Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Let's try it one more time. Good evening and welcome to the June 16th, 2026 meeting of the City of Vista Planning Commission. I call this meeting to order. Would you please rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Redding. Thank you, Commissioner. Ms. Loomis, roll call, please.

Chair DeJesus?

Here.

Commissioner Grimm?

Here.

Commissioner Jolliffe?

Here.

Commissioner Redding?

Here.

Commissioner Simmons? Absent. Vice Chair Martin?

Here. Thank you.

Commissioner Thompson. Here. Student Commissioner Nguyen. Absent. Student Commissioner Parrish.

Thank you. Commissioners, you've been provided with the minutes from our June 2, 2026 meeting. If there are no changes, can we hear a motion to approve?

I will make a motion.

Commissioner Martin.

I'll second that motion.

So we've got a move by Commissioner Jolliffe and a second by Commissioner Martin. All those in favor, cast your vote and please lock it. Do we have everybody's vote locked?

If everyone locked, yeah, it's not showing up on the screen. I'm sorry. Can we have a hand vote, please? All those in favor? And it looks like it's unanimous. Yeah.

Thank you. The minutes have been approved unanimously with the commissioners present. Ms. Chau, are there any changes to tonight's agenda?

No changes tonight, Chair de Jesus. Thank you so much. You're welcome.

The next item on the agenda is oral communications. This is the time Commission sets aside for members of the public to address the Commission on items that are not on our agenda. If there are no speaker slips, thank you. I do not have any speaker slips, and if you do want to address the Commission tonight, you will need to fill out a speaker slip for any of the items. Are there any ex parte disclosures, communications from commissioners? Okay, seeing none, we will move on to our next item, the public hearing. Public hearing number one is PH26-0027, Small Animal Clinic. And we're ready for staff's presentation, please.

Thank you, Chair DeJesu's, Planning Commissioners, Patsy Chow, I'm the Assistant Director of Community Development. I'm here this evening to present to you the Special Use Permit P260027, which is a request for a small animal clinic to be located at 1310 East Vista Way, Suite B. So this particular project, special use permit request to allow for the operation of a small animal clinic to be located again at 1310 East Vista Way, Suite B. Basically, tenant improvements being proposed within a 1700 approximately square foot commercial tenant space. The proposed hours of operation for this particular clinic are to be from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday. However, the applicant has requested for the conditions of approval to actually reflect 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Sunday in case there's actually a need to modify by one hour earlier in the morning or in the evening. because otherwise the applicant will have to come back here before the planning commission for changing the hours of operation. So we thought it would be prudent at this point to actually include that to maximize the opportunity to change the hours if needed. But right now, the beginning of the operations of the small unit clinic, assuming that it is approved tonight, would be Monday through Saturday, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. There'll be a total of five employees, one licensed veterinarian, Dr. Sun Hu, there'll be one receptionist, along with two to three vet technicians. There's no 24-hour consideration for operations 24 hours being proposed as part of the operations, no outdoor uses as well. And a particular example of daily caseload, it could include basically outpatient appointments, including examinations, vaccinations, surgeries, dentistry, and pharmacy services. So the particular site as shown on this slide, the project site is within a C1 zone and the general plan land use designation for this site is neighborhood commercial CN. The project right now is located within the Vista Terrace marketplace, it's commercial development. And in this particular site where the clinic is being proposed, there is one drive-through restaurant's donor shop next door. And the location where this is being proposed used to be basically an AT&T store. To the north, further to the north, you also will find Sprouts Market. There, across the street, there's Albertson Shopping Center. And to the west, there's the residential mobile states, Vista Large mobile states residential project. So as far as existing conditions on the site, there are 40 parking spaces that are actually serving this particular building. Again, there are two tenants, the Donut Shop next door and the proposed tenant space to be occupied by the Small Animal Clinic. So in terms of parking, as far as required spaces, nine spaces would be required for each use. So we're talking 18 spaces where 40, spaces are currently provided so well over what's required is actually provided at the site to accommodate these particular uses. The floor plan, as you can see on this slide, I know it's kind of small, but basically there's the main entry area, reception area, exam rooms, the dog holding areas for when there's examinations or surgeries and whatnot. Obviously there's a place for x-ray machines, bathroom facilities, and everything that's needed to accommodate the small animal clinic operations within the footprint of this floor plan. So the small animal clinic is allowed in the C1 zone, subject to issuance of a special use permit, and primary consideration for approval of the SUP is actually compatibility of this proposed small animal clinic with surrounding land uses. The way that it's being proposed right now at this location, sorry about that, I don't know what happened here. Let me try to get the PowerPoint back in here. Okay, here we go. Basically compatibility of the proposed project with surrounding land uses and the way that it is being proposed is permitted in the applicable C1 zone as stated already via a special use permit and the use will conform to applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan land use designation, CN, as previously stated. And pretty much the staff's recommendation at this point is for the Planning Commission to adopt the resolution that's approving the special use permit for establishing the small animal clinic at 1310 East Vista Way, Suite B, This concludes my presentation. Dr. Sanhu, the applicant for this small animal clinic, is in the audience. He filled out a speaker slip. He's here really more for questions. He does not have a formal presentation at this time. But I am available for any questions the Planning Commission may have. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We appreciate that. Are there any questions from staff from the commissioners? Okay, thank you. I got the clearing on the housekeeping here. If we have any questions, we have Commissioner Jal, if you have questions for staff.

I do, thank you. This is about the use permit, correct? And not about the building itself.

It is a special use permit consideration for the small animal clinic, correct.

Okay, thank you.

So I will now open our public hearing, but I don't have any speaker slips for this particular one. If anybody would like to speak on this. Seeing no one jumping forward, the public hearing then is closed. I am opening commissioner discussion if there is any. As Ms. Chau said, if the applicant is here, if we have questions, does anybody have questions for the applicant?

It's okay if you don't.

Okay, great. If there is no more discussion, we can move to a motion. Commissioner Thompson Thank You Commissioner Graham I'll second that motion to approve staff recommendations

I just want to jump in here, Assistant City Attorney Amanda Guy. There was a request from the applicant to amend the hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. So if the commission wishes to add that, make sure that the motion includes that amended condition. Thank you.

Just the clarification that is actually included in the conditions of approval already. Yeah. So that would probably be redundant at that point, unless Amanda decides that that's a requirement.

It would be, sorry. My impression from the presentation was that it was being added. So no need to add it to the motion.

Thank you. So we have a motion from Commissioner Thompson and a second from Commissioner Grimm to approve the item as written. Can I get a, we'll go ahead and take a vote. Let's see if it works this time. I don't have anything coming up on mine. Blue, I think.

Were you able to lock it in?

Mine's not even showing up.

OK, let me cancel that and do it one more time.

Technical difficulties, but we're OK. OK, thank you.

Is it on your screen now?

I came up this time. I think we're all locked in.

Okay, we'll just give it a second here and hopefully it will show up. If not, then maybe I need to press a button here that will allow us to see it.

Okay, here we go. And the motion passes unanimously. Thank you. So we'll move on to our next agenda item, public hearing number two, and that is the P25-0159 residential care facility. Can we have the staff presentation, please?

Just give me one moment to put the presentation up. Certainly. Thank you. There you go, thank you.

All right, yeah, okay. Good evening, the public hearing number two today is a special use permit amendment for an expansion of a residential care facility located at 682 Valeview Drive, planning case number P25-0159. So a little bit about the project site. This is a 1.32 acre parcel located south of Bellevue Drive and is currently developed with an existing 2,540 square foot residential care home. Site exit is from Valeview Drive and the site slopes upward approximately 34 feet from the lowest point at the front of the property to the rear. And the project site is surrounded by single family residential from all directions. The general plan land use destination for the project site is low density residential, and the zoning of the project site is E1 zone, which stands for estates residential. A little history about the facility. This residential care facility started operation in 2019 for up to six persons. And residential care facilities for six or less persons is a permitted use by right in the E1 zones. So they could just do it without any discretionary planning permit. They can just get the state license and start operating. And in 2021, the Planning Commission approved a special use permit to allow for capacity from six to eight persons per Planning Commission Resolution Number 2021-12. And the proposed project today is a request for an amendment to the previously approved specials permit as mentioned to increase the capacity from eight beds to 16 beds for a residential care facility for the elderly. Improvements include construction of a 2,800 square foot expansion to the existing residential structure for a total of 5,340 square feet and 12 bedrooms. The expansion includes seven bedrooms, two shared ADA bathrooms, two private bathrooms, a living room, a wet bar storage room, and the facility owner's private living space. The existing floor plan will remain five bedrooms, three bedrooms, a dining room, a kitchen, a living room, family room, and a laundry room. A total of about 1,800 square foot of outdoor decked area for open space recreation. The site would have total six parking spaces. Landscaping and driveway are to remain. This is the proposed site plan. The site access is from Fellview Drive. There is a gated long driveway all the way to the building. There are two rows of palm trees along the driveway that will be maintained. The building is located at the rear end of the property. The expansion is to the east of the existing building and the expansion does comply with the E1 setback requirements. This is the existing floor plan, including a living room, dining room, kitchen, five bedrooms, three bedrooms, and a family room. This is the proposed floor plans. Proposed addition includes a new hallway and entrance, 592 square foot living room, seven bedrooms, two shared ADA bathrooms, two private bathrooms, and owner's living space and a storage room. These are the elevation drawings of the addition. The height of the addition is about 17 feet from the average grade and the architectural design is consistent with a characteristics of a single-family home. This is the perspective view of the entire proposed facility. The project is consistent with the general plan because the existing use of the subject property is residential in nature, providing living accommodation for elderly members of the community or for those with cognitive impairment. The patients are provided with 24-hour custodial care and transportation is provided for medical or doctor's visits. The project architectural design is consistent with characteristics of a single family home. Surrounding properties have the same zoning, which is E1, and much of the surrounding community is developed with single family homes. General plan conformance, this special use permit amendment will not adversely affect the general plan for low density residential, which requires large lot resident, single family residences. Furthermore, the general plans allow for residential land uses such as residential care facilities, which conform to the surrounding neighborhood. Development Code findings concerning the project must be made in conformance with Section 1874-120 for special use permits and 1858-100 for residential care homes, including location criteria, open space, unit size, fire safety standards, landscaping, screening, and signs of the VISTA Development Code. Staff has included the required finding in the resolution. Environmental review, the project is exempt under state CEQA guidelines, section 15301, existing facility, which applies to minor alteration of existing facilities that involve negligible or no suspension of use such as additions to existing structures provide that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 square feet if the project is in an area where all public service and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive. The proposed project is a minor alteration of an existing facility with negligible expansion of use and is limited to 2,800 square foot addition of eight additional beds. Available public utilities and facilities allow for the maximum development allowed under the general plan and it is not located in an environmentally sensitive area. Therefore, staff recommendation is to adopt Resolution 2026, granting an amendment to a previously approved special use permit, which is P21-0060, to allow for the construction of a 2,800 square foot building addition to increase the capacity from 8 beds to 16 beds for a residential care facility for the elderly located at 682 Bellevue Drive. And that concludes staff presentation. The applicant, Mr. Lazares is here and I am here available for any question.

Thank you so much. Are there any questions for staff from the commissioners? Commissioner Grimm.

Yes, the project has, I guess, been operating for about six years now. Has there been any issues at all with the neighbors over that period of time?

Per my understanding, there's no major complaints about the operation, but the applicant can provide any additional information on that, yeah. Thank you.

Any other questions? I will now open our public hearing. We have a speaker slip for Mr. McGraw, Glenn McGraw. Right here, please. If you don't mind speaking into the microphone, that would be great.

Okay.

My name's Glenn McGraw, and I'm a retired engineer. And I've been to a lot of planning meetings over my lifetime, but never in Vista. And nice to meet all of you. Anyway, the reason I'm here tonight is my mother is a resident at the facility. She has been for five years. And we're very happy with the facility. It's super quiet, peaceful, great neighborhood. The staff there is wonderful to my mother. We go twice a week, so I've literally been there over 500 times. And... It's a wonderful place, and there's no reason that more people shouldn't be able to take advantage of it. It's really been great for us. It's met all our needs. I reviewed the plans. I used to be a plan check consultant for San Juan Capistrano. So for fun, I just looked over the plans, and they look substantially in compliance. And I think the new plan will benefit the community. So that covers it. Any questions for me?

Thank you, sir.

OK.

If there is no one else wishing to speak that would need to fill out a speaker slip, did you fill out a speaker slip? If you'd like to speak, you can fill out a speaker slip, sir. We'd be happy to hear you. You can speak first and fill out the form after if that makes it easier. Thank you. And if you don't mind stating your name when you come up to the microphone.

Sure. My name is Rick Fellows. I live directly behind 682.

If you don't mind, in the microphone, because we can capture everything. Thank you so much. How's that?

It's perfect. OK. Anyway, my name is Rick Fellows. I live at 842 Dale View, directly, I guess, behind the address here. I've lived there for over 30 years, and when more horses were on the property than people, I understand things change. I was here in 2021 when they went from six to eight beds, and I was told by Aaron that that was going to be it. Well, now I see that it's going to double to 16. Again, I understand things change, but then two years, does this make it 24? Does it make it 36? I don't know. I mean, it doesn't seem to have a whole rhyme or reason. I understand that we need facilities like that, but I just can't see expanding it myself. So anyway, that's kind of it. I just not really, I mean, what they have now is fine. I don't know that it needs to be expanded. Thank you. Oh, you have a question? I don't know.

Well, thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Wonderful. If you don't mind speaking in the microphone, stating your name, and then filling out a form after, that'd be great.

My name is Paula Shalott, and I'm a friend of the Person Dean building. And I worked in a facility of 50, 60 people, and that's what a lot of these facilities hold. It's disgusting. They don't care for these people. These people see four walls. That's all they see. I've been helping out with the landscaping because I need to work. But it's beautiful. You can hear the hawks. You can hear the birds. And I love that. I mean, I'm going to be 70 next year. I mean, it's peaceful. I wouldn't want someone elderly living in a box, literally a box they live in, And some of the rooms, just disgusting. I didn't stay there long. I just had enough, but it's not good. These smaller ones are just more humane, more down to earth, and they feel more homey than they would in those places.

Seriously, bad. That's it. Thank you. If you don't mind filling out a form with Ms. Loomis. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay, thank you. The public hearing is closed, and I'm going to open this up for commissioner discussion. Commissioners? Okay, seeing no discussion, I have something to say. I will say that being a member of this community and also being on the Planning Commission, and many years ago, over forty working in uh... geriatric care It's nice to see a home, in my opinion, that can, especially with the support that it has from the people that are on the record having supported the project and hearing this, it meets all of the zoning requirements to have 16 beds. So they're not, when you think about maybe adding 20 more beds, that's probably not, as long as it's in keeping with the with the zoning and the application for the special use permit is updated or amended, then technically, they're within their rights to do that. But from an emotional point of view, I think it's nice to have an option for our seniors to have a place to be cared for in our community, and I support the expansion of it. Commissioner Martin.

Yeah, I would just like to say that I live about a half a mile from the site. And I frequently, as part of my walking, I walk down the street. And I knew that it was a residential care facility. And I've probably seen no more than two cars there ever. It's very non-impactful. It looks exactly like a residence, as it always has. and they don't create any noise, generate any traffic, and they're doing a good thing for the people that need that assistance. So I support what they're doing. I support the expansion, and I'd like to hear more comments from the other commissioners if you care to, but I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve the project as recommended by staff.

Thank you. Commissioner Jolliffe.

In addition to the people who spoke today, we received a couple letters in support of the facility. And it was touching to see the support, the way that they wrote about the facility and how much it means to them. My mom has now passed, but she was in a facility that was not as nice as this. And it made me think that as I grow older, I would like that to be an option. So I don't know if there's any other comments, but I would second the motion.

Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve the project. Please cast your vote and lock it in. The motion passes unanimously with commissioners present. And with that, we can, first of all, thank you so much, Stacey. That was a great presentation. And we can move on to reports. Any commissioner reports or? Oh, we have one more item?

So sorry.

I am so sorry. I was gonna end the meeting and we're not done. I apologize. Thank you, Commissioner Martin. Thank God you're sitting next to me. I don't know why I didn't know that. Okay, move on to our next public hearing number three. My apologies, P24-0164, 552 West Beaubier Drive Project. And we can have the staff report, please.

Thank you, Chairman and Commissioners. Chris Winters reporting on this project. This is public hearing item three for the Beaubier Drive tentative subdivision map. It is planning case file P240164. This slide shows the project site and surrounding existing land uses. The site is 1.67 acres in size. It is accessed from Beaubier Drive and there is approximately 30 feet of elevation change across the site with the highest point near West Beaubier Drive in the central portion of the project area and the lowest point near the southwest corner of the property. Surrounding land uses include apartments to the north, attached homes to the northwest, multifamily units to the west, and single-family residential to the south and east. This slide shows the existing general plan and zoning designations for the property. No changes are proposed to these designations. The project site is medium density residential, which allows up to 10 dwelling units per acre. The existing zoning is R1B residence zone, which is basically for single family residential and ancillary uses. For the project summary, it is a tentative subdivision map and site development plan to construct 15 single family attached homes with zero lot lines. 15 homes on 1.67 acres equates to approximately nine units per acres, which is consistent with the general plan. For parking for the residences, the development code requires 45 parking stalls, which is two and a half stalls per unit, plus 0.5 guest stalls for the overall number, 45 required in total. The project is providing 65, which consists of four for each home, two within an enclosed garage, two in the driveway, plus five guest parking stalls, which are located off the internal roadway system. The roadway itself is a private 24-foot-wide roadway that would provide emergency access, provide for two-way traffic. As shown on the site plan, the road access would be connected to West Beaubier Drive at the northeast corner of the project site. The site will also include stormwater basins for capturing and controlling stormwater flow to maintain flows consistent with how the property drains now. And as shown on the slide, there are groupings of homes with zero lot lines, so they're connected wall to wall, although each home is on its own separate lot. As far as landscaping for the site and open space, the code requires a minimum of 15% of the site to be landscaped, which is just under 11,000 square feet. Overall, the project would provide approximately 50% of the site as landscape or open space area. This would include environmentally sensitive area, which would be protected from future development. That's primarily located in the north central portion of the project area. Some of the trees proposed for the site plan include coast live oak, Brisbane, box, desert willow, and so on. The basins would also be landscaped with sages and various grasses. This slide shows the building architecture for the single family homes that are attached at the wall. The side at the top of the image, obviously with the garage door would be facing the internal roadway. And the bottom image on the slide shows the rear of the residence with a small cover over the pedestrian door. The middle picture, so the ends of the buildings essentially. THE ARCHITECTURE WOULD FEATURE A VARIETY OF MATERIALS FROM BOARD AND BATTON SIDING TO WOOD FRAME UNDER THE ROOF AREA, ASPHALT ROOF, SHINGLE TILES AND STONE WORK. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE FIRST FLOOR PLAN WHICH CONSISTS OF THE TWO CAR ENCLOSED GARAGE, LIVING SPACE AND KITCHEN AREA. THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW THE THREE BEDROOMS UPSTAIRS WITH THREE FOLD BATHS AND A LAUNDRY ROOM. Laws applicable to the project, the project has applied Senate Bill SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act, and the Housing Accountability Act, or HAA, which allow for the development of 15 residences consistent with the allowable density under the general plan. Under these laws, the city shall not require rezoning if a housing development project is consistent with the general plan's allowable density. The project site is currently designated by the general plan as medium density residential, which allows for a maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre. The site is zoned R1B residential, which requires a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet. Given the project size of 1.67 acres, the general plan land use designation would allow for a maximum of 16 dwelling units, whereas the R1B zone would allow for a maximum of 12 units. State law requires that the project be allowed to construct 15 residences as proposed by the applicant consistent with the general plan MD land use designation. SB 330 also prohibits local agencies from denying projects that comply with the city's objective standards or conditioning such projects in a manner that reduces their density unless the project would have an adverse impact upon the public health or safety or violate a specific state or federal law. The HAA requires the city to waive development standards, objective development standards, if their application to the project would prevent development of the allowable maximum density on the site as proposed by the housing development project. Therefore, the city would not apply the following R1B zone standards that would prevent physical development at the maximum density as proposed by the project. Minimum side setback is five feet as required on the R1B zone. The project proposes attached units with zero lot lines. Minimum lot size under the R1B zone is 6,000 square feet. The lot size as proposed range from 2,564 to 5,768 square feet. Maximum lot coverage under the R1B zone, which is buildings and the required driveway to the garage access, is 60%. The project proposes lot coverage of up to 77%. Similarly, the HAA requires the city to waive the following subdivision design standards regarding lot area, width, and depth to accommodate the development at the density allowed under the general plan and as proposed by the project. Every lot shall contain the minimum lot area specified in the zoning ordinance for the zone. That's one of the requirements under Title 17 in the city's development code. The project proposes an average lot size of 3,808 square feet instead of the 6,000 square feet required under the zoning. Second, every lot shall be at least 50 feet wide, exclusive of side yards required in the zone. In this case, R1B has five foot side yards, so the lot would have to be 60 feet wide to comply with that. The lot widths range from 26 feet to 52 feet, which is accommodated by using the zero lot lines for attached homes. Lot depth shall be 90 feet and no greater than three times the average width under the subdivision standards. The project proposes that some of the lots have depths of 3.7 to five times their width, which exceeds that ratio. Under general plan consistency, the project would protect community character, it features quality design, and it adds to the city's overall housing type and supply for a variety of income and age groups. Under zoning conformance and objective design standards, The project would be consistent with the R1B development standards for maximum building height, minimum dwelling size, front and rear setbacks, minimum amount of parking stalls, and so on, except for the standards waived per SB 330 and the HAA. The project would comply with the city's objective design standards for the site design, vehicle access, and landscaping. Under environmental review, a mitigated negative declaration was prepared for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA, which determined that the project would not result in any unmitigated significant environmental impacts. The MND was circulated for public review from April 3rd to May 4th, 2026 and no comment letters were received. The project will be required to comply with the mitigation measures that were specified in the MND and included within the project's mitigation monitoring and reporting program. These measures related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, land use planning, and noise are included in the project's conditions of approval. Staff's recommendation is for the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution adopting the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the 552 West Beaubier Drive project, Planning Case P240164, and to adopt a resolution approving the site development, the tentative subdivision map, and site development plan to construct and present one additional point. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Munderson. Thank you for that presentation. Do we want to ask the commissioners first, or do the developers? If the commissioners have any questions of staff, please let me know. No? Okay. Okay.

Chair DeJesus, if I may, the applicant is here, as Chris Winters pointed out. So if Mr. Mike Schweitzer would like to comment. I believe he filled out a speaker slip. Do not. So we can fill one afterwards.

THANK YOU, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THANK YOU, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.

LOOKING FOR. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'D LIKE TO THANK CHRIS FOR I'D LIKE TO THANK CHRIS FOR HELPING SHEPHERD THIS THROUGH HELPING SHEPHERD THIS THROUGH THE CITY. THE CITY. IT'S A GOOD PROCESS. IT'S A GOOD PROCESS. I KNOW THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF I KNOW THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF SOCIAL MEDIA BUZZ ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA BUZZ ABOUT FROG ROCK SO I THINK WE DO HAVE FROG ROCK SO I THINK WE DO HAVE ONE SLIDE THAT WE'D LIKE TO ONE SLIDE THAT WE'D LIKE TO SHOW. SHOW. IT WAS KIND OF ONE OF THE KEY IT WAS KIND OF ONE OF THE KEY POINTS WHEN WE DID THE SITE So the area that's covered in green there is going to be an HOA open space easement. So we are maintaining all the large granite boulders that are on the property. That was kind of one of the key things is we want to keep that kind of that feel of what the property is. I'm more than willing to say if there's a condition that we can add that when the HOA is established, that the HOA is responsible for maintaining the painting of the rock. I think that could become a very good community activity for the residences there. So I appreciate the project coming to the Planning Commission. I think it's going to provide a price point that is in large part missing from the area. Each individual house does have a backyard, a minimum of 24, 25 feet. I think the largest backyard is 57 feet deep. We did our best to offset it from the neighbors. Obviously, next door to us in Oceanside is a 420-unit apartment complex that we are trying to stay a little bit away from, in addition to trying to stay a little bit back from the neighbors. So I appreciate it. I'm here to answer any questions.

Thank you. Can we ask questions of the developer? Do you want to come back? Because we have Commissioner Jolliff would like to ask a question.

Yeah. So I like this open space here, and congratulations for working around that design constraint that was the boulders. I wanted to know if there are any benches or anything there where the residents could

So we did plan on having a small walking path going through there for the residences to be able to kind of experience the boulders and the rocks. We weren't planning on having a bench there, but that's easy enough to put in. Okay.

And this is a tentative subdivision map. Good questions, just early design review. I think that those are gonna, we'll see if we can hold you to that. I'm glad you're on the record for the frog. It was a social media sensation. So thank you for that.

I got to say, I don't have Instagram. One of my employees said, hey, this is going viral. And I actually did end up that same day talking to the individual and kind of walking him through what we were doing and asked him to repost, and he did. So it worked out.

Thank you. Anybody else want to have a question for the gentleman? Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

And with that, if you want to speak, anybody else in the public would like to speak, they can come up and state their name and then fill out a speaker slip, please. And then we'll hear you, Mr. McGraw.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes, I hear you.

Yes, my name is Guillermo Vasquez. I'm one of the property owners on the just boundary of this property. So I wonder is the city have been considered all the traffic that is being forming with all these construction that is taking place in this area. I believe one of the members mentioned that there's a building of I don't know how many apartments that were built just a couple years ago on the northeast side of the bovere and recently there's quite a few apartments building up in the same area between bovere and and on the same corner So going through this construction, building more houses there, how do you consider all the traffic that is taking place and it's going to be probably even more with the construction?

So this is a time for public comment, and you're welcome to share with your feelings, and we hear you, but it's kind of hard. We can't answer those questions, but certainly the staff, maybe somebody you can ask early on, and this is early in the process, so please stay around for it, but we're just here to hear what you have to say right now.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, you can keep talking if you'd like.

I also wonder if, I believe that's a beautiful property and I wonder if the city have considered doing something more recreational for the community instead of building houses, continued building houses and that's it.

Thank you. Mr. Glenn McGraw. Please speak in the microphone so we have it on the record, thank you.

I decided to stay and comment because I'm a City of Vista resident and it's an interesting project. First I wanted to remind the Board that the building code was developed from carpenters. The old carpenters from Europe helped develop the Uniform Building Code, which is now transformed into the California Building Code. The code is the minimum. When somebody designs something to the code, they have designed it to the minimum. I'm concerned about the design. We're seeing a lot of stuff pop up in Vista that looks like cracker boxes to me. The architecture is poor. There's no pop-outs. Everything's in one dimension, one plane. There's only available in six different colors. I see all these buildings going up. There's 100 units, three colors. And as long as nobody will force the contractor or developer to provide a pleasant looking structure in addition to just building it out to the max, that's the kind of projects that we're gonna end up with all over the city. I believe that it's designed for the maximum profit and minimum consideration for the city. But I do understand the need for additional housing, so it's a tough cookie.

Thank you, I'm done. Tara Goldberg.

Hi. I just had a question because I didn't see it clearly on the plans about fire truck turnaround. and if it meets the current standards of the 150 foot backup before, sorry, before the turnaround requirements. I didn't know if there was a plan showing or if anybody could speak to it with the city or the developer.

Thank you. Can staff address that question? Or do we, Mr. Winters?

Thank you, Chair. As part of the full-size plans that were submitted to the city, the applicant did provide this fire access exhibit to our fire marshal for review. That's the reason for the shape of the private roadway so that it would accommodate a turnaround for a fire truck as shown here.

Thank you. Anybody else? Thank you for your comments. I'm going to close the public hearing and ask for discussion amongst the commissioners. Commissioner Martin.

Thank you. Yeah, it is an interesting project, and it's a bit of a tough site. I'm very pleased that the boulders are remaining and incorporated into the site. I really like how the buildings have been pulled back off of Beaubierre. A little bit disappointed that there's only one floor plan and one unit type, but I think I can look past that. And contrary to what the gentleman expressed, there is some breakup in the wall planes because the units do have a play back and forth a little bit. And I definitely appreciate that because it could have looked very uniform and mundane without breaking up those wall planes. So I like the project and I'll be interested to hear what my fellow commissioners think as well.

Thank you. Commissioner Jolliffe.

Thank you. I appreciate that this is infill and that it's providing a homeowner opportunity for people. It does feel a little tight and we're not getting any affordable units. I think my main thing is that the color of material board feels very busy to me. So don't have a problem with the asphalt roof. I feel that you've got that brown wood around the windows that works well with the off-white. I don't feel it works well with the gray. And then you've got the wood tiles and the slate. It's kind of a lot of colors. I almost wonder if just removing the gray might help that. But it's not the architecture for me. It's just the colors. And it just feels too busy. So I'll look forward to see what the rest of the commission says on that.

Thank you.

Commissioner Thompson. I had the same thought. I'm happy we're filling that area in because there are the gigantic... apartment buildings next to it, so it's nice it's kind of in between. But I did think the colors, there's something about them that isn't quite there yet. I did notice the large apartment buildings near it have kind of lighter tones, like desert kind of lighter colors, and I think that's kind of nice because they're so big. And the only other thing I wanted to mention is I have been asking for shade trees on every project just because it makes it nicer to be outside and be in front and walking around the buildings for the community, for the whole city to have them. So please consider putting as many as possible.

Commissioner Grimm.

Yes, I had a question and then a comment, and I should have asked this earlier, but for Mr. Winters, I've been by that road so many times on Beaubierre, but I can't remember, is there parking on Beaubierre at this location?

There is parking on Beaubierre.

That's what I thought, okay. That'll solve some of the problems of spillout from the project, so no problem there. Going back to the issue that Mr. Martin addressed, I'm a little bit worried if you took out some of the colors that it might not work as well as you think. And I guess that kind of goes to your comment. I think the applicant did a good job of the balance between affordability and trying to make it look like a good project. So I can live with the colors that are proposed.

Thank you. Commissioner Redding?

I live near this general area and I see it almost on a daily basis. So having this project there, I think will help clean up some of the areas that are there. The newer apartments that are going in are new. condos and townhomes, that's Oceanside, so we really don't have anything to say about Oceanside. But for Vista, as we continue to go down Beaubier toward the new elementary school that's there, I think this project, anchoring this one corner for Vista is a good thing. That particular area where there is parking on Beaubier right now, that parking is congested in the moment. Part of that has to do with construction, but it was congested before the construction I don't see this project with two cars in a garage, two cars in a driveway, adding much more to that traffic concern. The Sky Apartments take up a lot of space with respect to the parking, but people park along Sports Park Way. There is Sports Park that's right down the road there, there isn't enough recreational areas for individuals but I'm in support of this in general and colors are subjective so I know we're really early right now and that may change a little bit here and there but I'm supportive of it I'm happy to see the rocks I'm not happy when the or the boulders whenever they're tagged sometimes it takes a city a couple days to get the tag marks off but in general I think once an HOA goes in those boulders will look better the environment will look better and so I'm fully supportive of it

Thank you. Do the student commissioners have anything they'd like to put in? OK. Well, I have a couple of things to add. First, thank you so much, Mr. Winters, for a great presentation. And I notice that all of our projects come up with state information. And I think for people watching and for people that are seeing development just blow up in every town in California. There's reason for that. And it goes back to SB 330, which means Senate Bill, so that's the state of California, the HHA. And one thing that I had asked for clarification about was the zoning was different than what's allowed, but what's allowed is allowed through the general plan, if I understood that correctly. And so there's all these dynamics in understanding density. If something is zoned for a project, it can be built by a developer. We get to have some comments on design and so forth and paint color. But to actually say, no, we'd rather have a park there, we really don't have that ability to do that because it's zoned for this development. And then the state is really sitting on local governments to be able to increase housing. All well and good. I just want to point that out, and I'm really happy that staff includes that clarification for the citizens of Vista so that we can understand. It's very complicated, so I always like to mention it because it's not us just allowing things. It's the zoning, the general plan, and the state telling us that we have to. When we have a nice project come forward like this, for me, it's pleasing to the eye. I kind of like the colors. I like a community with a diverse architectural style from modern to this sort of craftsman-y cottage-type style. It doesn't... I don't have a problem with the color at all, but I did want to make sure that I said that about the states interwoven with the general plan and the zoning. And look forward to seeing more of this project as it progresses. And to that end, if there are no more comments from the commissioners, we'd entertain a motion. Commissioner Grimm.

Chair, if I may interject briefly. Winters for staff, if the commission wished to discuss at all the condition regarding Frog Rock that the applicant suggested, or if it's... Well, maybe we can include that in a motion, or do we, is that, do you want to just offer us discussion on that?

It's up to the commission whether you wish to discuss it further, or we could suggest some language that captures what the applicant was suggesting as well.

If there is no discussion on the ROC, we know that the developer is here and has said that he will preserve that to the best of his ability, included in the HOA information, if anybody wants to include that language in their motion. I'd be open to that. If Ms. Guy has some language we could use, it would be greatly appreciated.

I do. I can suggest it so that it's easier for you guys. So I think consistent with how we draft our conditions of approval in the past with respect to HOAs and conditions imposed or agreed upon with an applicant at the hearing, I would suggest the following. The CCRs for the subdivision shall require the HOA to be responsible for the maintenance of the painted frog rock located within the ESA open space easement onsite, including but not limited to as needed paint application. Thank you.

That sounds great. So if you're going to make that motion and you'd like to adopt that language, we don't have to repeat it. We can say as suggested. Thank you. And to that end, I have Commissioner Grimm and then Commissioner Redding.

I'd like to move approval per staff's recommendation in the additional language provided to us by Ms. Guy.

Thank you. Commissioner Redding.

Just to verify with respect to the HOA and the boulders themselves, I live in HOA where we have multiple boulders that we are responsible for. If the HOA was not responsible for that particular boulder, would that be a city responsibility or just no one would be responsible for it, just out of curiosity?

It's located on private property, so it would not be a city responsibility. The ESA open space easement obligates the HOA as conditioned currently to maintain that area for the ESA purposes, so the boulders would remain in place, but they would not be painted and maintained to keep the visual of the frog appearance.

And so we're saying that any future HOA would be responsible for maintaining the appearance of the frog itself?

Exactly.

Interesting.

Would anybody like to second that?

I was going to say, I do want to second that. I want to second it. I want to keep moving forward with it, but I guess I'll just have to ask a few more questions about maintaining the boulder rock for the HOA. It's a pain in the rear end for my HOA, and if you have to maintain the image of a frog, that would be quite interesting, but that's okay.

Okay, so we have a motion by Commissioner Grimm, second by Commissioner Redding to approve the motion with the language by Ms. Guy. If everybody would like to cast their vote and lock it in. And that motion passes unanimously. Go Rock. OK. So thank you for pardoning my stumble. And I believe those are the public hearings for this evening. And we can move on to reports. Ms. Chau? And thank you. Thank you, Mr. Winters, for your presentation.

Thank you, Chair DeJesus. As far as upcoming meetings, it's looking like we might have a break in July. Might be next meeting, possibly August the 18th, a couple of items for that meeting. We will know for sure as we get into the end of June here, July, but I will definitely, Kristen and I will let you know if there's something coming up or pre-meetings and whatnot, and we'll give you in advance notification of those. But if you're planning to take off, I guess, July, get a little break. Thank you. Maybe this is the time. Thank you. I don't have anything else, and our director, Vaca, didn't have anything to add to the conversation, so thank you.

Well, I'd like to, if everybody is okay with that, I'd like to have Student Commissioner Kalia Parrish come up. Thank you. Come to the microphone, if you don't mind, because I just want to say on behalf of the commission here, I know tonight is your last meeting and you're graduating. Congratulations and thank you so much for everything you've done here. I know I've had the pleasure of getting to speak to you personally. You're such a vibrant person and so many great plans ahead and have you chosen a college?

Yes, I have. I'll be going to Cal State San Marcos.

Stand locally. Well, thank you so much for helping us here. And tell your fellow students to follow your track here. I will. Thank you. And on that note, I will adjourn the meeting. Thank you so much.