Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and get the meeting started if staff is okay with that. Yeah. Okay. So, at 402, this meeting will now start. Um today we have roll call. Let's start with that first. Chair Winnham absent. Vice Chair Will here. Commissioner Balovic here. Commissioner God present. Commissioner Miner here. Commissioner Ryan present.

Okay. So let's take some care of some orders of business. If you would like to talk today, there are cards that you can fill out out there and you can submit them to these ladies up here. Um, and then we just ask that you silence your cell phones for this meeting. And Jeremy's over there. Do you want to introduce your staff for us?

Sure, I'd be happy to. Sorry, my chair is I think broken and will not go up. So, I'm just stuck at this height for this afternoon. Um, yeah, we have um Elizabeth Steedman and Michelle Yang helping us with clerking. Uh the usual folks up here, city attorney Curtis, Josh Anthony, myself, and planning manager Lily Toy, um assistant planner Drew Morgan will be presenting the item later. And those are the staff here for presenting to you this afternoon.

Thank you. We're going to move on to item two, approval of minutes. Minutes from the January 13, 2026 meeting. Do we have approval? I'm going to abstain from the January 13th minutes because I was not present. Thank you. Then we do not have a quorum, do we? No, you don't. You don't have to be here, but you can sustain. We do have four. You have the remaining four. I I think that could vote. Do we have a motion? I'll move for approval.

Okay. Do we have a second? Is that is that a motion for both items just for the January? Just for the 13th. Oh, just for the 13th. I will second. All in favor? I I. Any oppose? Okay. Motion carries. Now we're going to go on to the minutes for the February 10th, 2026 meeting. Do we have an approval for those meeting? So moved. Michelle, thanks. Do we have a second? I'll second. Aaron seconds. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Okay. And that one carries as well. So item three, any announcements?

Uh, vice chair. No announcements. Thanks.

Okay. We're moving on to four, which is planning commission's items. And there are no consems on the consent calendar. So we're going to move on to item B, which is the public hearing that we're here for today. The subdivision map application S-2024-0000740 plan development plan application PD-2024-0000741 and resoning application RZ-2024-0000795 by JNL Custom Homes to subdivide a 1.65 65 acre parcel located at 4363 Churn Creek Road into 16 parcels. And I believe we are going to have Drew present to us today. Would you like to come up and present?

Good afternoon everybody. Thank you chair. Here before us, we have a private application for a tenative subdivision map, a plan development, and a reszone application. The property location is at 4363 Churn Creek Road. It is zoned RM9. Um the plan development application and Reszone is proposing um an RM9 plan development overlay. Um, this property has a general plan designation of residential 6 to 10 units per acre. The property is currently vacant and is consisting of annual grasses with oak trees nestled along the perimeter of the property. This here is the tenative map. Um, this tenative map proposes to divide this 1.65 65 acre property into 16 parcels with a project density of 9.7 units per acre. The average lot size is roughly 2300 square ft which is about uh a 20th of an acre. The reasonzoning of this property to a plan development overlay is necessary to allow lot sizes less than 10,000 square ft. While the 9.7 units per acre density exceeds the density for the RM9 zoning designation, properties reszone to a plan development or PD may exceed standard zoning density as long as they are within the general plan density range. Here is a picture of the plan development plan. Um it's attached single family homes. Um the property lines will separate units and yards. Um private street uh will take place from Churn Creek Road and there will be

landscaping within a subdivision along Churn Creek Road. Uh landscaping within a subdivision and along Churn Creek Road. Um each property will be under a privately managed homeowners association. Um the HOA will be utilized to maintain shared amenities for this project such as the road and sidewalk, uh block walls, community area, detention basins, and landscaping within the subdivision. These are the elevations uh provided in the application. Um so you have two different home variations um each with three bedrooms and two and a half baths. The facades utilize a combination of board and batten and stucco. Uh roofing materials offer a combination of metal and composite shingles. Um each unit will have a singlecar garage. And here are the amenities that were proposed in the application. Um, these amenities include walking paths with benches, decorative street lights, an 8- foot tall decorative soundwall, uh, along Turn Creek Road, interior landscaping, and a community area that includes bean bag toss and an area to hop on rocks. For general plan conformance, uh, the overall density is 9.7 units per acre. Uh single family houses are to the north and south of the property and to the east is single family zoning. The current property is zoned for residential multif family. This tenative map proposes attached single family homes which is more in character with the surrounding area than your typical apartment buildings would be. The applicant submitted a plan development plan for reduced lot size setbacks and to allow a private street.

Uh this proposal provides an efficient utilization of land at 9.7 units per acre while also respecting the existing community by proposing homes which are in character of what you might see in a neighborhood. Um so one of the issues if you will um this project had to contend with was noise. Um to the west of the property you have Turn Creek Road and then beyond that you have I5. Um so this project would be receiving noise from both of those roads. Um so we did get a noise analysis for this. Um in the noise analysis the conclusion was an 8ft tall decorative soundwall is required along Churn Creek Road and this is to reduce outdoor noise and interior noise. And then as well homes on lots one through four. These are the I5 the I5 fronting homes. Um they are conditioned to be reinforced to meet the minimum interior noise standards. of um 45 dB for the environmental uh biological resources assessment was submitted with the project. Uh it identified a small wetland feature um on the northeast corner of the property. This project is avoiding this area and the wetland plus the 20ft buffer as well. Um and it's required to be shown as a private open space easement on the final map. Um this is just basically a non-buildable area. Um there were no special status plant species identified on the property and then tree removals that occur in season for bats and migratory birds and raptors are required to conduct inseason surveys and gain environmental clearance through CDFW. The project shall follow uh standard subdivision condition number 35.

Um for SQA staff finds a project is categorically exempt from the squa under guidelines section 15332 for infill development projects. Um this type of exemption generally applies to projects that are less than 5 acres and surrounded by urban uses can be served by utilities consistent with the general plan and zoning and not affected by significant environmental issues. Um this project is well supported by the general plan and zoning. Um staff recommendation to the planning commission is to find that this project is categorically exempt from SQA. Approve this tenative map application, reasonzoning application and plan development application and determine if the findings are in evidence and approve this application with the recommended conditions of approval. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to open it up for the commissioners if you have any questions or concerns. Minor. Yeah. The one question I had was uh the HOA is that going to manage the yards for the houses or just the public landscaping? That's going to manage the public landscaping, not the front yards. So front yards, backyards man are managed by homeowners.

Correct. Okay. Yeah, I I have one question. Uh where the fire truck turnound is, I presume that's also set up for your your normal garbage pickup. And I'm I know in some cases in some areas when they have a area that's like that where there's a lot of turning around with heavy trucks, it creates issues for the the pavement and breaks down over time. Is there any additional requirements for that particular area in this plan? Um, we're talking about the fire turnaround area at the very end. Yes.

There's no additional requirements. Um, but it it would have to be maintained under the HOA, the road.

Um, but for this project, there's no additional requirements for that. Uh, fire did review um this project um originally. Actually, when the project first came in, there was a trash enclosure kind of in the middle of the um subdivision and um which is okay cuz it's multif family. Um but with this being a PD, it allowed them the flexibility to have their own trash cans. So, we did remove that portion from or they did remove that portion from the project. Um but there's no additional um um standards that for the roads other than they need to be maintained under the HOA. Thank you.

Okay. So, I'm curious if they don't if they're going to have uh trash cans. I'm looking at this and I mean, my garbage cans are huge and I have to have like three of them. Are they going to have to have each each house is going to have three garbage cans? And where are they going to put all this?

Yeah. So, they they it will be tight. Um, so they're I'm assuming they're just going to go in front of the little section on the lots. Um, so when this originally came in and it switched over to, um, having their own trash, um, we did review it with solid waste just to ensure that this is there's going to be enough wiggle room here for them to be able to get through. Um, and u, they did give approval on it. So, it it's going to be tight, but um the original uh tenative map had the only area they could really fit it was in the middle of the subdivision. Um which actually which isn't really ideal either when you walk out your house and that's the first thing you see.

No, I get that. Yeah. Yeah. Seems kind of snuggly. Um and am I the last one to get the memo on the hopping rocks? What does that mean exactly? And why would you do that as opposed to something that might be kind I mean like if I was a kid is that fun now I'm old I guess I'm just you know asking for the fun meter here. I think I might be beyond that as well. Yeah that just seems like a weird use of space but it could be fun. Garbage cans and hopping rocks. Sorry. I'm looking at Okay, I'll stop for the community.

Yeah. Right? Wouldn't that if you were a kid, wouldn't you rather there's no open there's no space and the backyards look like they're all gravel. So if you have a kid and you and they want to play like we're everything is concrete, gravel or bark and they're not going to want them to play in the bark. Guess they play in the street. I used to play in the street. Michelle's guest I looked at Hello. Um, so the sound wall would be required for this project if it was a just a not a planned development but a subdivision. Yes, that would be require.

So I'm curious why it's listed as an amenity. Why the sound wall is listed as an amenity when it would be just a standard requirement. It's a great question. Um, for a PD we had the flexibility to make it they can they have to make it more decorative. Yeah. Michelle, can you turn on your microphone, please? That's okay. You did. Okay. I'm trying to determine if the um enhancements justify the plan development flexibility because as Erin pointed out, the park is very minimal.

The soundwall would be required no matter what. So that's just one thought I had there. Um, are all of those that the the items that are listed in the amenities, all of those would are above standard subdivision requirements? They would be above multif family uh requirements. Above multif family requirements. Yes. So, um, for example, I I you probably wouldn't have that community area in the middle uh potentially. Um and also with the HOA and the maintenance of the landscaping as well. Um this this does exceed your typical application.

Okay. The HOA is probably maintaining curb, sidewalks, asphalt, landscaping, street lighting. Correct. All of that stuff. So, okay. Um can you discuss and maybe there's an image the single access off of Churn Creek? Uh I'm just Well, how wide is the the road inside there? Because it's I think I read somewhere it's not to city standards. It it is not um that's the reason why the it had to be privately maintained. Conditioned to be privately maintained. Okay. 20 24 feet, Michelle. 24 feet. How far? 24 feet wide.

Okay. So is I'm just I'm wondering about queuing um turn movements just general fire department access if that is a sufficient width especially is parking going to be allowed along the street there be no parking allowed on the street uh the project is conditioned to actually have red curb and uh it say uh fire lane no parking along is there any off and I'm sorry I don't don't recall looking for this at the time I was reviewing the pro. But is there any um turning lanes or anything? Right turn lane, left going out to the right.

No, there's not. Okay. All right. Um the little wet land it. So that's just being treated as something to avoid, not an amenity. Yeah, that's correct. Okay. And who will maintain that or is that part of the HOA? I believe so. Yes. Okay. Um, was there any thought of integrating that into the design somehow? Um, I just wonder if there's any benefit to that. Yeah. Yeah. As of right now, I believe it's just got a kind of like a wall around it. Uh, like a fence or a wall? Um,

is it going to be enclosed? I guess what I I think might be a missed opportunity there. Yeah.

It would be helpful if you could pull up that slide where she's talking about where the wetlands is in the back of the property so that the commissioners can see. There you go. Is it being used as a detention basin? Um, no. The detention basin is actually right here. Okay. And then it'll spit out over here into the wetland and I'm assuming it will just travel over here to little uh Turn Creek uh channel.

Okay. Um, so they're onecar garages and there's 12 I think I counted 12 additional parking spaces provided. I'm just wondering, you know, people tend to use their garage for storage units these days and I'm just wondering about the adequacy of the overflow parking.

Yeah. Um, so the driveways, they are 20 ft in length. Um, most people park in their driveways because they do use their uh cars for storage. Um, so with this project there just one singlecar garage and then there should be 16 spaces actually um on here. So each Oh, okay. I didn't catch the three down there. Okay. Um, and there's 16 units, so conceivably you could have a guest parking and right,

one car vehicle parking there. Um would a conforming RM9 project looks look significantly different than this?

It could. Yes. Uh you could have a apartment building um that has I believe it would have to have 14 or 15 units in it. Um, I think what makes this unique is each person can own their own lot. Um, and believe this project did their best trying to make it in character with the surrounding neighborhood while also meeting that density of uh that general plan density of nine six to 10 units per acre.

Okay. Um, and then I do want to concur with Erin about the play area. It seems very minimal and really not much of a play area at all. And I also want to point out I'm looking at the developers packet as you enter the project off of Churn Creek Road.

While there's roof line articulation, those are flat walls. There's no articulation. and on the most visible part of the project. I don't think it's very attractive. And I'm just wondering if we couldn't condition I would like to see a condition for at least on that that highly visible entry unit some type of more articulation. You're basically it's just a flat wall. Yeah. So condition architectural enhancements along those units across when the commission discusses this further after the public hearing. I'd like to discuss that. So those are my comments.

Thank you. And I have a couple things. Um under findings D, it addresses that there's nothing relating to traffic, but then there's nothing stating in that finding that there's nothing relating to traffic. So this might be for Mr. Anthony, but it addresses everything else, noise and the quality of water, but it doesn't say anything about traffic other than in the headline that there's nothing relating to it. Yeah. For for traffic for this um for this project, Churn Creek Road as it runs in front of the project is a five lane section, meaning there's two travel lanes, both north and south, and there's a center turn lane.

Yeah. That center turn lane acts as the buffer, right, to reduce delays of people going in and out of the subdivision. So with that center turn lane, this being only 16 units, minimal amount of trips, there was no adverse effect to the traffic along Jur Creek Road.

So I grew up on Arizona Street. My parents still live back there. And let me tell you, going left out of Arizona, which is just one street above that, is a risk of my life every time. And people cut through the back way to avoid that because it is so bad because I the new shopping center of SaveMart has definitely impacted Turn Creek Road. And especially when Enterprise High School gets out of school, I don't let my kids drive over there. It's risky. Yeah. So, I just was disappointed that in the findings there was no nothing further about traffic. Yeah. They didn't they didn't cross any thresholds as far as delays to trigger some kind of improvement. Right.

So, within our guidelines, right, the city established guidelines, they had no no impact is and I think what Michelle was trying to get is maybe just more signage and um actually labeling of getting out of there would be helpful. Mhm. But I just wanted to bring that up as well, but I think Jeremy was going to say something. Were you? Well, I'm just I'm just trying to follow. So, you're you're talking about um baseline level traffic from surrounding uses then just the area, but not particular this project because that's what that's what uh Josh was speaking of in terms of threshold for our analysis of this project.

Right. I I did look that up. It does not meet the threshold. I just wanted to bring up the point that in the findings it doesn't mention traffic at all. And I tend to think that there is plenty of traffic with that, especially how much development's going in South Reading. Turn Creek Road is definitely What packet page are you referring to this year? Uh, it's finding D under the findings and I'm on page 37. Packet page 37. I'm sorry, 27. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

Just trying to make sure we're talking the same here. Um, and then for Drew, I have another question. Was there any site constraints for like grading? Because I know that we always considered that land marsh land because of that area is always pretty much underwater. So, was there any site constraints that you ran across and getting it through planning? Um so yeah, apart from the the wetland that was identified, um we do route this out to um land development. Um and as far as site constraints for these pads to go in, um none were identified.

Okay. Thank you. And then I think you said right off the bat that the density is the reason for the reasonzoning. The density of this project is one of the main reasons for asking us to reszone it.

Well, it would be the um actually these having their own individual lots as well is a reason for the reasonzoning um for this application. Um that that's not typical. It would just be if this was just a multif family development, there would be just one parcel and each individual um uh land owner wouldn't be able to own that land. So, does it meet the RM9 density standards then with that? It exceeds it. It exceeds it. Yeah, it exceed it exceeds standard zoning by.7 units an acre.

Okay. So if you look to your staff report on page one, the last paragraph, the PD is the overlay district that requires the reszoning. And so with this project, they're asking for five things. They're asking for the density increase, which is the one additional unit. Okay? And then reduce lot sizes, the 2300 average lot size versus the 10,000 that's required in RM9. Reduce building setbacks. And then reduce covered parking. They're providing onecar garage versus twocar that's typically required. Okay.

And then uh the private street. So all those things fall within non-standard. So the PD is required which requires the reasoning. Did you have that in your slide? Can you go back to that slide that had that

and Lily and they're getting the density bonus of the 1.75 because they're doing the PD. That's correct. And so the question to you the issue is have they done enough for the trade? Right. So we're giving these things and Do you feel that it's justified by what they're offsetting? There you go. It's that you just highlighted the reduced size lot sets back and allows private street right there. Yeah. So, you've only had the three of the five. That was okay. Um I think that's it for me for now. Do we have any other?

Okay. So, at this time I am going to thank Drew and open the public. Sorry.

I do have I do have one more quick question. Yeah, just so so we may not have to call you up later. Um I was looking at the landscaping plan on the Churn Creek side and pursuant to the question about those um those walls uh facing Churn Creek. Um is there do do we know what those shrubs are? It looks like at least on the with the speed the east side of the property there are some larger trees planned. I don't know if these are small short stub shrubs. I know we have a is a 6ft wall but wondering if we have anything that's planned to come over that six foot that would shield the houses just a little the side of the house just a little bit. additional height in the landscaping to

right kind of break up the facade over for the houses. Off the top of my head, I I don't know exactly what plans they have proposed on this. Um, typically this is um kind of a pre-plan that gets hammered out at building plan check. Um, but yeah, so I'm I'm not sure what they are on the top off the top of my head. Okay, thank you.

Okay, so it looks like I am going to open the public hearing now. And it looks like we have one card. Again, if you want to speak, they're out there. You can turn it in to them. We're going to start with Ivonne Pierce. You may go up to the podium and you'll have a three minute clock countdown. It will beep at 30. You're not done. You have 30 seconds left. Hi. So, I own the property just north of this new development. I had recently just retired a couple months ago. was planning on doing like a entertainment kind of parties at my house and now that's completely going to be out of the picture. Um there's going to be no privacy with 16 units looking over into my property. So, I have a lot of concerns about noise, about dirt when it's being built, um, littering, just also with pulling out. Like I think Lesie was saying, it's already bad with the with all of the new, you know, with SaveMart and Costco and all of that has been added in. And then to have 16 more units is going to be even more difficult because I have a big telephone pole that I can it's difficult to see to the left of me. Um the other things that you were talking about I was kind of concerned with you mentioned a sidewalk. Is there going to be an imminent domain? Are we taking some more of my property and making a sidewalk there in front of my property so that these people can walk to and from like the stores? And is this going to be low income? Is this going to be HUD? Are people going to be renting

these places? Are they going to be buying these places? Because my previous line of work was dealing with lowincome criminals. And I have a huge concern for property value as well as safety. So my also my concern yes like I was saying was was property value because there's you know it's like okay am I stuck here then in this property because I've got 16 units coming in and if they're low income nobody's going to want to buy my property ever. And then the wetlands was another thing like yes it turns into kind of a pond but there is no wall or anything on this property that you're going to be developing on um that prevents that. So am is there going to be a wall that's going to be happening there and then it's going to flush more of that water onto my property um which is more of a concern because it already floods quite a bit in my area. Um, and then what else? That was just kind of at the top of my head. Um, and then are and I I'm on a well, so I don't know how that's going to affect um with all of these units. Um, is Oh, 30 seconds. Um, let's see really quick. Yeah. So, that's mainly kind of what I'm I'm wanting to know is is some more of that information and if there's going to be any assistance with the traffic and with all of that influx of additional people. Thank you.

I have a question for you. She one of the commissioners is trying to So, do you come out Arizona as well? No, I come right out on the Churn Creek. But, no, like what road do you come on to Churn Creek from? Like Denton? So, I used to live on Denton and I bought this home. It is right on Churn Creek. Okay, that's it. There is no off street of anywhere. I have to come right out on turn. Thank you. Is that good, Erin? Hang on. Are you the parcel directly to the north of the project? Yeah. Thank you. Oh, to the north. Yes. Yeah. Thank you, Ivon.

Just trying to figure out. Okay, so it looks like I have no more public comment cards. Correct, Elizabeth? Yeah. So, I'm going to close the public hearing and I'm going to take it back to commissioner for comments. Do we need to ask about the sidewalk and all stuff? That's what we're going for. Can Can you guys go through her questions because I'm curious about that now, but I didn't write it all down. I did. So, starting with sidewalk, making a new one, taking part of the property on Churn Creek. How does that look? So for her parcel, no, there would be no there's no take involved. That's not part of this project.

So anybody walking along Churn Creek in that area would just be utilizing the existing right ofway. I don't know what it looks like per se. It's probably a little goat path on the side of the road, but yes. Yeah. And then I I think I can answer this one. It's not going is it going to be low-income housing? I do know they are going to buy the units that correct? No, it it won't be. In fact, um and I'm sorry, I'm going to recommend actually the the commission shouldn't be considering that. You're actually statutoily prohibited from looking at uh or discriminating between um uh market rate housing versus the low-income housing. So, just to keep a clean record, I would recommend just leaving that off entirely.

But but the point I was going to make, thank you. um is also that as a PD overlay. So this commission has brought up a few times is the trade-off uh worth it in this commission's view to allow for the decreased setbacks and so on and so forth the the relaxation of standards. So the fact affordable or not, I mean these kind of projects will have more marketability and be able to actually be marketable at market rates if we allow for some of these things right at the increased density. We relax some of the standards. That's what the PD overlay is for. I asked um planning manager Toy if it would help this body to I asked her when on on the side, hey well where do we start with this project? What have they done to sort of come to the table with add-ons to sort of deserve the PD overlay and allow of some of those allowances. So, if you'd like, uh, the two of them can sort of give you somewhat of the evolution of the project and what's been added to sort of earn that PD overlay district if you would like to hear that because what I'm hearing this body say is that maybe they haven't done enough and perhaps you're wanting to see more conditioning or other requirements to sort of earn that PD overlay district. So, I'd put it back to you all. Would you would it be helpful to know how far we've come? Maybe the applicants could speak to it somewhat in terms of earning this PD overlay distinction.

Yes, please. Yeah. So, I'm kind of putting them on the spot, but I'll give them a minute to gather their thoughts. Um Um So, they're they're going to game plan here a little bit. But, okay. Can I keep going through the questions while they do that? Um wetlands. Can we address that a little bit further? If there will be a wall around the wetlands or how that will be protected, um what that looks like for this project? As far as I can see, it just looks like it's going to be this I think this project is just taking an avoidance strategy, right? just block it off, leave it alone. If it's not conditioned to physically build a wall, then I wouldn't count on it. Um, but while that is it conditioned to have a wall built around the wetlands or not

to keep condition, it's just an avoidance. It's it's marked off development is avoid in that area, but as far as there's no condition to build a physical separation. Thank you. Um, and then I don't know if we can address this, but her last question was about her well, if the project would affect well water. Um, I couldn't I couldn't see how it would. I mean, I don't want to speculate, but from my expertise as an engineer, I I don't see any way this development would impact groundwater in and around the area. It's impervious surface. Uh, we're sending it off to the storm drain. Um, yeah. So, without speculating too much, I don't see any clear reason why it would impact her. Well, thank you. And all utilities will be provided by city of Reading. Correct. Yes.

Okay. Those were Sorry, those are the questions I had written down unless somebody else got something else. No. Okay. Any other questions? Yeah. How now the boundary on the north side of the project is that is it going to have any fence at all? It's not going to be open, is it?

Um, so we don't require buffering between residential uses. So it's and this isn't a true multifamily project. This is attached single family kind of duplex style housing. So, um, I think as Commissioner Godard asked previously, a conforming RM project could be your standard. I don't know, whatever would fit on that, a 4plex, an 8lex, whatever it might be. Um, so in this regard, we don't require a wall to be built between two residential uses of of Okay, I'm going to look to my planners. Is that correct?

Uh, that's correct. Uh, what I do want to point out is that on the east side of the property, it is single family zone. So, is a required buffer yard there. So, what you'll see there is uh the property line and then you'll see a six foot masonary wall which indicates to match a sound wall and I believe from this exhibit they're taking that sound wall along the perimeter of that 20 foot non-disturbance area and is walling that off. And the applicants engineer is here to confirm that. If you'd like to have him come up to confirm say the say the last part again. Pardon me. Say, say that last part again.

Oh, that that wall is standing along that buffer area along the wetland. So, it will be walled off according to this point. Okay. She's getting muttered. It's drawn that way, but it's not conditioned that way. Right. It's not conditioned that way. We don't have words to that effect. It's we would rely on the set of drawings. So, we could add a note or add a condition if this commission so chose

because that buffer yard walk it. hard to because that buffer wall is typically at the property line. But in this case, they provided it at a a buffer setback which is 15 feet. Is that right? 10 feet. 10.

Okay. Yeah. Okay. Another commissioner. Okay. So, I'm curious on the uh north side, it's got the dash line all the way down says record boundary, but what what is that like behind the walking path and all that that would border on these these that just indicates the property line? There's no fence or anything. There's no fence or anything. So, okay. Is that R? So, if the people who lived I I drove by here, but it's kind of hard. You can't really loiter because there's nowhere to park.

Yeah, I'm sure the police were following me. Like, why does this woman keep making U-turns and driving by the same place? But I couldn't figure out like on that on that back side, how how does that border out? Like if you have kids playing on the paths and all that kind of stuff. Is that right in their backyard? That is uh their side Well, this property sideyard is what we would call it along the north property line there. Yeah, because it's behind there, right? There's no physical separation other than some trees on that property line. Okay. So, yeah, there's a lot of togetherness.

Any other discussions? Michelle, do you want to bring up the um design? Yes. I I have a question about the north wall. It says it's um 8 feet and the south s wall is also eight feet but they it the north wall on the imaging looks like half the size of the south wall.

Can you can you clarify? Do you mean east west? Pardon? Do you mean east west? No, I'm looking at on Shern Creek, the sound wall. On the north, it says it's 8t wall, 8 ft linear. And on the south side, it says 8t also, but it looks twice as large. So, I don't know if that's mislabeled. You're not saying um height, Michelle. You're saying length of wall? Yeah, I'm looking at the length. Okay. Yeah. And um are you on Just so we're all reading the same packet page, you looking at one of the drawings? I'm looking at the cover sheet to Churn Creek Commons. PD1. Okay. Yeah, PD1. Make sure we're looking at the same

page 48. It does look shorter. And I'm just wondering, not in length, but it not in height, but in length. It looks a lot shorter than the south wall. And I'm just curious as to why that would be. Well, that that call outs a new 8 foot. I I believe that distinction is the height of the wall. at one point is it an eight foot wall or is it still so it's it's designating an eight foot wall and then graphically it's showing however it scales out to being how long it is it looks like to the property lines I'm sure the applicants hearing could speak to it in more detail but the length isn't designated by those notes that's the height of the wall right that's the height and the length is designated based on what was recommended on the sound study

on the sound study okay all right yeah I would like to discuss the just the architectural elements I I'm not loving this. And I'm not thinking that if you plant trees there, it'll be a long time before that is not hitting you right in the face as you're driving by on Churn Creek Road. So, it seems to me there could be some some additional architectural elements. Yeah. Yeah. Like make it softer. Mhm. It's very futuristic. Which are you saying like the the roofing angle is too jarring?

Is it just No, I'm just look looking at look at this wall, right? I mean, if you look at the design on this page, too. I know, but that's on the street. You got to drive it. This is on churn. This is a hightra corridor, and it's the most visible part of this development. And it's correct. Correct. Not very articulated other than the roof line. Now, driving down Churn Creek, I have to agree the design did not melt into what you see on Churn Creek. However, the colors kind of match SaveMart colors that they're starting to do on the front. So, that that I can see, but as far as the design, it didn't mesh with the Tren Creek area.

So, what is this? What do you what are we looking for? I mean, in terms of I would say if you zoom out to a macro level and you look at this project in terms of housing, I will I will say it's a unique project. It offers a type of housing we don't see a lot of in our town in terms of this attached single family duplex style. Um, you're going to see it hit the market likely at rates that I'm not talking affordable housing here. I'm talking about rates that are affordable to certain sectors of our population. And just to give you a sneak peek, um, we're getting preliminary arena numbers from HCD and the housing element is going to be a doozy. We're going to look be looking at probably double the amount of housing that we need to find in our town from the last housing cycle. So just at a macro level, I would just urge this body to think about that. I think we we certainly have the

Jeremy, I'm not suggesting that we they redesign the whole architecture. No, I I hear you. I'm just saying in terms of a PD and trying to come up with a little bit of a more creative, you know, we build a lot of single family residential in our town. We have plenty of single family and we'll build more, but this kind of housing, what does this commission need to have to feel comfortable approving a PD overlay that allows for this slightly more dense housing, right? and allows for adding would adding some trellis elements along those big huge bare walls and shutters I was going to say shutters be a huge ownerous burden on the applicant.

No, but I think where I was going with my line of questioning was we also heard comments I think about the the park area or the the lack thereof, right? Some of the other amenities that I think the commission wasn't um super thrilled about. So maybe let's pause there for a second. Do you guys have sort of the story or does the applicant have something to say regarding how far have we come? I think that helps frame it up and then we can start talking about what else to add. Does that work for the commission or do you want us to jump to straight to what else? Because um if we're just talking about the frontage and we're talking about lots what one two and three and four and four just three three sorry three I think three one two and three

the lots fronting creek on the on the west wall of those Yeah.

Um okay well let's start there. I mean, we could condition it to have we could well, we've done this before, right? We could condition sort of a generic architectural enhancement, leave it to staff to try and muddle through that some and get something a little bit better. We could get all the way down to the specifics of provide change in roof pitch, provide uh stucco siding versus board and batten versus fiber cement. We could talk colors, we could talk materials, we could talk Wayne's coats, we could talk stone. We could get really specific or we could just have a condition that gives us the flexibility to push for a better design on those lots that front Tren Creek. Um, unless there's something I'm missing, Lily or Drew.

Um, I think one of the options that I've seen years ago, Michelle, you may recall, is that uh final design to be approved by the planning commission. That is the ultimate decision, but we could land somewhere in between. So that's an option. Um but if you give us very specific criteria and none of us I don't think in this room are architects but you we need more specific so that you give us guidance um so that we could do it more at a director level. Um, but if you certainly are uncomfortable with that because this is a reasonzoning that you could add a condition that you approve final design.

Do you want a discussion? Are they going to make your presentation?

Yeah. Okay. And and I guess in your presentation I'm I'm real curious why there is no um why that sound wall stops and there is nothing all the way back to the wetland. If if this is, you know, slightly over an acre and a half, that is not a long uh stretch. But it but if it was my house on the other side and my yard and stuff, I don't think I want 16 parking spaces and potentially kids playing and uh a house and all this stuff and then just like, hi, it's in my it's in my yard. I have to drive by some more. I got to drive by more now looking at that in my head. But why is there no barrier down that down that north side?

Right. And so it is on the south. Yeah. It's it's because it's not required. Um you can condition because this is a discretionary permit and because uh no requirement because it is also RM9. So there's no wall or we don't even require fencing. People put up fencing because that that's just the nature of how people want to, you know, have their private space, right? But this is proposed as a common area and so the applicant had not proposed anything but certainly that is within your discretion to require something real fast because Commissioner Ryan did ask the question earlier if there was a fence on the actual property like does that property owner have a fence to

yeah the neighboring property. Okay we have is that the developer? Yeah. So that was a question too for your presentation and then Commissioner Miner has a question as well.

Okay, we're we're going to keep it. Commissioner Miner, do you want to listen to the presentation then have questions? Thank you. Can you state your name for the record, please? Yeah, Josh Miller. I'm the uh uh applicants representative as the project planner. mic. Oh, sorry. Little hype challenge here. Sorry. Uh Josh Miller. I am the project planner for Horox Engineers, the uh engineer for the for the applicant on the project. So, there would be a fence along the north side. Uh in speaking with the owners, a wood fence would be preferred. You know, we wouldn't expect that to be open to the north. It doesn't, you know,

from from an insurance and just a practical standpoint, it doesn't make any sense to have that an open field between the two. Um, but, you know, they're willing to, you know, put a fence there that that makes sense, you know, both from safety and, you know, visibility. Yeah. Do you want to discuss have any questions for the developer? Erin, I thought you were aren't you tell are they telling us more

about the what it took to get to this point? Yeah, I I mean Lily could explain it probably a little bit more eloquent eloquently than I could, but we we've definitely worked over the past two years to um come to a compromise and and with the city staff to come up with elements, amenities to the project that are both uh in favor of the city, in favor of the the project and in favor of, you know, the project uh you making it cost effective. It's got a it's got a pencil, right? Uh but these are not um it's it's not a low income. It's not high density. We're only asking for one more unit. So, it's already RM9. So, I know it may not be ideal, but that's the zoning that they bought. You know, that that was existing. We didn't come up with RM9. But the the amenities for the play area, the tot what they call a tot lot is kind of a new term for a little play area where you could have the jumping rocks or you know whatever the kids want to play in bark area, a swing set type of thing. Um I know the the owner um reached out to a company to find out what currently they would put in a tots is what they came up with. So we left it basically to an expert to say this is what would be an amenity for children to play in a play area for kids. That's what they came up with. If that becomes something in the future when this actually gets built, you know, maybe that changes a little bit, but I think the intent is to provide um a play area for kids. Um there's a lot of open area next to the parking lot, the or not parking lot, the parking spaces. there

is a lot of area there that's in common uh way above and beyond a normal multifamily uh development and a lot more than a typical single family development which this is you know kind of a hybrid of the two and to Jeremy's point I think this is a great opportunity to get a housing uh development that is in between or something that we that the city doesn't have a lot of has to offer and I think that's you know the cost of construction with those roof lines the different materials that is that is a big cost to the to the developer most single family um developments make it very cookie cutter very standard and these are not so that is one thing that we did was we added a lot of colors change the roof lines and that does add cost to the project and so that that's something that I don't think should be overlooked in that cost.

Thank you, Mr. Miller. I'm going to ask you to stay up here just in case some of the commissioners have questions. Do we have any questions? Michelle, sorry. Yeah, I'm confused. Are we going to get a presentation? I think that was the presentation.

I could add on to a little bit. Um, so when we're looking at a project, there's always a lot of um, you know, things to to consider as far as the parameters of what uh, were brought forth. So in this case, we had wetlands discovered at the northwest east corner and then the option was presented to the applicant, you can fill in that wetlands, which means then mitigation dollars, right? And um so by filling that in, he could push the detention area or some sort of open space area, open up where he has that detention area, more usable space for common area. So what he decided was not to put that money towards mitigation, avoid it, which really squeezed in the developable area. And in this small lot, then it really reduces much more. you've got um we talked about providing twocar garages which then would drive this thing to threetory which then requires ADA and all those things. So he wanted to keep away from all of those things you know budget-wise he wanted to hit a certain market. So, which then brought us down to onecar garages with open park spa, you know, spaces and then reducing this what we call a common court as more of an alleyway, right? And you talked about 24 ft. Are we going to be able to squeeze a fire truck in there? They're minimally squeezing 24 with rogue curbs, which allows a fire truck to ride over that sidewalk. So, that's how they're meeting the fire access and turn around everything. So this project is really really tight. But what we did try to do was try to pull the amenities that were displeasing like the common garbage you

know you walk out and there is this garbage bin and today those garbage bins as you see are getting larger because they have recyclables they have all these things. So, I thought that was a win for us um in a lot of sense because it was sitting in the middle of the center of this project. So, by doing that, it pulled that out and we were able to get at least some play area. Um, being that these are smaller units, we saw smaller families. We didn't think that there was going to be teenagers or anything that like that that would require like a small basketball court like you see at, you know, the K2 development out on Old Tourist. So, a little bit a type of market hit for this type of unit. Um, and then we had them, you know, they proposed a walking trail, small yet, but still available. Um, so those are kind of the parameters that we were set with with the small property short of buying somebody out like the neighborhood showed up today, right? And to expand that northerly, I don't think we would have arrived at a better project, maybe better enhanced, but I don't think as far as like lot sizes or anything like that. Um, I think we have um done what we could, but at your discretion, we can, my suggestion would be to add that buffer yard on the east side back into the project by pushing that buffer yard onto the property line. So then it opens up that backyard area rather than walling that all off. That would be a good suggestion so that you incorporate that wetlands back into as well into the project. It really opens up that back area so that it can be commonly used as a play area, sideyard, something. So that is 10 feet back there that you could gain back by doing that.

Could you put the the site plan back up there so we can visualize move including the buffer yard? It's the thing with the trees on it, right? That's what they're talking about down this side. While Michelle's looking at that, I have a question for Mr. Miller. Did So, the wetlands are part like the applicant owns the wetlands. That's part of this property, correct? Like they own it. They're just deciding to ignore it.

Yeah, they they would own it. Um, so I want to roll that suggestion back about the the wall being eliminated. I would still put the wall on the property line, but because CDFW recommended a 20 foot non-disturbance area from the wetlands, I would perhaps doing like a chain link fence or a rod iron fence so that it's protected, right? But you have that wall along the back so that it looks and appears open, right? So, that is my suggestion there. I I think that would satisfy, but let's open it up.

I I like that. I mean, I've I've backed up to open space in a lot of homes we've owned and like some black chain link, which initially I thought like green would be better, but black actually you see right through it.

It's great. Nobody can get out there and you get the benefit of the um the space without the access. Um I I still think you need a a Okay. So, I don't know that. I mean, I don't I didn't walk around out there, but if there is as much uh if it is as marshy as you say on that side on that north side, I've just I've lived in places like this and you put a wood fence there and uh it's it doesn't last. They don't they don't last. The wood fences where our town is filled with really sad dilapidated wood fences actually. Um, I drive up and down Shasta View all the time and I'm like, too bad they didn't put the wall all the way down because everything is just comes off. I thought, how how big a deal is it to put to continue your your masonry wall down that side so that the homeowner doesn't have her animals getting on them or bugging them. These guys are going to if if you have dogs or whatever. I mean, is that a big thing? Yeah, the the masonry wall is is very is more expensive than you could imagine. Okay.

And so I would say on the north I'm assuming that's why we don't do them a lot. That's yeah, just guessing. So on the north side, I would I would caution against conditioning that on the north side. I think it would make sense to, you know, maybe come up with some options, condition that to have a screened or solid fence to be determined, whether that's, you know, a chain link with slats, but the masonry wall I think is is a lot to ask.

I mean, this this commission before has conditioned like a durable fencing kind of material and left it up to staff to figure out the details. um you know, fiber cement, uh chain link and slats, um a combination of rod iron and other durable materials. So, we could condition it specifically, but with enough um vagueness for us to work it out so it's not uh some kind of material like wood, which in our climate we know um doesn't last well. Um but, you know, to roll it back, the code, the reason it's not conditioned right now is the code doesn't require it technically. So, we didn't have the authority to really condition it. However, as Lily mentioned, as a as the discretionary body, um it can be conditioned by you all on that north side, but the code doesn't require it.

So, let's take that up. If we were wanting to condition the fence, well, I'm curious, too, if it's a homeowners, if if you did build a wood fence and the wood fence was falling apart, the homeowners group, I mean, whoever's managing this, do they take care of that since it's a private road and that sort of thing? That common area with the fence, I think we could probably wrap it into the the HOA maintenance. Yes. Just something so it doesn't, you know. Okay. So, do we want to recommend that the fencing be on that north side with the condition up to the city to decide at their discretion what what should be done.

Um I that would be fine with me as far as the fencing was concerned, but it looks like um there's been discussion of rep including the buffer yard in the common area. Is that something we want to condition? And then at bare minimum, I would like staff to make an effort to improve the churnrete. Well, let's do one condition at a time. So, we'll start with the fencing on the north side and then we'll move to the common area and then we'll move to the architecture. So yeah,

ju just want to make a a couple high level high level comments and comparing this to what could have very well been the project that wouldn't have even come in front of us is a 14 unit multifamily structure with none of these requirements. This is in my mind this is it probably would have had a wall, wouldn't it? Not to the north because it's the same zoning. It would have it could have had zero nothing. Absolutely zero. That's what he said.

Um, furthermore, they do have in this case there isn't even there's one house that is neighboring that north property. Um, or yeah, one one house that's neighboring the north property. It's not even their back, you know, their backyard faces the street, not so much the north property. And the comparison of what could have been is could have been 14 units that are lined up all looking back to the north. Um

to me I think this is leaps and bounds superior and well worth a trade of adding one. I think the PD I think not seeing a big multifamily complex there. This is going to attract people that have some pride in home home ownership. Um, they're very likely going to take better care of their property than an apartment complex. It's going to be much more likely to have a higher, you know, higher income um, residence. you know, certainly not why I'm making why I would make a recommendation, but in this case, I just think this this has a lot of benefits and amenities for a community. So, I'm that are over and above what the minimum could be. The most affordable thing would be to put 14 units, apartment units that have no, you know, doesn't need to go to planning commission, doesn't need to go to city council. Um, and that that would be the least expensive thing to do here. So, I'm nervous about adding a lot of things. I'm certainly open to K open to adding shutters on the west side or saying that they have some fencing material, which they're already amendable to do. Sounds like that's already in the plan, but going above and beyond that to to me this product is already well above and beyond what they would need to be um is my stance.

Thank you. Great feedback. Greg, did you have something? I would just say that my biggest concern is the fencing on the north side. I think there needs some sort of a barrier there and I think they've agreed to that and so with that being included, um I'm happy with the plan as it is. Yeah, I I wasn't married to what it was. I just it didn't show here that it was there. And I thought she said she has animals. I thought, "Oh, yeah. This is all all kinds of unpleasantness." So, so going back. So, you do agree that the fencing on the north side will be part of the project? Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think the the the owner had had expected to fence the north side for Yeah. Just something durable. Yeah. Yeah. And and part of that process is going through, you know, the the improvement plans and finding out what makes sense and also what makes sense from the fire standpoint and the insurance. Yes. You know, insurance companies and the and the fire the the fire departments want to make sure that what is built is makes sense for the climate. So Okay. Michelle, is it correct though that presently the northern fence is not conditioned? That would be something we would need to add. Okay. Yes. Correct. Yeah. Correct.

Yeah. And um we could we could do some sort of generic condition like I mentioned or if this body wants something more specific, we can work on that. Um I think in the past when this body's conditioned, you know, durable fencing material, etc., that's given us enough at the staff level to end up with a product that we we feel meets the intent. So, um, I I think we're okay with leaving it up to the city unless we have any objection because I I think Luke's comments are really good and I agree with you. That's true. You know, dropping a like an apartment building in there or something. This is way better than that. So, I I totally agree with you. Didn't mean to be a nitpicker. I guess I I just sad questions.

Okay. So, let's discuss the common area. Michelle, I am fine with the way the common area is presented, but there was discussion of adding the buffer yard. So, I just was following up on that. This Yeah. Do you have discussion, Erin? Do you have a prep? No. No. They were going to put in the the like chain link or whatever on the buffer thing, right? Is that for my benefit? Could we clarify? Michelle, what's your understanding of the buffer yard that you're talking about? I just make sure on the um east southeast corner of the property. Is that what we're discuss calling the buffer yard? Yeah, on the eastern parcel, correct?

And I believe Lily was mentioning that previously, right? I just want to make sure we're on the same page in terms of the buffer yard. You were talking about talking about adding a buffer yard on the No, there's a buffer yard, but I was suggesting moving the sound wall to the property line to the property line, right? And um it's been clarified that CDFW says it's a non-disturbance area, which means that you can't do anything with it, but it doesn't mean that you have to wall it off or fence it off. So you could just take that entire property line there and just make the sound wall along that wet east property line, but you couldn't go to the wetland. Correct. You'd have to you'd have to hold it off the wetland area.

You'd have to hold it off at the wetlands. So the sound wall could go from the souththeast corner north along that property line until it hits that non-disturbance area and then we can't go into that area with that soundwall. How does that affect the sideyard though? of the adjacent housing unit lot of lot 16 yeah that that's their standard five foot there so but there's a there would right now there's the proposed sound uh I mean the the buffer wall currently it's held at the five foot set

I'm not sure how that would work it seems like you would have public encroaching upon that housing unit. If you move the wall, unless they're going to put a fence in their sideyard, follow me, right? It would be almost like a 10-ft debt zone if you put a fence be there, though. There's nothing I mean, they could rearelize that to be their parcel. Right. Right. You could add that in as part of their parcel. What are they talking about? I'm sorry. I didn't catch that. So, you can move the property line. Yeah. For the lot 16. It's not okay. over to the east property line and just incorporate that sideyard so it just becomes their I'm not that

15 ft of sideyard condition. So if someone else can you're just talking about moving it over a little. Yeah. And we're good with that. I don't think we're solving a problem here at the dumb question. I think we can move. We could move. I would probably leave it. There's no problem here. Yeah. No. Okay. Can I get that we're in agreeance to leave it? Okay. So let's move on to the architecture on just to pause leave it in agreement as as drafted. It's fine on that wall. Thank you. Yeah.

Anybody any comment? Okay. So yes, now we're moving on to the architecture of the units facing Churn Creek Road or not facing but parallel to Churn Creek Road. So do we want to leave it to staff's discretion or do we want to give them more stringent guidelines? I think that's the discussion we need to have. So, if I could ask a question of the commission. Yes. On packet page 59, um, you see some front elevations of these houses. Um, you see there kind of a shed roof. You see, you know, a little pop out roof over a window. You see some board and batten. These are steeper pitch roofs, right? We're used to seeing single family residential in this town that's usually just stuckle with like a 4 and 12 pitch and that's it. They're really not not much to be seen. And so I would say these elevations do offer an architectural enhancement over what we're accustomed to seeing in town. I guess my question is if that elevation facing the street resembled something more like you're seeing on the front, would that suffice? And my second question is also elevation duplex type B. You can see those shed roofs go two different directions. I think how it's rendered, you're seeing a big blank wall because the roof slopes away from Churn Creek.

Mhm. you could condition those floor plans and or require miring of the floor plans so that the roof sheds toward Churn Creek and leaves you with a not as tall of a wall that looks so blank like Michelle you were referring to. Um, you know, and we can deal with the details later when we get to building permits and further on. But certainly you can flip-flop these, you can mirror them, we could add a condition that kind of hits on these points I'm talking about if if that's satisfactory to the commission. I think that staff understands the concern. Yeah. And I would could defer to their discretion either by changing the pitch of the roof through some landscape requirement that was like big trees. Yeah.

That we don't have to wait to 15 years for them to cover. Okay. Um so an enhanced landscape plan perhaps on that. I think maybe that would solve it. Um arbor we've seen arbor treatments around which can be very attractive and shutters. So, I think there's a lot of options available that aren't necessarily dealillers. You know, they're affordable, but it would really enhance the entry into this project, which I think is important. This is the kind of thing that you hear from the public later. Why did you approve that? Trust me, you would hear that. Yeah,

I hear you and I agree. I think I would respectfully ask maybe if we could get some kind of condition because it will help staff. Um, I don't know at what point this will get built or if it'll be years from now, but if we could get some condition to that effect, maybe we could work on it quickly together. It would help us enforce it later on. Um, so you're asking for specifics? What if not? Yeah. Uh, you know, with respect to, hey, uh, for the lots fronting, Churn Creek, a combination of an enhanced landscape plan andor change of roof pitching or shedding, you know, whatever architectural enhancements, we could come up with some language shall be required of the project. That would help. I guess selfishly I'm asking me. It' help me later on to require that of the builder.

Well, that would satisfy me. Yeah, Commissioner Miner. Yeah, I was just gonna maybe it's very similar to what Director Pagan just said, but what if we put in that they have the roof roof pitch toward Churn Creek and add shutters? Sure. Or do what you said with make the front kind of wrap to the side just on those few units. Yeah, you could say incorporate um architectural features as shown on elevation on page such and such. Incorporate features on the on the frontage. I shed the roof towards I liked what you said earlier which was kind of a more general generic direction than to write today saying you have to put shutters up

because we could get a better project with enhanced landscaping and a roof ch. you know, I I would like I trust you and your discretion. Um I really want to avoid micromanaging this to the extent that we're telling you what the pitch of the roof has to be and Okay. Yeah. Right. I think we want to make sure the project is still feasible for the applicant. Yes. But something of enhancement left up to the discretion of the planners. Agreed. Um, so really how you stated it the first time, Jeremy, if you wrote that down. What's that? How really? Yeah. Yeah, do that. Whatever that was,

I suppose. I mean, is it fair we could incorporate it city attorney into the motion and I could somehow draft a condition later. Is that not what you would prefer? Um, can I listen to you need to come back for approval in terms of the specifics of the condition? Um, or or create it now? Yeah. or I you you do have the ability um I mean the public hearing is concluded. You could have an emotion of intent and then effectively direction to come back with finalized um uh language that would capture uh something along the lines of you know um sounds like um architectural reforms that are more in line with what is uh common in the area.

Can I something along those lines? Can can I add another another comment that I don't I don't think this needs to come back to us certainly, but I think that there's we get another pass at this when this goes to city council. So, if we just direct Jeremy to simple come with something. Yes, the ones that were facing Churn Creek. We could come up with a condition and present it at council and present it at council and that will be the ultimate but we certainly don't need it to come back here. Right. That's what we're trying not to delay any longer. Yeah, I like that. Um I think we have sufficient direction and we could listen back to the tape to come up with a condition that would be suitable and I think hit on this um body's recommendations for that. I like that idea.

May May I make a motion? Sure. Are we ready? Wait, any other comments? I'm sorry. Well, can I ask clarify just one thing? We talked about putting a chain black chain link fence along the wetland buffer yard versus a block wall. Is that what we were? Is that where we ended on black chain link along there? I think the drawing Lily had good idea. The drawing does show PD.01. The drawing does show some kind of fence along that disturbance area. Was that your intent? Yeah. We were going to we were going to fence it. I didn't know if we it landed on we could do black chain link fence along the wetland feature. Does your drawing specify what type of fence or No,

I don't recall. I don't think it probably No, the drawing just says uh buffer yard per RMC. I think staff could I think we could probably handle that at staff level. Um because we also I think that's what we directed back was that there would be fencing there, but that it would be to the discretion of the planners. Yeah, I think the two conditions this body landed on in terms of wanting to have them in the record was the northern property line fence and then the west frontage enhancements that we just discussed. Yep. Right. Is that is that my understanding? Is that correct? Those two things are Yes. the main drivers for this body. Okay. Yeah. But still making it feasible for the developer with because obviously retaining wall or block wall was not

Well, we'll talk we'll talk with them between now and council um and work on a condition that we all think makes makes some sense that also satisfies and and follows the spirit of what you guys told us. Thank you. Any other discussion before I ask for a motion?

Okay, Luke, please. I'd like to make a motion to um accept staff recommendation with the addition of two items. A fence to be on the north side of the property line included in the HOA. So to be maintained by the HOA and visual enhancements to be determined and presented for the Churn Creek abuing properties um at city council. So, some kind of a condition along that to be presented at city council for enhancement for visual enhancements. You said that. I'll second that motion.

Okay. All in favor? I I Any oppose? Okay. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Miller. You can sit down. Thanks. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, staff. Okay. We're going to move on to um item five, which is public comment for any non-aggendaized items or matters within the city's jurisdiction. But I don't think we have any. Do we Elizabeth? Okay, seeing none, we're going to close the public hearing or comment area. Sorry, I always say public hearing. Public comment. Um and then we're going to move on to commissioner comments. Do we have any comments today? Nope. How about Jeremy? Any director's report? Uh, nothing to report today.

Okay. Well, with that, the meeting's adjourned. Thank you. No, thank you. Thank you. You got that.