Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Kuznick. Here. Commissioner Conjula.

Here.

Vice Chair Avila is absent tonight. Chair Alpert.

And I am here. Thank you. Okay. If we can all please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

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.

Item three is announcements. Are there any changes or additions to the agenda for tonight? There are none. Public comment. At this time, members of the public may address the planning commission on any item that is not already included in tonight's agenda. If you'd like to speak, please fill out a speaker card located in the back of the room and submit it to the recording secretary. Are there any late communications or speaker cards on this item?

I don't have any speaker cards, but we've received written public comment from Brian Swanson. It's part of the public record. We're provided to the commission prior to the meeting copies on the days and in the red binder in the back of the room.

Can I confirm we did receive that yesterday and today and there is a copy up here. So thank you. Item five is the consent calendar. Item 5.1 are the minutes of the regular planning commission meeting from June 2nd, 2026. Were there any public comments written for this item?

No public comment for this item. Okay.

And no speaker cards. So go ahead and move on. Are there any no changes? If we can get a motion to the minutes from the meeting?

I can move that we accept the minutes from our last meeting of June 2nd, 2026. Second that.

Okay. Let's see if we can remember how to vote on this item.

I think we push us. No, that's not what we want.

It doesn't appear to be showing up on our screens to vote at the moment.

One moment, please.

OK. We are still learning the new system, so.

OK, try now.

OK, there we go.

OK.

But your vote. Yes. We have a little bit of technical difficulty on the one side here. One moment, please.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay, motion passed 3-0-0. Okay, we can go ahead and move on now. Item 6, unfinished business. There is none. Item 7, item 7.1 is a public hearing. It is a request for a time extension for the Windflower Fields Townhome development. at 2701 Hooper Drive. As a reminder to our commission, we are going to consider item 7.1 is to consider adopting the draft commission resolution number 0326, approving an 18-month time extension of the project. We do have a brief staff report from Ryan Driscoll.

Good evening, Chair and commissioners. Yes, as mentioned, this is a time extension request for the Windflower Fields Townhome project. It's at 2701 Hooper Drive. It's a three and a half acre site as shown on the aerial image here. A little bit of background. This project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in December 2021 for the development and investing tandem map. for 47 for-sale townhomes and 16 accessory dwelling units. It was approved for a 36-month or three-year time period. In December of 2024, the Planning Commission approved an 18-month time extension until June 7, 2026 of this year for the project. And prior to the expiration of the project, the applicant submitted on June 3 of this year the time extension request under review tonight. So the request is for a 54 month or four and a half year time extension that's for the project to allow the applicant additional time to attain all required construction related permits and to explore some landslide remediation mitigation strategies that they're going through some design work on. For this project, the State Subdivision Map Act allows the project a maximum time extension of an additional 54 months from the June 7, 2026 expiration. And the City's Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to review the time extension at a public hearing and may approve or deny the request for the time extension. Staff recommends the commission consider the staff reporting attachments, open the public hearing, take public testimony, and close the public hearing, discuss and deliberate, and adopt the draft resolution provided number 0326, improving an 18-month time extension until December 7, 2027 for the project entitlements to allow the applicant to demonstrate progress towards constructing the project. So I'll turn back over to the Commission.

Okay. Was the applicant here wanting to make any comments?

Yeah. Good evening, Chair Alpert and members of the Commission. My name is Brian Winter. I'm the land use attorney on behalf of the applicant that originally was involved in obtaining the project entitlements. I appreciate all of the work that Ryan and city staff have done in connection with this project over the many years that it's been in process. As his staff report clearly lays out, there is an ongoing constraint that we're working through to try to resolve in order to allow the project to be sold to a home builder so it can be constructed. I would simply ask this is an 18 month extension recommendation. We previously had an 18 month extension. The map act provides for a total of up to 6 years under this particular provision of the subdivision map act. we're working as diligently as we can to be able to make sure the project is implemented. And rather than run the risk that we are back here again doing the exact same thing in a year and a half, I would simply ask that you grant the balance of the four and a half years that the MAP Act provides for. I'm happy to answer any questions, but that's our request.

Questions from the commission on this?

You said you're working diligently. What seems to be the glitch in getting this rolling here?

There's a landslide that revealed itself after the project was originally entitled on the adjacent property to the west. that poses a potential risk to the property in the future. That has impaired the ability of my client to sell it to a home builder. We've been in contract twice with different builders. And as a result of that, there's different solutions to the landslide. That's not the subject of tonight's meeting, but we are working with city staff and we are working with NGO, the geotechnical engineer to solve the problem. There's different ways of doing it. And we're working through that as rapidly as we can.

Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Would the 18-month be a good checkpoint that the planning commission knows and the city knows how far you have made progress? I think that was the reason behind that. And I see that is a good point where you could be halfway for the six years and that we will know how the progress is going and where we are very much invested and interested in seeing you guys build that infrastructure

Sure. We're happy to provide updates. I would just respectfully add that we're entitled to these extensions. And so it is extra work to potentially have to come back here. I think it's more efficient to simply move this forward. And on other projects in other communities, I've obtained the six-year extension or gotten a one-year extension and then the next year gotten the balance of the five years, just understanding that it's not necessarily the most efficient use of time. city resources or my clients resources to come in incrementally like this, but we'll be happy with an 18 month extension. I am requesting respectfully that you make it a four and a half year extension.

Okay. Okay. No more comments. Are there any written communicate? Thank you for that. Thank you. Written comments or public comments on this item?

I have no speaker cards or written communication on this item.

Okay. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing comments. From the commission?

I feel 18 months is a good checkpoint that we will know. We are interested in their progress as well. And it would be nice for at least the city and planning commission to know where it stands after half the time, three years, I guess.

Okay.

I'll go with the recommendation of the staff.

Okay.

We haven't heard any compelling reasons why the 18-month is... is not suitable, nor have we heard any compelling evidence that progress is being made other than the two deals that have fallen through, which I'm sorry to hear that. And so while it is tedious to come back and check in with us, it does more or less help us help you stay focused on this and to understand hopefully light a fire under all the people and agencies and organizations that you have to work with. So while nobody likes a deadline, sometimes they are efficient in producing results. So I hope you understand. Thank you.

Okay. You captured my thoughts perfectly.

exactly okay so end of the day I want to ask staff that there is full six-year term they just have to come back and correct with they'll get the remainder of of the what after the three and a half that's right the 13 the 36 months out of the 60 right or 72.

They'll get the full entitled.

They'll end up with the six years.

The full six years is allowed.

If they ask. So if you only do 18, they'll still have that 36 months.

Prior to the expiration of the new extension that's granted, the applicant would have to apply for an additional extension of whatever additional time is remaining at that point. So since 18 months was granted previously and then 18 sounds like this evening, there would be an additional available three years after this extension is granted that the applicant can request. And so that would be available to them. They would not need to file for an extension if they were to begin commencing construction. And so in that sense, they may not need any additional extensions if they are able to move forward with construction.

I'm in favor of the 18 months. Primarily, it kind of keeps it on top of mind, not for you. I know you're working on it, but the community, you know, that Yeah, the commission meeting tonight shows up in the local news and people says, oh yeah, there's Golden's Gate. What's happening with that? And it's just kind of a, it's a nice way to keep the community informed. And I appreciate that it does trigger a little bit of work, but it is relatively minor. So, you know, so there's no further comment. We're looking to adopt resolution 0326. Why don't we take a quick look? I don't think there's anything unusual about the resolution. So unless someone has questions, Any burning changes that need to be made to either the resolution or the conditions of approval, I'd like to ask for a motion to adopt Resolution 0326.

I will move that we adopt Resolution 0326. Let me get the number correctly. 0326 for the 18-month extension for Windflower Fields townhouse development.

I'll second that.

Okay, been moved and seconded. Okay, there we go. Okay, the resolution passed 3-0-0. Hopefully we'll see you before 18 months with a great update. Yes. Thank you.

Hopefully not. You guys will start off.

Cindy has a- Sure.

And just through the chair, decisions of the planning commission may be appealable to the city clerk's office within 10 calendar days of the decision by filing a letter stating the grounds for the appeal along with the appropriate filing fee. Thanks.

We're moving on to commission reports and staff updates. The first item is 8.1. It is a study session for all of an oak vesting tentative map and all of an oak housing development located at 3150 through 3180 Crow Canyon Place. Staff recommends that we receive the staff report, take public comment, and provide feedback to the applicant and staff on the proposed project. And as a reminder, we did see this as a concept review not too long ago. So tonight we have Caitlin to give us a little staff report. Hi, Caitlin.

Good evening, Chair Alpert and Commissioners. I'm Kaylin Snodgrass, Associate Planner with the Planning Services Division, and I will be presenting Item 8.1, the All of the NOC New Application Study Session. Consistent with the City's policies regarding processing preliminary housing applications under SB 330, the purpose of the study session is for the applicant to share the vision of the project early in the process before the project is deemed complete, which also allows for the public and the Commission to share any thoughts or questions with the applicant. The project site is a 7.2 acre parcel located at 3150 Crow Canyon Place. The general plan and zoning designations for the site is mixed-use residential emphasis. The development is separated into two projects, the Olive and Oak Vesting Tentative Map and the Olive and Oak Housing Development. The Olive and Oak Vesting Tentative Map consists of a major subdivision application that proposes the subdivision of the site area for condominium purposes. This application is currently in review for completeness and the CEQA pathway will be determined once the application is deemed complete. The Vesting Tentative Map is subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission. The Olive and Oak Housing Development Project consists of an architectural review and tree removal permit applications, and it proposes the demolition of four existing office buildings, the construction of 119 for-sale townhomes, a 45-unit, 100% below-market-rate rental apartment building, the construction of a private park, private roadways, landscape improvements, and a through-access road to the housing development project at Bishop Ranch 12 and Annabelle Lane. The housing development is subject to a streamlined ministerial review process and a use-by-right housing entitlement defined in California Government Code Section 65583.2 and allowed by the San Ramon Municipal Code Division D2-3B. This prohibits any discretionary local government review or approval for owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential developments that have 20% of the units reserved for lower-income households. The project site is designated as a housing opportunity site in the adopted San Ramon 2022 to 2031 housing element. The housing development proposes 45 below market rate rental apartment units, which totals 27% of the proposed overall unit count, thus qualifying the project for the streamlined ministerial review process. This concludes staff's presentation. Emily Boyd from Brookfield Residential and Lauren Alexander from the Pacific Companies are in attendance tonight to share the applicant team's presentation on the proposed development.

Thank you. Why don't we have them come up before we ask questions of staff.

Thank you to staff for the report and the introduction. Good evening, Chair Alper and commissioners. It's good to see you again, and thank you for the opportunity to provide updates on Olive and Oak, a project that was first introduced to you in August of last year as Crow Canyon Place. I'm Emily Boyd, Director of Business Strategies with the applicant, Brookfield Residential. In tonight's study session, I'd like to re-familiarize the commission with the project, provide updates based on your previous feedback, and take comments and questions on our most recent submittal. To support in this effort, I'm joined by Lauren Alexander with our affordable building partner, the Pacific Companies, who you will hear from shortly. Other members of our project team are also present to hear your feedback and answer questions, including civil engineer, CBG, architect and planners, KTGY, and landscape architect, Gate Studio. We're really excited to provide more detail on the site context, the housing products proposed, and how the project advances the city's housing and land use objectives. As a refresher, Brookfield Residential is a master developer and home builder with significant experience delivering large-scale communities throughout Northern California, including the Boulevard in Dublin, Natomas Sunset in Natomas, Amoruso Ranch in Roseville, and Rosewood in Morgan Hill. Our focus is creating thoughtfully planned neighborhoods that provide a range of housing opportunities while integrating with surrounding communities. So why this site? This 7.2-acre site is currently occupied by four partially vacant office buildings and is designated mixed-use residential emphasis under the city's land use framework. The project is consistent with the MUR zoning, which was established to encourage housing infill opportunities on underutilized office and commercial properties. The surrounding area is already transitioning toward a more walkable, complete, mixed-use environment with nearby residential communities including City Village, Canopy, Annabelle Lane, and the Orchards in the development pipeline or under construction. For the project overview, the proposed Olive and Oak community includes 164 total homes consisting of 119 for sale townhomes and 45 affordable rental units. Some changes to note since our last visit to you. H Street is now an EVA only to the cul-de-sac with no through access for vehicles. That's the road there in front of the affordable building. All buildings along C Street now run perpendicular to eliminate cars backing out from garages onto the main free road. Sidewalks were added throughout to encourage pedestrian use and provide safe accessibility. An eight-foot concrete masonry sound wall was provided along the highway there on 580 to, I'm sorry, 680 to mitigate highway noise. And we also consolidated many of the smaller green spaces onto a centrally located park that we will look at in more detail shortly. We've also met and started collaborating with the adjacent Annabelle site developer to improve the interface between our projects and as well as submitting a preliminary housing development application in February. Last month we submitted the vesting tentative map and development applications for the project with the attempt to utilize various streamlining legislation based on the site's identification and the city's housing element project design and affordability components. The project is designed to provide a variety of housing choices, including ownership opportunities, affordable rental housing, and optional ADUs within the townhome product. Importantly, approximately 27% of residences within the community are affordable units, helping to address one of San Ramon's most significant housing needs. And on that note, I'd like to turn it over to Lauren Alexander to tell you more about Pacific Companies and the affordable component of the project.

Good evening. Thank you for having us.

My name is Lauren Alexander. I'm with the Pacific Companies. Just give you a quick introduction to who we are. We're a fully integrated multifamily development company specializing in affordable housing. We've nearly 30 year history developing affordable housing in the state of California. with over 300 projects consisting of over 20,000 units. And we've had a partnership with Brookfield for coming on 10 years now, providing the affordable housing below market rate units on many of their master plans in Northern California. We have dozens of Bay Area affordable housing projects, both completed and in construction. And we've actually most recently completed two projects in Fremont on Osgoode Road, if you've heard of them. Do I have control of the slides? Sorry. Okay, great. Thank you. As Emily explained, the affordable apartment consists of 45 units, which represents 27% of the total project units. The project will average 60% of area median income. I'm happy to explain that later if you have questions about how that affordability level works. The unit mix will range from studios to one, two, and three bedrooms, and the affordability will range from 30% to 80% of AMI. It's a, I'm going to show you the next slide here. This is a five level building, four levels of residential over one level of dedicated affordable housing parking. First level also contains a multipurpose room, bike storage, a gym, potentially a computer room. And there's a courtyard on level two that'll be an exterior amenity for residents. And we also have a surface parking lot of about 14 spaces to the north of the building that are also dedicated parking for the affordable residents. I'll be available for questions about the affordable component should you have them. I'm gonna hand it back over to Emily.

Thanks Lauren. So Olive is the three-story row townhome for Brookfield's for-sale portion of the community. There's two types of townhomes, actually, and it incorporates complementary housing products. Olive is the row townhomes. Oak is the interlocking townhomes. This will create visual variety throughout the community while maintaining a cohesive architectural identity. The townhome architecture is designed to create contemporary residential neighborhood that reflects the evolving character of the Bishop Ranch area. Olive is the 51 three story row style townhomes consisting of three plans ranging from about 2000, about 20 to 70 square feet. All of them in this product line are side by side garage configurations. And the largest plan also has an optional accessory dwelling unit or ADU offering even more housing flexibility. The image here, not to be confusing, this isn't the three different plans, this is the three floors of the plan three to give you a little bit more visibility on the ADU. Oak is the second for sale townhome neighborhood at 68 interlocking townhome units, ranging from about 1,300 to 2,200 square feet, so at the smaller end of the scale, creating additional housing diversity and smaller square footage ownership opportunities. By incorporating multiple floor plan configurations within a single building type, the product is able to provide greater housing diversity while preserving a unified architectural experience. The varied building forms, unit widths, and roof lines of all of the note combined were designed to reduce the perceived scale of development and to create a more comfortable pedestrian experience. By far one of the project's greatest strengths is its location. Future residents will have direct access to employment centers within Bishop Ranch while also being within walking distance of shopping, dining, schools, community facilities, and recreational amenities. The site is especially well connected via the Iron Horse Regional Trail and new pedestrian infrastructure supporting both active transportation and healthy lifestyles. The project is also located within easy walking distance of San Ramon Central Park, the serene walking path around Lake Annabelle, and the hopefully soon to be open Bartlett Pear Park. In addition to nearby public amenities, Olive and Oak includes a centrally located neighborhood park. After hearing your feedback in August, we sharpened our pencils and worked with KTGY planners to reconfigure the building layout, consolidating several smaller green spaces to create a functional, usable space featuring a play structure, seating areas, and shade elements for residents. Collectively, all of these amenities contribute to a walkable, family-oriented community environment. At its core, Olive and Oak represents the transformation of an underutilized office site into a mixed-income residential neighborhood that delivers housing diversity, meaningful contribution to affordable housing goals, walkability, and implementation of the city's long-term vision for reimagining the Bishop Ranch area. We appreciate the Commission's feedback and look forward to continuing to work collaboratively with the city and community as the project moves forward. Thank you.

There's no more from the applicant or from staff.

Why don't we open it up to commission questions. These are questions at this point. We'll have a chance to make comments after public comment. So we want to start with questions at this point.

I have a question. I'm not sure if this is for staff or the applicant, but the zoning is mixed use residential. So does this require any non-residential use or is this part of a concession or a waiver that they've asked for?

Good evening. I'm also one of the planners working on the project, Ryan. The subject site is a housing opportunity site. Okay. And as a housing opportunity site, state law allows 100% for residential projects such as proposed. So it can be that.

Okay. Thank you.

Questions at this point?

I do have a couple of questions, but I think we can talk to the builder or the owner after that. I also appreciate the changes that you guys have made from the last. I remember that was like the second or third month I joined and we had a lot of questions on you guys. At least combined all the park spaces and created an internal park space, which I really appreciate that. And also having some parking space for the affordable housing, their dedicated guest parking, things like that. So I appreciate both of them. You guys have implemented that. So The connectivity with the, or the connectivity with the neighboring development, I guess there was some, we can't directly talk about that, but you guys are working with that, neighbors?

Yeah, we have met with and are having continuous conversations with Vandell over on the Annabelle site. So improving that interaction between the two sites.

Okay, so that it's easily walkable and easily accessible for the residents as well. Okay. Correct. Thank you. We'll come back to the questions.

I did have a couple. I have this one for staff to start with, but I have this for you. In the staff presentation and staff report, I just want to bring it out and confirm. The Planning Commission discretionary review is for the vesting tentative map. not the architecture, not the project itself. And that's ministerial, is that?

That's correct. The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review the vesting tentative map once the project has been deemed complete and reviewed for CEQA. And then the development or the construction of the housing units itself is subject to that streamlined ministerial review process that will be processed by staff or the zoning administrator. Okay.

Okay. And so as a reminder, our comments today, while appreciated, do not obligate or commit any kind of action. Is that fair to say? That is correct. Okay, great. Okay. Okay. I did have some questions on the project itself, you know, just to clarify. First of all, thank you for clarifying what olive plus oak means. That was going to be my first question, the naming. So thank you for that. And you also explained the changes between, you know, last year's and now. So that was helpful as well. It was my question there. The change to the EV, to the one road letter H, I think it was to emergency vehicle only. Was that a, sort of a design decision or was that as a result of the fire department's feedback or how did that come to be?

We received some comment after our last presentation just requesting that it was just a comment, requesting that we not have two main throughfares going through the project. There was some concern about that interface with the end of the cul-de-sac with traffic there and how we would navigate that. Ultimately, it worked well in the design in that it created some additional parking spaces there as well as traffic slowing mechanism. So design and functionality came together.

Makes sense. Thank you. You mentioned there's going to be 16 optional ADUs. What does the word optional mean in this case?

So if you look on the oak slide on the ground level floor, it can operate as a bedroom four with just a sitting type area. And there is the option there off of the porch. I'm not sure if you can see the cursor. If I move it for a doorway coming off of the porch, providing separate access from the main home. So this door here could be blocked off. This could create additional access into the ADU with a sitting area. And so this area then here would, in the standard function, be bedroom four and bath three with a closet and just a sitting area, or it could be converted as an option chosen by the buyer or selected by us as the builder if we chose to build it that way as an ADU.

Okay, so the initial buyer sort of decides if it's going to be an ADU or the builder, I guess is what you're saying?

Correct. So if we were pre-building, we could make the decision just start building that way if we thought that the market was accepting of it and that was something that the buyers here would appreciate and select. Otherwise, we could just leave it as a standard four-bedroom, three-bath.

Got it, got it. Okay, and then on that, if you look at the slide that has the overall site layout... Because the road. Okay, that one's good. Um, I know we gave feedback that we're, you know, interested in the access to Annabelle lane a bit And this is, did you consider other other options to get from Annabelle lane to Crow Canyon place or is this the you landed on this one for an explain maybe perhaps why

So this is the current alignment of the road from Annabelle Lane. So from our design perspective, it made sense to just align with their existing plan.

Okay, okay. And in the drawing, I saw there's some, like, It's kind of hard to see, but there's like little dark brown at the end of those streets. Is that pavement treatment or what might that be? These here? No, it's sort of at the end of the EV street and then at the beginning entrance to Crow Canyon Place. Those little brown smudges, those things.

Oh, yeah. Okay. I see there. I believe those are just some type of a stamped concrete.

Okay. So it's a design element. It's a design element.

There's not anything.

Okay. That's fair. That's fair. And then for... This project, I'm a little interested in the park itself. Is that available to both the residents of the affordable apartment complex as well as the for sale complex? Is that right?

So it's a private park, but it will be open to public access, much like the neighborhood park within City Village. There wouldn't be anything preventing folks coming and going from there. Unlike the ground floor elements from the affordable building. Those will be exclusive for the use of the residents of the affordable building. However, the outdoor area and that park area noted here would be accessible to not just residents of Olive and Oak and the affordable component, but also San Ramon residents in general.

That makes sense. And then it'll be maintained by a combination of the apartment owner Brookfield, I assume, and the HOA, is that how that works?

I'm assuming it would be HOA, but that hasn't all been figured out yet, but I believe it would be an HOA obligation for maintenance.

Okay. But the apartment residents will still have permission to use it. Is that okay? And then in the drawing, we saw that there were some, like a, like a balcony patio on the affordable apartment complex. Have you gotten far enough along to know what's going to be out there or what the use is going to be right now? I couldn't tell from the drawings that we got.

I don't believe it's been programmed yet. Right now it's just an open space. You can see it here running the length of the building. It is elevated on the second floor, so it does offer some space. privacy where it's not just directly on the ground floor for residents. And then you can see it somewhat, this is kind of a bad angle, but over here on the backside. So it projects out from the building. But as far as the programming on that, I don't think it's been determined yet.

Okay. The affordable project, there's 45 units. This is different than what we've seen before on rental projects. There's almost always been a onsite manager. and this is all rentals or is there going to be one of the units dedicated to a manager?

There will be an onsite manager, yes. One of the units will be set aside for a manager.

Okay, will that still also be affordable?

No, the way that they define affordable, 100% affordable is excluding manager units. So no, that will be.

So it's still 45 units, but 44 will be affordable, but one will be manager? Correct. Gotcha. Okay.

In the courtyard, well, we haven't programmed it yet. It will vary, like at the least we'll have a tot lot, sort of like a playground for younger children and an area for older children to play in, usually like a barbecue area as well.

Okay. That was my next question. Is there going to be a barbecue someplace?

Yeah. Usually we have some place for an electric barbecue.

Perfect.

Popular.

Okay. Okay. Um, are you, I know it's discretionary, but I can still ask, um, were you planning to take it to the San Juan architecture review board? Any part of this project there, their comments would be just as optional and discretionary, but they're very familiar with our objective design standards as well as, um, Every applicant that's gone through there appreciates the essentially free feedback. So I don't know if you had planned to, but if you weren't, I'll just make the comment. I think you should.

Thank you for the comment. We haven't considered it yet.

Okay, great. Okay. Any other questions before we go to public comment? You have some questions.

On the affordable housing, there are like 13 studios, eight one and two bedroom, 12 three bedroom. So how much... In total?

There's 45 units in total.

Okay. So 13, somehow I only count 41. So maybe I'm missing something.

Wait, I'm doing the math. I might have done our math wrong. What are you counting? 43? 41. 41. We'll get back to you on it. Yeah.

Maybe there is some space that you guys allotted to... We probably just did.

It was probably a typo.

Or maybe... Yeah.

Okay.

And just one final question. So you mentioned that there will be a manager's unit for sure.

Yes.

Okay. So... And I also remember you guys talked about the computer room, the bike storage, and the mailbox. And you guys were very diligent in going through all of the stuff last meeting. So I really appreciate that and looked at it. From a city council perspective, they always want to have affordable housing that is for sale also. We had this comment last time also. I'll just add, if there is any opportunity to have for sale affordable housing, that would be appreciated by the city council as well. So kindly take it up.

Thank you for the comment. And for clarification, the two bedrooms, there are actually two separate two-bedroom units, and that's where the miscommunication came in. One is 892 square feet. There are four of those. And one is 888 square feet, and there are eight of those. So there are a total of 12 two-bedrooms. Apologies for that.

Of course.

I'll just ask one more. So the... Three-floor fur sale is, there are only two types. And on an average, what is the parking allocated? And this is also, the following question would also be to the staff saying that, have they asked for any parking waivers or concessions associated with the project? Please go ahead. Like on an average, what would be for average parking space for the...

So currently each for sale townhome has its own two within the unit. So side by side for all of Olive. And then Oak has the smallest plan as a tandem garage configuration. So still two garage units within... garage spaces within the unit. And then there are several throughout the site. We'll look for additional opportunities as we firm up our utility plans to add in additional parking spaces around the site. As it is right now, we'd like to leave ourselves that flexibility as the plan comes together.

Yeah. And I understand at a minimum, there will be two for the first sale and the guest parking, you guys would look into that? Correct. Awesome. That's all I had.

So I'm trying to get a feel for the three different styles that will be within the same project. So you have the oaks, which look like a lot of very square roof lines as I'm flipping your pages. So this is what I'm referring to.

Should I have So good representation is here with olive on the left, the blue, oak on the right with the white. And again, there'll be different elevations and color palettes for each that are also in the planning submittal. And then this is a good representation of all three product types. So the affordable building is on the far left. Yeah.

Okay. So that is different than the graphic that you have as part of the, at least it seems like in the presentation. I think that most of the projects we've seen have tried to include the pitched roofs, something that looks more along what people expect, you know, the childlike drawing of a house, which is the pitched roof and then the rectangular building underneath it and not so much just the flat roof kind of visual look. So I'm happy to see that that looks more, I think, what people like to see. as we're building more and more units in the city. Thank you.

Thank you.

I will second the opinion of Chair Alpert. You guys should look at architectural mode. They are wealth of information and it's time well spent with it. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, why don't we go ahead and open public comment at this time. Do we have any written communications or speaker cards?

I don't have any written communication or speaker cards for this item.

Okay, we'll go ahead and close public comment. And again, we'll provide feedback to staff on the map request, as well as any other feedback to the applicant, you know, knowing our limits and constraints on the project. So do you have some feedback?

No, I mean, I think we are somewhat limited in what we can provide you for feedback other than what we know people in San Ramon, at least current residents, like the look of. We appreciate green spaces and parks as best we can and things that make a neighborhood enjoyable and build community. So that's really good. I regret that it was difficult to see where it's going to be connecting to the to the next housing. But I will trust that our staff and you guys is creating a thoroughfare that is both safe and usable. I do want to say, and this is not necessarily to you, but just so more or less for the record, that as we are increasingly having standalone affordable buildings, which seems to be a development type that can get made and can get used, that we also remember that as we're identifying shopping sites and places for restaurants and so forth, that we need to also be cognizant, and not just you, but us as a city, to remember to have businesses and entities that are also affordable for that growing population in this area. And while the... The city center is there. Maybe that's just a very special occasion. But if it's Wednesday night and you have to get to the school program at 7 o'clock and you need a couple of burgers, that those are an important product in our area as well. having done both of those in my parenting history here. So remember, we like to also, I like this works out very close to the Crocanian Commons where there's a variety of products in there. And we continue to make that accessible to our affordable population that we hope to encourage to be part of who we are in San Ramon. So thank you.

As well as Magnolia, right on the other side of the road. Hop, skip, and I jump over to the Starbucks and Fat Maddie's.

So well said, like we were looking for some, we didn't want to go to there. city center and we couldn't find anything affordable that would be a good point but besides that uh the questions directly pertaining to the project would be what are the timelines that you guys are looking is it in cohesion with the for sale apartments the affordable housing will be built on what timelines that would be my first question second thing is uh When you guys come back, probably this is not the right time. When you guys have the plans solidified, I would really like to take a closer look at the buildings and the other details within the streets and association with Annabelle Lane, as we spoke about, and walking around. amenities for the residents and park details as well. And of course you will, you'll look at the stormwater and all these things engineering wise. Uh, we would like to look at a closer map as we have received from other developments as well. So that would be the priority first time when you guys come back for the first meeting, that would be helpful. And, uh, for the staff would be like, uh, I know this is, uh, Like a ministerial approval? And which part of this would the planning commission have any say or... details associated with it, what would be the waivers. And of course, once it's ministerial, there will be a lot of other points that you guys will go through without the approval of the Planning Commission. You don't have to come back. And please let us know what those are. That would be really helpful for the public as well.

So the vesting tentative map is the only thing that will return to the Planning Commission. The demolition of the existing offices, the construction of the affordable apartment complex, and the construction of all the townhomes in the park will all be reviewed at the ministerial level. So that will be reviewed by staff. That will not come back to the Planning Commission. Okay.

Good. It is good from a timelines perspective, and we all are hoping that, but we would really like, I know it's ministerial, but for the one time that you guys come back to the planning commission, it would be helpful to get a detailed information and get public's feedback as well for the drawings and the maps in detail. I know these are high level.

So just to clarify, so there's no obligation to have another public hearing on the project. So I would suggest that if there's feedback that we wish to provide to the applicant to consider that we provide it tonight, and that would be the feedback that would be given in public, you know, but not necessarily to, you know, anticipate or expect a follow-on planning commission meeting. So, yeah. if you want to give some thought. But I think tonight is the night to give feedback. There's not likely to be another public hearing for the reasons that was explained to us about state law. And something not mentioned is having additional reviews that the state deems superfluous is not a good thing for the city to insist or mandate. have to be very careful to ask for additional hearings.

That's the reason I said if and when you guys come back.

Okay, so I think the real point, my real point here is tonight's the night to give feedback. Yeah.

That's correct.

You want to think about it?

Yeah, go ahead first.

I do have some feedback to suggest here. First of all, I think it's a good infill project. I think it's a great place, a great location for all the reasons you provided there. And I think you know this. I think that internal circulation, Annabelle Lane is probably the most important part of the project. It really is. It's going to be extremely important for the residents that live there to get to the school, to Iron Horse Trail, the ones across the way to get to shopping. So to truly give a lot of thought to things like bicycles and pedestrians and sidewalks and traffic calming, you know, as people go through from one street to the other, from public road to private road that's kind of winding through the neighborhood to public again. Really give that some serious thought, you know, because I can just envision those in your development will be using that access to get to the middle school over on El Costa. And depending on where the school district decides to send the elementary kids, you're going to be going through to that side or they're going to be coming through your side. So just really give that some thought on how that works. And I know staff also will be working on that as well. The boundaries currently show golden view. So they'll be going. Yeah. That could change, but that means that the Annabelle Lane project will be going through your project. Obviously. Yes. Okay. Um, The park and home space, like other comments, I think it's a great amenity. One thing I would suggest that you may consider, because like in the apartment complex, someplace for barbecue and community gatherings, it wasn't obvious. The tot lot and the tables and the shade structure are perfect, but I don't know that there's a easy, nice way to have barbecues on the for sale units. It wasn't clear to me if there were balconies that would support a barbecue or not, but just think about that on there. The noise in the sound wall. Thank you for thinking about that without making a big struggle. Think about the landscaping in front of it because a long blank concrete wall isn't very attractive you know what might be attractive to somebody that likes to spray paint stuff but i think planting would be great you know so it gives that you know um i know the gates folks are great so they'll you know they will provide some excellent feedback you know um i think Architecture, similar to Commissioner Kuznick, I think the for sale units look great. I like the look of them. I like the mix of colors and materials and it's residential, it feels that way. The five story or rental project, I feel actually could benefit from some architecture assistance and I'm not an architect. So my comments are just very naive, but it reads in my mind a little bit too commercial and more like a hotel than a residential complex. And I think without a lot of expense, because I know that's always an issue with affordable projects, the choice of colors and building side materials, things like that, similar to what you're doing on the for sale project, I think would go a long way to helping to improve just the use of color. The long white light cream just feels kind of jarring to me in the same place. Consider adding some different material to that building a little bit. I think it would make a difference in that project quite a bit. And I think those are my comments, but I'll just make one more pitch. And I know it's completely optional, and you have fabulous architects as well, that the architecture review board on the city, they're volunteers as well. And they've, every time they provided, you know, a lot of great feedback, something to consider, you know, if it works into your schedule and your timeline. And I think that wraps up my comments. And so to the left to see if you have any other comments that you'd like to share tonight, you know, because again, this is speak now or forever hold your peace here. Was there anything else?

Just briefly, as I'm looking through the plans and listening to fellow commissioners, just be cognizant that if the apartment building has ground level parking, that there might require them being afforded a parking sticker that gives them primary access because we... We have experienced the idea that, well, two-car garage sounds good. It really fits everybody's needs, and then there's the hunt for someplace to put that car. The other part might be we have also offered the opinion that sometimes it's worthwhile to pursue perhaps a shared parking agreement with – there is still one more office building – that will be close to this, that will be occupied in the daytime, that perhaps they would be amenable to allowing residents to use that parking in the evening with some parking permitting and an income stream for that privilege. So just some thoughts that we have offered to other projects as we've seen them related to that. So I hope that is helpful. Thank you. That's helpful.

So I'll add a few more things. Of course, you guys have put together instead of separate places for the parks and you have combined all of them to have a good common space. Can I ask how much would that area be? What's the square footage or acreage?

I believe it's around 8,000 square feet, not inclusive of the sidewalks. And I can double check that number for you, but it was in our letter.

Okay. And the next thing would be, are there any bike lanes that you guys have separated on the streets so that it becomes easier for all the people who are using bikes? And have the homes or the affordable homes housing being allocated EV charging spots because that would be the next thing in next five to 10 years. Those would be the priority parking spots that would be looked or that would be wanted by many residents. So I would say kindly have that criteria in mind. And EV bike lanes, park, I think that's all from my side. Thank you.

Thank you. So the last thing we were asked to do, we haven't mentioned it once, we'd either talk about the building than anything else, was anything on the vesting tentative map. Any guidance questions or we have nothing?

Okay, nothing.

I think we're good on the vesting tentative map, so that's fine there. Any other feedback you're looking for tonight from us? No. Anything, any questions? Follow-up feedback you would like from us tonight.

No, I appreciate all the comments.

Okay, well, thank you for coming out tonight. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And best of luck.

Thank you.

Okay, our next item is our item 8.2. It is our annual year in review. Every year about this time, we get an update from staff on all of the work that we did over the past 12 months. And tonight, Lucas has the great pleasure of doing that for us. So welcome.

Well, thank you very much. Chopper and commissioners Lucas house assistant planner city of San Ramon. I have the great honor tonight to as staff has done continuously throughout the years provide you with a opportunity to recognize some of the work that you've done throughout this year, especially this chair rotation with chair Albert at the helm. Can we get the screen change please. This first section will cover the approved projects from approximately July 1st, 2025 to June 30th of 2026. In August of 2025, the Planning Commission approved the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments. In October 2025, for background, the Council had approved the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments to implement some changes from the Zoning Ordinance consistent with general plan. Excuse me. General Plan 2040 and the 2023 to 2031 housing element. The amendments that were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission clarified and broadened standards and procedures of various land use regulations and day-to-day usability of the zoning ordinance. Briefly following that, in August of 2025, the Planning Commission approved the new marketplace murals, a replacement of the public art pieces. The construction status is these pieces have been completed and can be viewed today. It was referenced just a moment ago. This is the Pepper Grove, formerly Bishop Branch 12 development project. This was approved by the Planning Commission in November of 2025 and approved the development applications for a 3.57 acre site, a portion of Bishop Branch 12 at 2 Annabelle Lane. The project that you approved would demolish the existing office building and construct 64 multifamily townhome units. The current status of that project, if you've driven by it on 680, the demolition is underway and grading plans are under review with construction to be determined. On the same night, the Planning Commission approved canopy of the Bishop Ranch 8 site in November of 2025 as well. This approved the development applications for a 27-acre site at Bishop Ranch 8 at 3000 Executive Parkway. The project consists of demolishing the existing office buildings and constructing 416 housing units. 161 of those will be multifamily, 255 of those would be single-family. For this, the grading permits are currently under review and the construction is to be determined. In February of 2026, the Planning Commission approved the Orchard Master Plan at 6001 Bollinger Canyon Road. The Orchard Master Plan comprised of three districts totaling up to approximately 2,452 units. and 58 optional ADUs. The project will demolish the existing office buildings to construct three districts, neighborhood, multifamily, and mixed-use districts. The neighborhood district was included in your approvals, and the multifamily and mixed-use district applications in the future are to be determined. Just as you do every year in March of 2026, the Planning Commission heard from our Associate Planner Annalisa, the General Plan Annual Report, the 2025 General Plan Implementation Status Report, as well as the 2025 Housing Element APR. And lastly, for this category, in March, the Planning Commission approved a major subdivision for commercial condominiums at 200 and 210 Porter Drive. This was a one-lot subdivision of a 3.72-acre parcel to allow up to 53 individual airspace condominium units. The final map for that is still currently under review. We'll move forward now to some projects that you've reviewed in the past that are currently under construction. The first of which is City Village at Bishop Branch 6. Again, 404 total units. Planning Commission approved this back in November of 2021. It began construction in January of 2022. And to date, the Planning Department, the Community Development Department has issued 66% of building permits. Up next is just next door to us, the Avalon Bay Apartments was part of the City Walk Master Plan approvals in Bishop Ranch 3A, will be comprised of the 457 units within the two buildings and 11,400 square feet of leasing and amenities. The Planning Commission approved this in June of 2024. And then recently in this past year, in October of 2025, the Planning Commission approved revisions to the project to allow the satisfaction of the affordable housing obligation by transferring through land dedication. Construction is currently underway next door. Next is Bartlett BR7 development. This was approved by the Planning Commission in December of 2024 and approved the development applications for our 12.6 acre site at Bishop Branch 7. The demolition of the existing office buildings will commence and construct 190 housing units, 118 multifamily, 72 single family. Similar to Avalon Bay, the Planning Commission in November of 2025 approved revisions allowing the project to satisfy their affordable housing obligations by transferring that obligation through land dedication. Demolition has been completed and construction is currently underway for this project. Bless you. Repeating, similarly, this is Bishop Branch 11 residential development that was approved by the Planning Commission in March of 2025. The approved development applications were for an 11.1 acre site at Bishop Branch 11, 2301 Camino Ramon. It will demolish the existing office buildings, construct 195 total units, 128 multifamily, and 67 single family. And once again, in October of 2025, the Planning Commission approved revisions to allow the project to satisfy the affordable housing obligation by transferring the obligation through land dedication. In the same manner as Bishop Branch 7, Bishop Branch 11 is currently under construction with demolition being completed. This is an older one, recently renamed. This is the former TTLC townhomes now called Aria at 500 DeWood Road. This was approved for 57 for sale multifamily units. The final map has been approved. Agency permits are in process and the construction status is currently underway. The picture on the right is a view from the adjacent Cortese building where they've constructed their new retaining wall. It was a little hard to get a picture of this one, so I apologize. This is the Iron Horse Village Development, a 9.5 acre project site that will demolish the existing office buildings to develop 117 housing units, a mix of 86 detached, 31 attached, and 8 live work units. This was approved by city council on a call for review in December of 2023 this construction is currently underway and to date 41 43% of units issued a building permit. Another older one, this is 2481 Deerwood Drive, now called Deerwood Heights. This was approved by the Planning Commission in April of 2023 for a 61-unit townhome development on a 4.4-acre parcel. It also required the general plan amendment and rezoning approved to change the office use to residential and open space designations. Construction for this project is also currently underway. Again, this angle just demonstrates the large retaining wall that was to separate the residential from the open space. Now we're moving on to some projects that are currently under review with the Planning Division. Woodside Canyon at 18 Crow Canyon Court was approved by the Planning Commission in January of 2025 for a 2.9 acre site. It will demolish the existing office buildings and construct 54 multifamily housing units. Demolition for this was completed just last month and the building permits are currently under review with construction to be determined. The Camino Ramon Apartments or Eden Housing was approved by the Planning Commission in June of 2025 for a 2.2-acre site at the Bishop Ranch Service Center, 2453 Camino Ramon. This project will demolish the existing service center and construct 200 rental apartments, 198 affordable units, and two manager units. Building permits for this are currently under review by staff and construction is to be determined. Moving on to some projects that are a little bit further out in the pipeline. This is Bella Village, the Morgan's Masonry site at 2233 Cinnamon Valley Boulevard. In May of 2024, the zoning administrator approved a use-by-right, 131-unit, 100% affordable multifamily residential project. This construction is to be determined. Next is the marketplace mixed-use development, which will be demolishing 55,600 square feet of existing commercial spaces to construct 40 single-family detached condominium units and four JEDUs. It will also renovate approximately 1,800-square-foot eating and drinking establishment Starbucks next door. This was approved by the City Council on appeal in March of 2023, and the Planning Commission approved a vesting tentative map extension in December of 2025. This currently still has ongoing litigation and construction is to be determined. Next, we have the CityWalk BR1A apartments at 6131 Bollinger Canyon Road. This was approved by the Planning Commission all the way back in September of 2022 for a 383 multifamily residential development project and is located within the BR1A neighborhood of the CityWalk Master Plan. Construction for this project is also to be determined. We also have the El Nido Assisted Living Project at 19251 San Juan Valley Boulevard. It was approved by the Planning Commission in November of 2022 for a 72-bed residential care facility on a 0.7-acre parcel. The construction status for this is that there are building permits in plan check and construction is to be determined. And lastly, we have the City Center Hotel at the southeast corner of Camino Ramon and Bishop Drive, which was approved in July of 2020 for a 169-key hotel and a shared collective parking. Construction for this is still to be determined. That recaps our past year and past years with some other projects. So it's been a pleasure working with you all. And if there's any questions on any of these projects from the past year, we are happy to discuss.

Thanks, Lucas. I do have one quick question. I'm glad that you got recent pictures. I see that you took like a week or a couple of weeks ago.

Some as recent as yesterday. I see that. Awesome. Wanted to capture the most recent up to date for as many as we could. Okay.

That's wonderful. So for Canopy BR8, was there...

grading plans under review so is there any demo that needs to be completed in there they have not begun demolition yet no there is a fence up around the property but there's no demolition that has commenced and demolition permits would have to be reviewed by staff okay would would that be so demo would come before the grading right correct we would encompass all that under the grading permit reviews so a lot of these would be done concurrently okay that's the reason probably that's my clarity i need it and uh br7 demo is complete i guess and uh

Just one more that I was looking at the Eden housing project, one at the Bishop Ranch Service Center. Has there been any progress made or is it still timidly?

I can answer that one. That one's currently assigned to me. The applicants have filed for building permits. So they're actually currently in plan check review, which then leads them into once they're successful with their building permit to be able to commence construction.

So demo has to be done, right?

Correct, right. Demo, site development, including grading, utility, infrastructure.

So they haven't touched the site yet.

No, applicants typically will file concurrent applications for building permit review and site development. Sometimes one may be more complicated than the other and so they need a longer lead time for that. Along with, typically with affordable housing projects, oftentimes the funding that they're seeking from the state or for tax credits requires that projects be shovel ready within a certain period of time. And so leading up to the granting of those affordable housing dollars, the applicant likes to set themselves up with having building permits review already completed so that they can demonstrate that they're shovel ready.

So basically they are ready for demo and grading. Fair enough. Thanks for the clarity. Thanks, Cindy. That's all I have.

Thanks, Lucas.

We had an open public comment. Do we have any written communication or speaker cards?

No speaker cards this evening, but we did receive public comment from Brian Swanson. Just to clarify, all public comment was posted to the website. A copy on the dais for the commission provided the commission prior to the meeting, and it's in the red binder at the back of the room.

Great. Thank you. Okay. So this is just an accepted. I will add just one thing. Deerwood, the second Deerwood, you know, their model homes opened two weeks ago. So, you know. If you want to see what it looks like in real life, you know, they're right there. They did a nice job decorating them. And if you were there the first weekend, they were giving free food because they were demonstrating all of the electric appliances in there. So sorry you missed that. But, you know, they're very nice. They are there. Okay. So there's no action needed on the commission on this one tonight. Thank you, Lucas, for the year in review. It's always fun to see what we worked on. As we're doing it, it's hard to remember what we worked on. So this was very nice.

And can't believe that we have accomplished so much in one year. Yes.

Okay. We can go ahead and move on to the next item. Any liaison reports?

I did review the last Parks Commission. They meet again tomorrow. And the bulk of the meeting was dedicated to reviewing and approving a scoreboard for for the baseball field at Athens Downs Parks. And a lot of care was put into how that will be positioned and the sight lines and so forth. And one of the things I thought was really interesting is that with the presence of a scoreboard that allows the field to be attractive to little league tournaments and greater competitions, which I think then dot, dot, dot means money into the city.

um we're happy to see that and i think everybody will be happy um as well do you have any liaison reports um so um one thing tomorrow night this the parks commission is going to discuss changing their starting time from 7 p.m so we were a trendsetter in this group the city council also voted You know, and their change is more complicated. It takes a municipal code update, but they're going to start at 630. So we can probably say that we set the trail. One thing I'd also say that I did attend a workshop that the city council held. It was really trying to prepare them to get ready to begin Zoom participation on meetings. And they will start that in our next meeting. It's my understanding that the commissions will follow suit, assuming that the city council gets through their first meeting or two successfully. Then we'll also be allowing people to, basically means that you can participate. If you think back to COVID days, it would be very similar to that. So something to be looking forward to, having Zoom participation in the not too distant future. With that, I'll turn to Cindy. And do we have any staff up on us?

Okay. Well, typically at this time, I would go over a list of items that we're going to review on July 21st, but we have no items pending for July 21st. And so at this point, it's safe to say that we'll be sending out a cancellation for that meeting. We do anticipate that the Commission will meet in August. We just don't have items tentatively set for that meeting. But the expectation at our next meeting is that we will be, as we typically do with the closing of each year, be electing a new chair and vice chair, as well as going over liaison assignments to confirm the commissioner's liaison assignments. So keep that in mind as we move into August is, you know, if there's a liaison assignment that you're interested in trading or getting assigned to, to keep that in mind.

Okay. And I know the city council is still working on a process to recruit a new commissioner. So maybe by August we'll have the fifth member, but you know, at the moment they're still, it's still in their hands. Yeah.

Cindy, I should have asked this earlier, but I'm sorry, it was a little slow on the uptake. The Toyota property, there was a public notice about some work they were going to do, and then that was rescinded. So is there anything you can update us on what they want to do?

Sure. So there was a notice of a public hearing for the zoning administrator that was scheduled for the Toyota modifications. The applicant has since asked to put a hold on the review as they continue to make modifications to their project. And so until the applicant resubmits, that project is on hold.

Okay. If there are no other questions or comments for tonight, we'll go ahead.