I mean, did you? No. No, he can take the fifth. No, no. Yeah, of course. I didn't expect that. OK. And then, sorry. I'm going to sit too close to this thing. To take some of the heat off my earlier comments, the site layout is fine. I'm not worried about that. The landscaping is fine. Circulation is fine. My biggest concern is the sheer mass bulk. and kind of visual prominence of this. And again, I'm kind of blown away. I mean, staff, again, Design Review Commission, did they, I mean, I noticed that the original height proposed from the 2025 plans was 41 feet. Yes. And it was reduced, like a story was lopped off. Correct. Tell me more about that.

More context on that. So the project was presented, as Mr. Dougherty mentioned, at a neighborhood meeting. And there were concerns expressed about building height, architectural style at that time. So the next meeting was a follow-up with the Design Review Commission. It was a design workshop. So that's really an introductory session where the commission gives preliminary feedback. At that meeting, I believe there were still concerns about building height. There were suggestions about how to reduce the height, landscaping. There were some differences of opinion on architecture at that time. And so what occurred after that was Mr. Dougherty brought some other design styles for the commission to consider, and then ultimately the commission supported the Mediterranean style. I think the perspective from the commission was different isn't always bad, and it adds another architectural layer to the neighborhood. If I could channel just the substance of their comments. And they were appreciative of the reduction in height. So it did come down from approximately 40 feet down to its current height. I believe it's roughly 37 and a half. Just for references and aside, 37, 38, 40 feet is typical of this type of two stories over garage. It gets a little bit taller when you use gable roof forms. Here we have a flatter roof style mixed in with some gables. So I think for any of these architectural styles, when you have this type of product, you will see heights pushing up closer to 40 feet.

It looks like they had lopped a story off of the design.

There was a rooftop deck that was included on most of the units that's now taken off.

Good. Your floor, sir.

Indeed. I think at this point, I'm ready to take action. Oh, excuse me. I did want to hear from the applicant. So you've heard us bounce around design review and looking for alternatives and what have you.

Thank you for the consideration. I appreciate the public comments. I would just respectfully request to use the design review committee's approval. This is a discussion, as you can see, even just from the discussion tonight, people have different opinions on design styles. We did take the steps of, hey, these are the six styles that were presented to us. Unfortunately, none of these styles exactly mirror what's in the neighborhood. Some people feel different is actually a good idea as well. But we did take steps to present various ideas to different groups of people, and one direction was Pointed to us. That was the Mediterranean style. And so this did go through a very thorough vetting process I think our confusion or there would be much confusion if we didn't pick that style in terms of what Steve was describing in terms of different councils recommending different options and Our ultimate goal is to to build housing here Hoping to do that as quickly as possible and I think I Kind of changing the direction at this point would would add definitely a few months to the process and I'd appreciate Not doing that.

Okay, so hold the line. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you So I guess my question is I don't know if this is for you or for you Steve We don't want to slow down a process and we don't want to have property sitting the way it is for another 40 years and Does this conversation about the architectural nuance of the buildings themselves slow down the process of going forward with the project?

I would say it depends. If the architectural changes were to have to go back through design review commission, perhaps back up through to this commission and then on to council, that would certainly slow it down. I think there's also a slowdown if the development team has to redesign the architecture. So they've, as Mr. Doherty can probably attest to, they've moved forward with the Mediterranean design, developed

detailed elevations They'd have to go back and do the same for a different architectural style and that will take time And I think you had suggested that if we continued that one aspect of this that perhaps it could be just done through the Planning Commission and then off to the City Council I

Yes, I think one of the ways to reduce time here, if there is a desire for an architectural change, is to be clear on what architectural style is appropriate for this site, to convey that to the city council, and then in the approving documents, so instead of stopping and having the architectural team go back and make revisions, that the documents that go forward to the council simply acknowledge architectural design that's based on whatever type and that that architectural design return to either staff for approval or return back to the design review commission for a final detail review okay so if i understand what you just said so correct me if i'm wrong that if we were to continue that item we should select among those six items providing some advice well five out of those six

and say, come back to us in 30 days with a craftsman.

So I would not say it was a continuance. It would be to make a recommendation this evening to support the project with a different architectural style. And then that would move forward to the council. So no return to the Planning Commission through that concept.

But then, yeah, leave it up to the council to deal with this item.

How does that fit?

CHRISTOPHER COLEMAN- Well, let's talk about this a little bit. Tudor would look ridiculous. Victorian doesn't fit. Main Street, it's not the Main Street. I mean, it's San Maran. But Craftsman, I think, would be too heavy. So it leaves us with Mediterranean contemporary. Yeah. And contemporary and Mediterranean are kind of similar. Again, my concern is mass and bulk, overall visual prominence. So what if we had a condition or a modification that took white off the table and replaced it with a more earth-toned siding color?

Meaning remaining all that is and getting a different tone. to create a better visual aesthetic.

Because right now, and this is for our commission to decide. So we can make that condition. The city council can always reverse it if they think it's ridiculous. But that's a modification that we

Okay, so taking with his suggestion, so in that design review resolution, we would suggest using some different aspects.

Darker earth toned siding color.

That is certainly an option for the commission to make a recommendation that the Mediterranean style is acceptable provided it is a darker earth tone color.

How does that strike the applicant?

I don't necessarily know if we need his opinion.

Oh, we don't necessarily.

I'm sorry. You go for it.

Does that strike you as onerous?

That's not onerous. My only, I guess, confusion is we presented different colors. Respectfully, we presented different colors in our last meeting, and the white was the one that they wanted.

No, I see the dilemma. Paint color is the easy change, for sure. No, no. And I think you're going the right route. If that's what you're being directed through other bodies that are appointed by the city, I get that. But at the same time, everybody's got a slightly different take. I mean, I don't want them doing land use, per se, any more than I think they want us deciding what colors go on buildings. Nonetheless, we have a resolution in front of us that says, you know, one way or the other, we're supposed to address design review. Yeah, Commissioner Roach.

If there's a nuance to the color, which is part of the compromise, which is why we're here in the first place, take the when. Seriously, that's an opening that I'd like to... seriously consider. As long as that doesn't begin to throw cogs in the wheel of the process that's already moving forward.

Yes. OK. So let's have Commissioner Havell weigh in on that. You've got an opinion?

Let's just get this, like, the commission just needs to make a decision on this. This isn't bartering. This is not a negotiation. We're having a hearing, and we just need to make a motion.

Well, here's what I suggest. We have, I think, six resolutions before us, or five, that we work our way through these resolutions when we get to design review, if we need to put a stop sign up for further considerations or amendments. So again, let me ask questions or further discussion before we move forward with action. I think we're in a place. So the first resolution for us would be the general plan amendment. Is that accurate? That is correct. So I would entertain a motion whether to recommend to the city council the general plan draft amendment as presented.

I will move to approve. OK.

I'll second that.

OK. We got a second. OK. Any discussion on that motion? No. OK. I will make a couple of comments. I was part of this commission that approved the work lofts that were there previously, and I supported them. It's really unfortunate that that project has moved on. But that was many years ago, and it did move on. I see it as an infill site. And so as much as I think it's good for us to try and modify some of the design, I am very uncomfortable stepping into the role of a design review committee. I think otherwise I'm going to be able to support these things. So at any rate, we have a motion on the floor. Commissioner Havell? Aye. Commissioner Roche? Aye. Commissioner Harroff? Aye. And Commissioner Tiernan is an aye. The next resolution before us is the rezoning. And this is by virtue of the SB 10. So the floor is open. I will entertain a motion on the rezoning resolution. I'll move to approve.

I'll second that.

OK. Discussion?

Commissioner Havel? Aye. Commissioner Roche?

Aye. Commissioner Haroff? Aye. And Commissioner Tiernan's an aye. So master plan PDP resolution. That's our third resolution regarding this. Again, this is part of the, I believe, SB 10. Can I get a motion to approve or to at least recommend to the city council? I will move to approve. OK.

I'll second that. OK. Just to clarify, it's a recommendation to the council.

These are all recommendations of city council. Yeah, we do not have the ultimate authority here at all. OK. So Commissioner Havel? Aye.

Commissioner Roach?

Aye. Commissioner Harroff? Aye. And Commissioner Tiernanton, aye. So here's the one we want to talk a little bit about. So the floor is open to accept a motion to recommend the city council design review resolution on this project.

So I'd like to make a motion to the City Council that they adopt The design review approval with a modification that the citing colors and Treatments are of a darker earth toned nature Do I hear a second

Oh, OK.

I will second that.

OK, we got a second on that. OK, further discussion.

This has been a hot topic.

OK, so the motion before us is to approve the resolution but recommend to the city council further dark colors or more earth tones. Is that accurate? That is correct. OK, I'll take the vote.

Just to clarify, to recommend their consideration of that. Correct.

Right.

That they adopt it.

Right, right. Yeah, we're not specific that it would be burnt orange or that they'd make that decision. Commissioner Havel? Aye. Commissioner Rosch? Aye. Commissioner Haroff? Aye. And Commissioner Tiernan is an aye. So then we still have, and this is the undergrounding, the VTM. Is that correct?

Correct. OK, so we have another resolution before us.

It's identified as VTM resolution. I need a motion. I do believe that concludes this action before us. That's correct. When might it, for the public's edification, might this go to the City Council? i believe we're looking at an october late october date uh but we will send out notices again before that hearing so the community will know the exact date of that okay okay i appreciate that um with that we're up to general business um thank you um i i would like to hear the current status of our fireman fund project and where we go from there

Yes, so as you can probably see if you've been by the site, the demolition project continues, mainly focused on removing concrete and asphalt improvements. And then some of the grading that you're seeing right now is to ensure that the site will have proper drainage and stormwater pollution prevention over the winter period. We have two active applications for the project. We have a vesting tentative map application that is going through its process. What that includes is subdividing the property for single family development and then creating a parcel area for the multifamily component of that project. we also more recently received a what we will call a design review application it's for two areas that will consist of larger single-family homes and then a smaller single-family home type in two areas of the project that will go through an objective standards review subject to state housing law And I believe it will potentially be the, may in fact be the Planning Commission that makes a decision on that. We have the new ordinance that we have created here where projects of a certain size come to the Planning Commission and other projects end up going to staff. So I think the number of units in these projects will be at the threshold for review by the Planning Commission. And just to elaborate on what that objective review looks like, it is simply confirming whether or not the project meets all the objective standards. Staff will do the review and provide a recommendation on that. And there'll be, typically there'll be a matrix showing the applicable standards and then staff's perspective on compliance. So that's... pretty much it in a nutshell okay so if it gets busted up into subdivisions if it's ultimately I guess eight subdivision then it would all be essentially administratively processed potentially their current proposal for the design review aspect involves I want to say a little over about 200 units I see so that's well above the threshold to come to Planning Commission

Okay, so public hearings.

But certainly they could switch and decide to do smaller developments. I don't think they will, but I think their interest is in getting the entitlements in place and then being able to market the property.

Yeah, so potentially in 27?

I think, assuming the vesting map is done, we could see, I think we would realistically see some construction starting in 2028. It does take some time for the engineers to get final improvement plans. They go through a plan check process. And then there's selecting a contractor and actually starting the work.

Okay.

Hold on.

Okay. Anything else you want to share with the planning commission?

No. As you may know, actually I will, you may notice Commissioner Derby is no longer on the commission. He had to resign his position as he's moving out of the area for another job opportunity. So I figured we'd let the commission know about that and let the community know. So there is a recruitment happening now for members of boards and commissions. So there is at least one seat open that I'm aware of on the planning commission. And I believe there may be a seat open on the design review commission as well.

And I know you sent around a planning commissioner's sort of seminar or workshop for county stuff. Is that happening?

That is happening. I can't tell you the date off the top of my head. I believe it was an October date. So this is a half day long training session for commissioners who can join, and there's a dinner served with it, and it's about housing law, different housing issues, and it's being hosted by the county we're in.

September 30th, and we need the RSVP by the 18th.

Okay, I think I already expressed interest in it, so I don't know, but I'll follow up.

Yeah, yeah, should be good.

Can we have it by the 18th?

Well, we've been asked to RSVP by the 18th. Of this month? For the 30th.

Okay. I'll look into that.

Also, I'm disappointed Derby left before we could soak them down at Finnegan's.

That's deeply disturbing.

I will send out a note to the commission about the date for that RSVP. Yeah, please do. It did move once before on this one check.

Okay. Any other business? Okay.

I will be out up until October 6th.

Vacation time, huh?

Yes.

Well, enjoy. Thank you. Okay. With that, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.