Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Okay. Good evening. Uh, welcome to the February 12th regular meeting of the Walnut Creek Planning Commission. I'll ask the secretary to take the role. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Moran here, Commissioner Count here, Commissioner Strongman here, Commissioner Quac here, Commissioner Klopp here, Vice Chair Knighting here, and Chair Anderson here. Uh, commission's all here. We have quorum. Thank you. Uh, do we have anything on the consent calendar tonight? Uh staff has no recommendations for consent.

Okay. Uh then we will pass on to public communications. Um let me take a little minute to explain that because I have a hunch. We're going to have a lot of public communications tonight. Um the uh you have two chances uh two opportunities to speak if you wish. Um you get a chance to speak on either of the hearings when those hearings come up on the agenda. Um, you will also have a chance uh right now during the public communications uh portion to comment on anything which is not on the agenda. So, if you have something to talk about Mitchell Town Homes or Porsche, you can um uh that has to wait till those hearings come up. If you have something else to do, you can can do it. Uh then is there anybody who has a comment on something not on the agenda? Seeing none.

Okay. All right. Um uh there seems to be no one wishing to speak in public communications.

H closer.

Closer. Okay. I would move this but it doesn't move. Sorry. Um so so uh when the time comes uh since there's a lot of people here tonight just try to explain it once. Um uh since we don't have any comments now, but we will have during the the hearings when the hearing comes up, the applicant will have uh time to present. I'm sorry. There's a staff report first to kind of lay out what the the hearing is about. The applicant has a chance to describe his project. Um then each of you who has filled out a yellow um speaker card um uh can get gets to speak. Uh each of you will have two minutes. We have a lot of cards already. Um so that will take some time even at two minutes a piece. Um so uh do try to be succinct in what you say. Um no one is obligated to take all of their time applicant or other speakers. Um if you want to speak less, that's always welcome. Um if you uh if someone else has said exactly what you feel, you can say they said it right. I believe that too. Um that works fine as well. Uh at the end the applicant has a chance to respond to uh some of the comments. Um and uh during any of those comments uh the commission uh can ask questions of the speaker. Uh so I think that covers it. Um we'll move along uh to 3B as it were. Uh disclosure of exparte communications. Anyone had exparte communications this week? Commissioner Count.

Yes, I did meet with uh representatives from Viamonte as well as with Signature Development Group to listen to their concerns. Okay. Anyone else? Uh I met with Signature Development Group as well, the applicant. Okay. And Quaka, I met with representatives from Viamonte as well as the signature development group. And I met with uh representative from Signature over coffee. Indeed. Um just once. And um they emailed signature emailed me and I did not meet with them.

Okay. Very good. Then um the first public hearing is on the Mitchell Town Homes design review. Um I will note that if you are here for the Porsche item, uh rest assured that it will be a while before we get to it. Um, you know, if you want to go out and uh walk around the block and check in from time to time, uh, that might be a better time of your better use of your time than than sitting and waiting and getting anxious. Um, okay. Staff report. Okay. Good evening, chair and uh members of the commission. We are here tonight to consider the Mitchell Town Homes project that will be located within the Shadell's business park. Uh the application number is Y24026. And the applicant representing this project, Jonathan Fern and his team are here tonight as am I to answer any questions that you may have after the presentation. And I believe I forgot to introduce myself. So, Simmergill, senior planner with the city. And um uh for fair warning, this is a multiaceted project with many parts. So, I appreciate your patience in advance if this pro uh presentation does run a little longer than usual. So, I'll try my best to keep pace. And um so planning commission tonight um is looking to certify the environmental impact report and adoption of the mitigated monitoring and reporting program as well as the uh project entitlements uh which consist of uh a major subdivision design review, tree removal and tree drip line encroachment permit um as well as the density bonus

uh waiver requests. And uh just to quickly orient you with the site, uh it is zoned planned development with a general plan uh designation of business park. Uh it does consist of a 2acre uh 22 acre uh parcel that has 11 office buildings. um known as the Walnut Creek Executive Park and and the surrounding area as you can see here uh consists u of commercial and office uses and there are residential uses um across the site uh area um uh on Shadlands that's known as the Viamonte Senior Housing and um on Oak um on Mitchell Drive we have the Oakmont Senior Housing that was recently approved so um we have hasn't been built But we have approved a housing project here. And then further uh east um along Oakrove there are residential uses uh known as the Woodlands community. And this is just a closer look at that of the uh site, the project site in question. It is um outlined in that yellow and um all of these buildings within that yellow outline um will be demolished for project construction. Uh the adjacent parcels consist of a three-story um office building um that is fronting Oak Grove Road uh Bank of America um at the corner of Shayland's and Oakrove as well as the existing daycare. These are all separate parcels and they are not a part of the project site and they will remain. So, I think a point that I wanted to highlight is the uh building um it does not extend onto the project site does not extend onto Oakrove Road. And here are just some site photographs really showing what those office building looks the existing office buildings look like and existing access into the site from both Mitchell and

Shadelins. And in the middle, I've incorpor in included some photos that really just show what the existing office building looks like in relation to the uh Viamonte community across the street. Uh oh. Sorry, it's working just fine. That's going to be hard. Can I get some technical assistance, please? Yeah, the clicker clicker is not working, but I'll keep going while he figures that out. So, no, it does not. Apologies for that. Um, I'll start up again. So, yeah. So, here are the site site photographs of the existing office buildings on site that will be demolished. And um before we get into the project, I really wanted to go over the um background. Um in October um on October 18th of 2023, a SP330 application um was submitted pursuant to the Housing Accountability Act and the Builder's Remedy. And on October 24th of 2023, the city's housing element was certified by um HCD. Uh the application before you tonight was submitted 6 days prior to that certification. And on April 9th of 2024, uh the formal planning application was submitted. And from that time to May of 2025, there were multiple rounds of review revisions um to deem the project complete. And June 18th of 2025, uh the design

review commission reviewed this project and provided u advisory comments that they want the planning commission to consider tonight. So here is a list of those comments. Um the applicants team also has a presentation. So they will go in more detail how all of this has been addressed in the revised plans. Um I'll just note that these all have been addressed with the exception of um preserving more redwood trees on site. uh they they are preserving seven trees within the central area but apart from that they weren't able to um protect anymore. Um and before we dive into the project details um I want to go over the various state housing laws that are being proc that this project is being processed under. Um I will in the next few slides go through all of these. So, I'll start with the Housing Accountability Act. Um, which essentially means that the city's review is limited for residential projects that meet all of the city's applicable objective standards. Uh, so the project cannot be denied unless there are any specific health or safety impacts and um the city would uh need to make those findings for denial and those findings must be based on objective standards. And SP 330 um prevents cities from reducing uh the residential density or capacity or for applying any new standards after a application has been um deemed complete. And uh this project is being uh processed under SP330 and the housing accountability act as it does comply with the city's objective standards as well as the design standard. And um the builder's remedy provision under the HAA does allow a developer to propose a housing project that is more dense or is not consistent with a city's zoning or general plan land use. Uh therefore, no legislative amendments would be required for a project being processed under builder's remedy. And to deny such a project, the city would have

to make specific findings that determined that the city had a substantially compliant and certified um housing element um at the time when the project was submitted. And so that means it would need to be certified uh by HCD. And um given that this uh project um has a planned development that refers to business park zoning standards, the city determined that in addition to those standards, the project should also align with the development standards of the most comparable residential zone, which is the multifamily. Um and it would fall within the range of the medium density multifamily development under the general plan designation as uh the applicant is proposing uh 19 dwelling units per acre which falls within that range of 14 uh to 22 dwelling units per acre. Uh so that was considered to be the best fit. And uh the last of the state laws that apply to this project is the state density bonus. Um the applicant um is requesting waivers and uh a total of 10 waivers and under a density bonus um the project is allowed to um request those waivers to the devel development standards because it's providing affordable units. the project is providing 55 lowincome units and the only way to deny the waiver would be if the city finds that there is substantial evidence that it would cause a specific health or safety impact that cannot be mitigated. And um now I'll uh dive into the project proposal. uh the 422 unit uh multif family development. Um it is a three-story townhouse with a mix of uh building types that consists of range from twolex all the way through sevenplex designs. Uh have twocar garages and outdoor decks. Uh the units

are arranged across 82 uh different buildings and the height ranges from 38 to 40 ft. Uh there are a total of 955 parking spaces being provided. and um uh 542 new trees are being proposed as well as a central open centralized open space area. The frontage improvements include four new street lights along uh Shaylin's Drive and uh new sidewalks uh 10- foot wide sidewalks on Mitchell Drive as well as Shaylin's Drive and um a roundabout and bike lane extensions that extend beyond the project site are proposed. Uh the roundabout location is at the intersection of Viamonte and Shadelins and the bike lane extensions are along Shadlands as well as um on Mitchell Drive and these folks ex extend beyond the project frontage and um the roundabout is essentially um it it's it's been contemplated in the Shaylin's uh multimodal plan that's been adopted by city council. Um the city engineer did suggest it s suggest it but it's not required or needed for this project but more uh in order to really provide safety enhancements. Um so it's not triggering it but just to enhance the area. Uh the applicant um agreed and uh stated that they would be providing that as part of this project which we call off-site community benefits. And the project is also preserving eight existing trees on site and 449 tree removals are requested. Um of these 73 trees were already administratively approved by the city arborist due to the size, species and um the health of the trees. Uh the remaining 376 does require planning commission approval tonight.

And I wanted to point that none of these are highly protected species. And although the project is being processed under the housing accountability and builder remedy provisions, it is still subject to SQA and the city did an analyze all environmental impacts that are across the uh squa appendix G um categories that are listed here. The project is also subject to the uh various entitlement findings and have been addressed as part of attachment two um of your packet tonight. Uh so that would be the subdivision map findings, the design review findings as well as the tree uh removal findings um and uh compliance with the city's objective design standards. And um I'll just quickly run through the timeline of events really just to show that um we started in 2024 with this where the secret process was initiated. uh the notice of preparation was issued and then the public scoping meeting was held in December 11th of 2024 and um from that time as you see to today's date it's been over a year so in that process we did the uh draft EIR circulation for the 45day mandatory public review period that started on August 21st um however given the um the interest from the community we did extend that to November 20th uh an additional 45 days to really get that additional community feedback and give them more time to review the draft DIR. And then of course the comments on um that the public comments received were incorporated into the environmental analysis and the final EIR was submitted to the state clearing house on January 29th. Uh the EIR was posted on the city's website and um so tonight we are requesting that certification of the EIR and uh the SQA topics with less than

significant or no impacts or no where no mitigation was required are listed on this slide and then the SQA topics with potential impacts but with mitigation measures included would result to um a less than significant level are listed on this slide. And um mitigation, monitoring and reporting is included as a condition of approval and it does require compliance with that. And uh there are no impacts that would remain significant or unavoidable. And I also wanted to highlight the common theme of comments received. Uh they're listed on this slide. All of these comments um have been received and were responded to as part of the EIR uh which is included as your packet tonight. And um we do have the um environmental consultant um with us and uh could also go over any of the conclusions that came out of this. And uh the existing uh general plan designation is business park and the zone is planned development. So there are no residential uh standards. However, under the HAA, if the current zoning or general plan does not allow that use, uh alternative standards um that enable the project may be used. So in this case, the applicable best fit standards do apply and we uh apply the M2 standards. Uh this is just uh again another look at the um the the base dens the density proposed for this project. Um, as mentioned earlier, it falls within that 14.1 to 22 dwelling units per acre. Uh, proposing 19 dwelling units per acre. Uh, 55 lowincome units will be provided. Um, that is 13% which does exceed the city's 7% inclusionary housing requirement and um because they're

providing low income um they are um entitled to receive unlimited waiverss. However, the applicant is requesting 10 um standards that would physically preclude the feasibility of the housing development. And um here is the uh table that is also included in the uh agenda packet staff report. This really um outlines the 10 requested waiverss. And as mentioned earlier, um M2 is just the best fit, but the actual zoning for the site is the PD that refers to business park. And I'll give an example. Um the business park zone requires a minimum 25- ft front setback. The applicant is providing 10 ft. Another example is um number five, which is a minimum 20 foot uh side setbacks required. The applicant is providing uh 10 ft. And uh the 10 ft is actually consistent with the uh what a multifamily development typically requires for a side setback. And now moving into the tenative map. The subdivision will create 82 lots and 49 parcels. And here is the proposed site plan. Um that essentially shows that access to site is from Mitchell and Shadelins's Drive. And then those accesses then connect to the internal roadways of the development. Um this project is in two separate neighborhoods. So the access is also um broken up into the based on neighborhood type which I'll show you in the next slide. Uh there is no through access uh for vehicles across the site and the project will be completed in two phases. Uh the applicant will elaborate more on this and here is a detailed architectural

site plan. Uh there are seven building types and as mentioned earlier there are um two neighborhoods. Uh let's see. So there's two architectural building styles and that's uh neighborhood one and neighborhood two. So access to neighborhood one is gained from Mitchell Drive and access to neighborhood two is gained from Shayen's drive. Uh and there is no cut through traffic for any vehicles. However, there is a uh pedestrian walkway connection from Mitchell Drive all the way down to Shayland's for easy pedestrian accessibility. And um the the town homes consist of four four floor plans each, which which is a total of eight floor plans. And uh neighborhood one has six building types. Neighborhood two has four larger building types. Excuse me. Thank you. It's a lot to speak.

And then um the unit sizes range from 1,288 to 2157. Uh consist of 2 to four bedroomedroom town homes. Uh twocar garages are included in each unit. plan one in the neighborhood two um has a tandem garage design. And each town home um or neighborhood um which is neighborhood one and two does feature distinct architectural styles that are identified as style A and style B with a total of four color schemes per neighborhood. As you can see, these are the four proposed for neighborhood one and then um the four below proposed for neighborhood two. And we also have them up uh behind the design review secretary um neighborhood one and neighborhood two. The far left is neighborhood one. Uh right behind the secretary is neighborhood one. Thank you. And here are some uh renderings uh that again I'll let the applicants uh team go more into detail. Um but the top left uh is essentially at the corner of at at the intersection of Viamonte and Shadellands. And it also shows that rendering of the uh proposed roundabout. Thank you. And I'm not going to spend too much time um in the floor plans, but I did want to highlight the key differences. So this is neighborhood one floor plan. Um neighborhood one plan one, which is shown here, is the only two-bedroom design. Uh the other two through four four plans are all three-bedroom designs. Uh the layout is essentially the same. Each unit includes a uh rear garage, a entryway, and a flex optional room on the ground floor and main living areas, kitchen, great room, and an outdoor deck on the second floor. And on the third floor are the bedrooms and bathrooms. And here are the two architectural styles for neighborhood one. Um uh so as you can see here are the recessed

entries with the private balconies and the large windows. And uh neighborhood one is essentially a little more um I would say it features more modern expressive pallet compared to neighborhood 2. Uh it consists of the vertical board and batten sighting and stucco. And then of there's uh stone veneer and metalwood accent used as accents. And this is neighborhood 2 floor plan. Um again I'm just highlighting the key chain the key differences. And plan one is the design that mentioned earlier has a tandem design. So there is no bedroom on the ground floor, but there is a bedroom on the second floor in um plan one of neighborhood 2. And the remaining plans are all um essentially the same where they um have a bedroom on the ground floor. And um plan four of neighborhood 2 being the largest one has four bedrooms. And here is uh neighborhood two. Again, the two architectural styles that would be applied. Um consists of board and batten sighting and stucco. Also includes horizontal horizontal fiber cement lap sighting as well as stone veneer accents at the base and the metal accents. Uh one thing that is different here is the larger the use of the wood accent in larger areas. Um, this I would say is more of a uh craftsman style character uh compared to the more modern and a little more toned down um color palette. But overall the massing of uh both neighborhood one and two are very similar. And now moving on to the landscaping plan. Um the applicant is proposing 542 new trees that consist of uh range from 24in to 36in box and also preserving the existing seven redwood trees that are located within the central area and an

existing oak tree that's located further to the west um property line. And um in addition um I have listed here all of the major trees that will be planted along the project frontages or the perimeter of the site. And then um in addition to that, there's several more trees that'll be scattered throughout the site. And here's just a closer look at that central open space amenities area. And again highlighted in yellow with the star are the existing redwood trees um that are being preserved. And uh the last request uh before you tonight is the tree removals. Uh there are a total of 449 uh trees being removed. The city arborist did approve 73 of these uh due to the size, species and health and the uh remaining 376 does require planning commission's approval. And um as noted earlier, none of these are highly protected species in the city's uh tree ordinance. And uh again, just showing where those uh existing trees that are being preserved are located. And uh there are 31 off-site trees. Um, I've bubbled this area because there are highly protected trees in on the neighboring property and these are all being preserved um and protected in place and there are conditions of approval um for that as well as if there's any undersized tree that's less than 9 in in diameter and I believe there's several offsite uh trees that are less than 9 in in diameter over here uh they could be removed without a permit but there are conditions of approval essentially documenting all of this information and um with that the planning uh staff does recommend that the planning commission adopt the resolution certifying the EIR uh which and the MMRP

which is included as attachment one and the second uh resolution which approves the project entitlements is included as attachment two of your packet and the entitlements are listed on the slide. Um and for the record, city did receive a number of um additional comments uh both in support and in opposition. And these were included in the agenda packet as attachment 7. Um and with that I do conclude my presentation but um I'm happy to answer any questions that we also have several members of the city team uh the planning um public works traffic and engineering along with the first carbon solutions environmental consultant who did assist in preparing the EIR and they can also speak to a lot of the public comments that were raised um surrounding the project alternatives the geometric hazard schools and safety and they als also had uh prepared a um which was part of the packet the additional traffic analysis that was done and of course the applicants team uh Jonathan Fern I believe has a presentation for you tonight as well and yeah I'm I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you so much. The uh questions from the planning commission for staff I have a couple. Yeah. Um the uh the waiverss um there's 10 of them I think you said.

Um and for most of those the justification and the constraint on the planning commission um is because it would uh without the waiver the density would have to be reduced. So the with the density bonus uh there's a certain number of of units that they're entitled to to propo propose and build. Um and uh if there's a waiver requested or proposed that um without which that density would have to be reduced that's sufficient to prevent us from uh not or to keep us uh from denying that waiver.

Yes. So the waivers have the same health or safety findings that the city would need to make. So unless any of the waivers requested are resulting in some sort of impact, uh the city cannot uh deny it. And yes, it would by denying the waiver, it would essentially result in impacts or feasibility of the project and reduction in density.

Just to clarify, I'm clarify assistant city attorney. Um the the standard for a waiver is that it physically precludes the project. Um the statute says that it's at the density that's permitted by density bonus plus with the all the concessions and waiverss combined. And then there is case law that says you the city would have to grant the waiver recluse it at the density and design that's proposed by the applicant. Um and so that gives the um the consideration for the city about when you know something can be waved. Um and then there's the findings that Simmer mentioned about denying waiverss and and concessions.

Okay. Thank you. Um let's see. There was um in some of the the letters there were uh comments about the uh school assignments for this this project that the the children who were in this project would go to one school district which is is um heavily impacted already and and doesn't have a lot of room whereas one which I gather is also nearby is um would love to have more students Um uh is that a question of uh who makes that decision? Is that that the school districts themselves or is it uh

that's between the school district and the developers team I believe and the city doesn't weigh in on that is is it uh dependent upon the the boundaries of the school district. In other words, if if this parcel is within one school district's boundaries is the default that they would go to that school district. So I I might defer that question to the applicants team again because

I'll take it up then and I I I can weigh on a little bit. We she's right. this the city really does not have much in the say of where those boundaries are, but we do uh send all this material out to the districts for their comments on these and and I I it's my understanding that we received no comments from any school district. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

Can I just add to that? My understanding um as a former member of the Mount School Board um is that the map um that the school district currently has is based on um this area not having housing. So I don't think that we that the public can use those maps. Um, if this uh development goes forward, the I believe the school district will need to determine what schools have space and uh probably do a demographic study to be able to determine which schools. Um, but yeah, this is this is not a a city decision to be made here tonight.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Commissioner Club. Hi, thank you for all the work uh that went into this uh presentation. I have a SQA question or a um mitigation monitoring and reporting program question. So, uh, it was stated that there were six, seven different areas that required action through the mitigation and monitoring plan and it wasn't really specified how does that work and who's accountable for the measurement and where does that get tracked and reported and so I just want to quick overview of how MMRPs work uh, so that everyone understands what the follow through is etc. So I I'm not saying the specific actions but how does it work? How do we track it? How do we monitor and make sure that these effects?

Yeah, I believe the MMRP document does indicate does it fall under the purview of planning or building and this is usually done during the entire um the construction or permitting phase. So when when the project comes in um as a building permit or site development permit, we look at it at at it as part of that. So we do the city monitors it. I I could I could add to that. Um, so what most of most if not all of the mitigation measures um that are in the MMRP are construction related. I I don't know that there's any operational long-term. Yeah. Are they all construction related?

I think it's all construction. And so those are in the the the program includes who's responsible when when those things are supposed to be done, whether it's a long-term mitigation or an observation or the the fuel you use in your in your in your in your equipment, uh the idling times, things like that. Um there I don't know if it's in this MMRP, but often times it's roosting birds and bats to look out for that kind of thing. And there are assignments for who is responsible to do this and of course to report it.

And a lot of this stuff especially construction related is um discussed in a pre-construction meeting which we always hold between the um the developers team and the city's uh development services team. Thank you very much. Yep. Questions. Commissioner K. Thank you. Um, a a few questions that came up had to do with builder's remedy and whether it actually applies to this project or not. Um, I just want to make sure we're clear here tonight and with the community um that we are not as the planning commission determining whether this is a builder's remedy project or not. That's correct. Correct.

Commission isn't determining it. It is a builder's remedy project. Um and I can have um the city attorney um weigh in if needed.

Yeah, I can um clarify that question. And so the the as provided in a staff report in order for the commission to deny the project or impose conditions that make the project infeasible, there are certain findings that must be made. Um and one of the findings or two of them relate to a substantially compliant housing element. There is new statute that went into effect in 2025 that speaks to the issue of when a housing element is considered to be substantially compliant. Um the statute provides that for the purposes of builders remedy projects review that the housing element is substantially compliant when at the time of a preliminary application submitt under SB330. Um that either HCD or a court has certified it. Um and as um the staff who also provides that when the project submitted the ASP 330 preliminary application um the city's housing element was not certified by HD was certified six days later and so that is the that is the status of um the housing element issue um and the commission is looking at these facts um in terms of making the findings or not and that is the decision um part of the decision for that that is your decision tonight.

Commissioner Moran.

Yeah. Thank you, Senator. I don't know if this question is best for you or for the traffic um expert that we have here. Uh some of the public comments touched on uh the issue of increased cars coming in and out. I guess my question is uh if somebody could maybe walk the group through the concept of how the traffic is approached the issue of that right because on its face you would say there's not much there now there's going to be a lot more cars coming therefore that might be an issue but that's not in my understanding exactly how it's sort of looked at. Um, it's my understanding that it's more based on what is legally allowed or what could be there and then compared to that what the project is. Am I on the right track?

Yeah, we can call the um consultant or with they're available tonight to answer any questions related to traffic. Okay. Did I chair a meeting? Oh, did we wanna? Oh, okay. Great. I think that's You can give us a little uh BMTL.

I could I could do all those things if you want. I'll be I'll brief. However, um good evening. My name is Mark Spencer. I'm a senior principal with Wr. We worked uh with First Carbon on behalf of the city to prepare the environmental documentation. There's actually two transportation reports that are included in your packet. One is part of the EIR the SQA documentation itself and then there's a separate nonsequa traffic operations report. We do those separately now. A few years ago that changed. So previously many of you have looked at transportation reports. You look at intersection delay and level of service and all those things. That's taken out of SQA now. Those aren't part of environmental impacts but there's still operational effects that we need to look at. So to go to the first uh question that was brought up quickly, how do you walk through this? What we have now is a site and when we did traffic counts and we looked at the area, we did our, you know, in the field surveys, the office was about 80% occupied. And we said, okay, that's what's going away. It's not fully occupied. We get that it could be. And we say, okay, those trips are going to go away. And then we're going to add in the proposed project trips. And what's the difference in that in that number of trips? Well, the it gets confusing because the proposed project actually generates fewer trips than the office development. The office development as it currently is at its current occupancy level. However, there is a change in the traffic patterns. You have an office development. People are coming to work in the morning. So, they're coming like into the area. Then in the afternoon, they leave the area. residential development, it's the opposite. Okay, you have people living there, they're going to leave and go to work in the morning and come back in the afternoon. So, we evaluate what are those changes not only just in numbers but in traffic patterns um during a morning commute period, during an afternoon commute

commute period and what is the effect of that? Um, and that's what the the basis of our analysis is. And that's a that's a standard practice that not only the city follows but the county, Calrans and others. That's a that's a standard practice. And that's where we came up with our conclusions on that. We did in the nonsequa traffic operational report, we did look at several nearby intersections. We looked at roadways. We looked at what happens on Ignasio Valley Boulevard. Um and we looked at how those trips are distributed. And again, just uh I know there's comments about, well, you know, you don't look at Treat Boulevard. Well, Treat actually would get fewer vehicles under this plan um because of the change in traffic and also how much would come to and from the north. Um and we look at where jobs are located, where schools are, services, and um it also considers just, you know, people using BART. Uh are they going to the BART station? Are they driving to their jobs whether those are in Walnut Creek or Oakland or San Francisco, San Jose and what have you. The question about VMT now that's vehicle miles traveled and in the last five six years that's become the standard metric that we have to use in SQA documents. So in an EI or something like that and vehicle miles traveled um I like to put it this way. Previously, when we analyzed a development, we'd say, "Well, what's the effect? What's the impact of this development on the traveling public? Is it going to make things you're going to have to like take longer to get from point A to point B?" In BMT, we kind of turned that 180 degrees on its head. And we said, "Well, now what is the effect on traffic and distances of traffic and how far people travel and what does that really mean?" because that's kind of having a much broader effect. Okay? Not just point by point by point, but in the

city, in the region. So, if you have vehicle miles traveled, it says, well, if someone works, if someone lives in a in in Walnut Creek and they work in Oakland, and let's say that's 20 miles away, they drive to Oakland, and however they get there, if they drive there, they drive 20 miles there, and they drive 20 miles back. That's 40 vehicle miles traveled. Okay? in in very simple exercise in looking at that. Let me take well how many people in this development uh how many adults where are they going to work and you start looking at all the different VMT u metrics the way to evaluate that is you compare that to other types of development and also what is the standard in Walnut Creek what is the standard in Contraosta County and the goal for every new development whether it's this or anything else is are you at that level that is um the average for that area and you now have to have a goal that is 15% below that. Every development comes in you have to do better. That's a standard. That's what the the state mandates and that's what everyone is following from the counties to the cities. Those are the threshold criteria. This area and a lot of Walnut Creek happens to be in a lower VMT area than a good deal of the county. The reason for that is we have transit services, we have bus services with enough frequency and we have BART, we have availability of transportation services. So yes, most of us drive that's that no one's no one's denying that. But we have these opportunities to reduce trips and trip lengths because of these other types of services. This project happens to be in an area with a lower VMT ratio than the region. It is already at an area. So if you put housing in here,

you're doing better than say if you're putting housing in Antioch or Brentwood or Discovery Bay. No knock against those areas, okay? It's just that we have more services here. So it's a lower VMT area. So this is a good place to put housing in terms of regional transportation effect. And that then relates to things like air quality and other things as well. And that's why that's looked at. So I'll I'll stop there unless there's other questions regarding transportation. I'm happy to answer them now or later and if if it's appropriate. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions? Yeah. vice chair meeting.

Um I think it'd be important, Claire, to because there's been a there's always constantly changes in housing legislation. So I wanted to bring up two things. Um the certification of housing element. Um there are still so you brought up the whole point of uh cities or jurisdictions cannot self-certify and that's important because that was passed but one thing that I think is important to note is that there are still counties and cities out there that still have yet to have a certified housing element. Um so that so that is one thing. um HCD required it in January late at end of January 2023 and soon thereafter the city of Walnut Creek if I'm not mistaken got their certification so they were city of Walnut Creek wasn't was not one of the last it was it was pretty

we did we did a very good job that that that description is correct. Um the housing element statute provides for timelines when you have to adopt a housing element. Um and the city's met that the city actually um adopted a little bit earlier than the deadline. Um and the statute also requires you to submit the adopted element to ACD for certification. Um and the city um as you mentioned u vice chair that the city achieved that um you know while there are other jurisdictions that still you know remains are still you're right outstanding.

And then the other thing that I think is important to look at this because it's interesting because builder's remedy has actually been a part of the housing accountability act since 1982 if I'm not mistaken. So for 44 years. Um, but can you explain to us because the original submission was part of the original builder's remedy in the 1982 HAA, but then it subsequently changed to AB1893. And one thing important about that law is that it codified minimum and maximum densities to protect cities from having what I like to call as the Miami Tower. Um, can you kind of explain because the applicant did change to that new law which did then subsequently restrain them from putting a giant Miami tower. Is that correct?

That that is correct. Um the statute builder statute that's correct that it was a part of the HAA um for quite some time. is not new legislation um in that term and the statute that I mentioned earlier where it um kind of codified when a housing was considered substantially compliant um also amended um the builder statute to provide that previously um a project could qualify for builders remedy if it provided for 20% um affordability um and now the new law um which is already in effect provides for different types of affordability ability. So one aspect of the project um I think the staff report mentions this is that the affordability is allowed to be 13% for um low income which the the project is providing um and the at the same time the law does provide for um certain maximum densities um and requires minimum requires a project to meet minimum density if the parcel has that. Um in this case there isn't one but if there were the project has complied with that. Um and it also provides for maximum densities which is based on um one the city's housing element minimum density that is determined appropriate for lower income. Um and for Warner Creek that's 30 units per acre. Um so it's it's based on that but it's also based on whether or not the city is in what's called a high resource census tracked area. um which Wano Creek is within one. Um and in that situation, the law provides for a 50% um density on top of the 30. Um but all of that to say that we've reviewed that and the project is not exceeding those maximums.

And then last but not least, and this is something important because I know that a lot of folks in Walnut Creek affordable housing is important to them and the type of affordable housing. Can you also explain the law also required a certain um look and feel of those homes in in comparison to the market rate? Um the village does require that you have um kind of equal um comparable distribution. Um so essentially the market rate and the affordability units are kind of dispersed evenly um and they're kind of looking the same. Um and so you know the applicant can speak to this but I believe that's that's the case here. Thank you.

Any other questions for staff? Okay. Very good. That case I will uh open the public hearing and invite the applicant to uh present the application and you have 15 minutes.

Thank you. All right. And that. Okay. Um well, thank you, chair, uh commissioners. Um I am, uh Jonathan Fern. I'm senior vice president of development for Signature Development Group. And on behalf of uh our team today, um we are happy to present the Mitchell Drive Town Homes project for your consideration. Uh per your request, chair, I won't spend too much time on these uh slides. I think Spimmer did a really good job of describing where it is uh and what it is uh from an existing uh use standpoint. Um but just to give some highle um uh site plan highlights, the project is a 422 total town homes. Uh a little over 2 acres of publicly accessible open space scattered upon that kind of uh east west central spine there. Uh we will be incorporating a number of the um components of the Shadland's multimoto plan as Simmer discussed. one being um the 10- foot wide sidewalks on Mitchell and Shadelins where none exists today. Uh also bike lanes as well uh and we'll talk about uh the extension of those bike lanes a little later in in the in the um my presentation. Uh as soon mentioned uh we are retaining seven redwoods again in that central open space. Uh increasing the tree canopy from what exists today 488 trees to 542 trees. Again not taking down any trees that are uh highly protected under your code. Uh we have 111 uh guest parking spaces scattered through um the internal uh uh railway network there and then 30 bike spaces also kind of coupled along the open spaces was we just talked about 55 units 13% uh will be available to low-income households. It's about double the city code. Uh and then this takes a significant step towards uh city water creeks reena requirements. 6% of all of the low-income uh units that are

required will be dealt with in this project as well as nearly 16% of all the above moderate um units that are required. Um we do have the two entrances on Shadellands and Mitchell as Simmer uh highlighted. uh reason we didn't want uh cut through traffic from Mitchell to Shadelland's uh for automobiles uh but again we do have a cutth through for pedestrians and again Zimmer talked about this two different neighborhoods two different product types um just to have a uh a wider spectrum of availability of of product uh for sale. Uh and we'll be doing these in two different phases. So you can see the phases are uh the eastern portion of the property uh that will go first. The western property will go side of the property will go second. Uh and we will be having both product types um in each phase again to have a a greater offering um for sale. And also we're doing this in phases because we certainly don't want to we certainly know we can't absorb 422 town homes uh all at once. uh just to take a step back about um how we uh looked at programming this um kind of to the point about not putting in Miami Towers. Uh we took a look at what was around us and wanted to do something that was contextual. Uh so kind of starting at the top of the of the um page there or the at the graphic uh the 2800 uh Mitchell uh CCRC the community continuing care retirement community that stands at about 3 to four stories about 40 ft along Mitchell. The remaining um building within the Walnut Creek Executive Park uh between us and Oak Grove is is three stories about 30 35 feet. The Viamatee Senior Community to our south is four stories and 40 feet. And then the Shadelland Sports Mall uh the Postcue facility is 30 and 24 feet respectively. Uh to give a sense, our town homes to the top of the living space, the third floor of the of of each town home is a little under 30

feet. Um, and then we have roof articulation that takes us up to about 38 to 40. So, we feel that we're, you know, um, kind of hitting the kind of the bullseye here between what's around us. Um, and that was important. And then from a density standpoint, the sha the the Viamonte is about 50 units to the acre. Uh, the um, the uh, 2,800 Mitchell is about 39 units to the acre. We're at 19. Uh, so we're significantly below those from a density standpoint. So, uh, we just feel like this is, um, kind of positioned very well from, uh, uh, from a from a land use standpoint. Um, just want to give a, a quick, um, uh, nod to site context. We did want to create a, um, you know, a a a frontage, residential frontage along both Shadelins and Mitchell. Um, but we are, uh, I know there's some concerns about how set how far the units were set back. As mentioned, we have a 10- foot wide uh sidewalk along both Shadlands and Mitchell. Then we're 10 foot beyond that for our setback. So, we're a minimum of 20 feet uh from the from the face of curb um and kind of extending back to 25 in some areas. So, just want to make that uh make that clear. That said, we we knew we didn't like nail it uh when we first designed the projects. And so we've had a number of conversations, uh, presentations throughout, uh, the time that we've been at this, uh, with community groups, uh, interested parties, stakeholders, uh, the DRC. Um, and so one of the examples of that is the DRC back in June, they asked us to take a look at our central open space, um, and see if there was a way uh, to make it a little more usable. And what I mean by that is that as you can see with these um blue arrows, we had um kind of ongrade storm water detention facilities that were breaking up the usability of the open space. And so they asked us if we could look at a different uh storm water treatment system uh called silver cells, which are kind of below grade to make that central space a little more aggregated and usable. And so we did that. Um and as

you can see, we've kind of tied that together with the uh the light green areas there. So that's all connected. Now, uh we also and this is an example of what that would look like uh when it's when it's built. We look for other opportunities to do that as well uh at our dog park area which is shown there in the circle on the right. Uh and our rain garden area which is shown there on the left. Uh as you can see here again we had these kind of larger storm water detention areas. And then you can see now that we have changed that so that we have ability for uh a little more gathering space, a little more space for the dogs. Everybody loves that. Uh and then um throughout all of this we were able to get uh I believe it's 32 more trees um in the site. So we were obviously happy about that given the concern around trees. Another um another thing that the DRC asked us to do was around pedestrian connectivity both through the site uh and for the residents themselves. So the first thing Simmer mentioned this is they wanted us to widen the central sidewalk uh from 5t to 8t uh so it was a little more inviting for folks that don't live within the actual uh project itself. And then they wanted us to see if we could make a connection out to Oak Grove from the eastern side of our property. Um so it was a little easier for folks in the in the um in the community to migrate out to Oak Grove Road. So we did that. um not really shown here, but we are showing uh in this uh in this rendering here what we hope uh is a little more inviting um and welcoming entry to the community for all to use. In addition, we heard uh uh from a community member um that was looking at our N2 project. It's like, why do you have your balconies facing basically the auto courts that are coming in to serve the garages? It wouldn't be better to have those facing out uh to the streets to the POS. And uh we kind of scratched our head for a second, but thought, you know, that's actually a pretty good idea. Um and so we've incorporated that. As you can see here on the top is what it looked like before. Um and then now we've changed it. So we've put our balconies kind of on the front

elevations. They were on the back before. Um to uh address that u that very good comment. Actually talked a lot about safety improvements. We know about that. Um this is something that we certainly wanted to be uh part of the solution. Uh so a couple things highlighted here. one uh we heard a concern about cars uh you know obviously you know speeding down uh Shadelins particularly coming off of Oak Grove Road. So one of the things that we have worked with traffic on is putting a raised crosswalk where that um that AR that excuse me that yellow arrow is um that will hopefully slow down cars to allow folks at the Viamonte Senior Facility to make a left turn onto Shadell's a little a little easier. Um and then also we talked about the roundabout. Um so that's part of the Shadland's multimmoal plan that uh the city really wants to see implemented uh and we felt we could be a part of that um and install that traffic calming measure as well. Addition um talked about bike lanes. This is what we would ordinarily be required to um put in uh just result of our project. It's bike lanes on your project frontage but again in conversations with the city it's important to extend those bike lanes. So, we've agreed to extend those bike lanes on the north side of Shadlands all the way from Oak Grove to Wigot uh and on the south side of Shadlands from uh North Viamatee to Wigot and then on uh Mitchell uh on both sides from our project frontage on the west all the way to Oakrove Road. Uh in addition to those community benefits that uh I just talked about, we're also um committing to a monetary contribution for tra traffic camera enhancements at Ignasio Valley and Viamonte. We're contributing monetarily to traffic camera enhancements at Oakrove Road and the Kacosta bike trail intersection. And then we're also contributing to Median Islands where the Contraosta bike trail crosses Oak Grove Road. uh hopefully give a little bit of respit uh for folks that are crossing uh Oak Grove at that at that point. Reason why we're doing that monetary

contribution for the median islands because apparently um on the south side you're in Walnut Creek. On the north side you are in conquered. We didn't want to get in the middle of a kind of a byjurisdictional permitting process. So we felt that it was best that the city deal with that. Uh so that's the reason for that. Just want to talk quickly about traffic. I know we just talked about that. Um, as you have seen from the traffic uh report, uh, this this project does result uh in fewer car trips than what exists today. Um, that's based on a conservative 80% occupancy of the of the park, which is what it was when we submitted. But I do understand and recognize that that doesn't necessarily comport uh with what folks are kind of seeing um on the street. Uh, but I do want to go through a quick timeline here. We all know what the co pandemic did back in 2020. Emptied out a lot of office parks, this one included. Uh but the project was purchased um by the current owner uh in 2022 and as you would think uh they were purchased it with the intention of fully occupying it. Uh but what happened is a SB 330 application for this project uh was turned in about a year later. We turned in our formal application a year after that and then we're here today. All this is to say is that that's six years. Um and if you have lived at the Viamati residence for six years or less, this this is what you would see as reality. Um but what has happened is that we have the current owner has not tened the site um or have made an effort to tenant the site because of this ongoing application. So somewhat ironic that the application is actually somewhat responsible for what people are seeing uh today. But we do feel uh as mentioned by uh the gentleman at Writ this is a great place for housing. Uh we're already uh seeing residential uses uh in the uh Shadland's Business Park right now. over the last 10 to 15 years they have been working to diversify the business park but um as you can see as you all know there are um you know grocery stores within walking distance there sports mall within walking distance uh schools what you

know a lot of different things within walking distance of the site uh so we really feel that um it's a pretty good thing to put housing here uh just to wrap up uh we've been at this for like like I said almost excuse me two and a half years uh starting in October 2020 23 went number of rounds with the city uh year later got deemed complete addressed all their comments and then for the last um half of this year or last year excuse me have been addressing comments in the EIR and then we're here this evening. So with that I will uh take any comments or questions and um look forward discussion.

Thank you. Questions comments for the applicant. if

if I could ask one. Um I do want to say thank you so much for the presentation. It was nice to have additional detail about the project hearing from the developer. Um my understanding with the plans is that the um in addition to the main um pedestrian sidewalk that's going to pass through the middle that there were going to be two others, one on the west side of the property and one on the east. And because this this project is being developed in two phases, I realize now that um as phase one is built, the eastern walkthrough would be the one that would be available to residents and other people passing through first and the central walkway would not be available until the second phase is completed around 2030.

Yeah, that's correct. Um but we will obviously allow for pedestrian migration through on that right side um walkway there. Um so yeah, we will be building that out as we go forward. But that is correct. Um does it follow does the pedestrian path through the eastern side follow the main drives or is it more towards the edge of the propert? It's how do you uh Oh, can I use Oh, there we go. So it comes up here and then you cross and then it comes through the the right next to the dog park and then it comes up here and then you just walk out straight. So it's basically entering here kind of jogging here and then going straight up. Oh, so you would kind of start across right across from this the crosswalk from Vante. Correct.

Then make your way through. Okay. All right. I had a question about the mitigation measures. Yep. Um there's from my count 16 plus some sub measures. Um uh some of them pretty significant. Uh are there any that you find are uh going to be particularly difficult? You think you are, you know, able to within the context of construction and so forth to to complete all the mitigation measures?

No, I mean we've reviewed the mitigation measures. um you know, a lot of them are are best practices and just how you know you um would construct a property. Um but no, we we've agreed to them and we understand them and we're fine with all of them. Other questions? Mr. K. One of the suggestions along the way was thinking about families living here um and whether there was a play area for them. I don't believe you mentioned that in your review tonight.

Yeah, the play area there. Good question. The play area there is is shown in the in the blue. Um so yes, we did um insert that per the design review committee. They mentioned that. So we did put that in. Yes. So we'll have a play area. Question needing is there an exhibit where you show maybe I missed it. where the affordable is located.

We do have an exhibit that shows that as part of our plan set. I don't have that here. All it is to say is that we have uh dispersed the uh affordable units throughout the project. So, we're not aggregating them in any one area, corner, whatever. We're spreading them out per per plan and per per plan type and that type of thing. Is this going to be a I'm I'm slightly confused with your phasing because it looks like you're creating four parcels but then are you doing two large lot final maps? Correct. Yeah.

To to land bank the phase two or just sell it off. So we have we actually have we we were in contract for these two phases. We are the the four lot subdivision. and I think you're looking at um is for conveyance purposes in case we need to subdivide even further, but we are in contract to take down phase one and then um a couple years later phase two. So the part the part that's confusing to me is that usually when you have two large lot because you're basic because all these are going to be condo.

Correct. is um I understand that for absorption 422 units is a lot. Yes, it would have been nice in your phasing plans to show that each phase is stand alone and I couldn't in all of the vesting tenant maps and C and CBG is a fabulous civil engineer and they probably have already thought about this. Yeah, I'm assuming I just can't see it like you usually or I guess is is phase one fully standalone from C3. It is

infrastructure by C is are you the civil engineer? Yeah. Yes, it is. Um I I would think that that would be something important to show for us as city as a city.

There is a in the in the plan set there is a phasing there's a phase one diagram that does show that the phase one stands alone. Uh we then also had to prove to the city that we had adequate parking in phase two uh because phase two was going to remain and those buildings are going to remain as the the office buildings will still remain active um while phase while phase one is being instru constructed. I can't remember the actual page number. Apologize. No. Yeah, I I'm looking at it. So and I I I think that that it was kind of in the background for the utilities and so I wasn't I couldn't tell like is your C3 standalone? It is for this phase. Yes. Okay. Okay.

Everything is Yeah, they can stand completely separately. Got it. Thank you so much. No problem, Commissioner Strongman. Commissioner Count. Well, going back to the affordable housing, how long do they remain affordable? I believe it's 55 years. Uh, I think it's 45 for ownership. 45 for ownership. And at that point, they become market rate. They do. That's the That's the law. Thank you. Commissioner C.

Just a follow-up question on the phasing. Um did you is it possible or did you consider uh reversing it to have phase two happen first given the feedback from the community about being directly across from Viamonte um to do phase two first? Is that feasible? It's just unfortunately that's not how we're in contract to purchase to purchase the property. So we have op purchase sale agreements for both phases and one is going before the other. So that's kind of the restrictive the restricting aspect of this. Let's turn eating.

Might as well. um a couple of can you can you describe more silver cells just because they're pretty interesting concept right they provide detention and retention and underground chambers that are but you do it I don't want to do it oh boy I I don't know if I want to do it um you know that was a very smart ask from the DRC so I think it's worth and it's costly

yes so thank I mean thank you for the question so you know typically um storm water retention or detention is done kind of on grade and and below grade. Um so you have these kind of basins that if you look at the the um the orchard shopping center you can see them in kind of the parking lot um where you know you have water that drains in and then percolates down. Silva cells um are kind of a unique system uh where they're kind of like empty Legos, I guess, is the best way to really describe them. And you put them you you you put them under the ground and then you put you know soil on top of them. Um and then you have your you know your your your grass your sod on top of that. And then as it as as you can steer storm water to the Silva cells and then the then water percolates through the silver cells down um and and gets treated that way, but it all takes place kind of underground. Um and you the beauty of it is that you're able to actually program things on top of it. Um but yes, it is an added expense because you're putting in a layer that's underground. You have to dig it out um to to to to to install it. So there is a a premium for it. But that's and I can if you would like it better, you know, we can

I mean the reason why I brought it up is because you look at the amount of trees which I I I read it constantly and the city of Walnut Creek sustainability is of utmost importance to us. It's it's one of the measures um that our city council always puts as a priority. But the one interesting thing about silva cells having designed them myself is the fact that it requires unlike bio retention basins it actually requires more trees. That's correct. That's right. Yep. That is correct.

Which is important because we need to try to get back as many trees as we possibly can and then those will subsequently Right. Um it's the the that system almost provides the irrigation for those trees because it's in the underground correct

chambers and I to me that that was important because of the amount of trees that are coming out. The other thing that I was going to ask about was was there an intentionality of away the way how you um specifically how you um designed whether the units were facing out or in on shadelands in consideration of Viamonte.

Well, we certainly wanted it to feel like a residential neighborhood. So, we didn't want to like turn our back to it because obviously these things are these these units are uh you know are rear loaded in essence. So, you have to approach them from the rear for your car. The the garage doors are in the rear. So, we didn't want to have a rear to have the Viamonte residents looking at garage doors. Uh we also didn't really want them to be looking at uh the size of the units either because that's you know that's you know there's utility boxes and things of that nature. that's not the the best uh elevation. Um so, you know, we felt like putting the front elevation was putting our best foot forward and it just makes it feel like a residential neighborhood because that's where you have you know, houses facing each other. So, it made the most sense. Uh also, if they are kind of jogged, um then, you know, you run the risk of having those um alleyways, you know, be kind of vectors for cars coming in at night and shining their lights into the the Viamonte residence. So having the way that they're designed in this way uh prevents all of that.

Thank you. All set. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh I'll open it up to uh the public now and uh again remind you that you each have uh two minutes. What we will do is the secretary will uh call out the name of people on the card. He's got all the cards there. Um if you if you have not submitted a card and you wish to speak, the cards are open in the back there. You can get one, hand it to one of the staff. Uh he'll give uh two or three names. If your name is called, if you're not the initial speaker, just line up behind so we can move through people uh quickly.

I'm going to call up three names at a time. If you would like the the first person would be up, please make state your name if you'd like. And then um if the the second and third would queue behind, that would be great. Um I've got a request from Mary Steiner for a list, which we're going to do. I've got most of the names with the exception of one in cards, and we'll go down that list first, which leads to Mary Steiner, please. Wayne Morris and Lorie Reich. Jonathan, you're much taller than I am.

Okay. Okay. I think I got it here. Good evening, commissioners, and thank you very much for taking the time to hear us. I'm Mary Steiner, resident of Viamonte Senior Living, situated, as you've heard tonight, directly across the street, across Shadeland Drive from the proposed development. Let me start by saying that a town home project can be an asset to Walnut Creek and to the neighborhood while being a significant contributor addressing to addressing our housing challenges. I am not nimi. However, the project as proposed is just too dense. It could be a substantially greater asset to the surrounding community and its residents if it incorporated more open space, more green space and shade, and greater setbacks. This could be accomplished with a very modest decrease in unit density, but would yield a disproportionate disproportionately large improvement in lifestyle and aesthetic benefits to future residents and to the surrounding neighborhood. The residents of Viamati Viamonte that I speak with express major concerns about the feel and feel let down by the development. They worry about impairing energy emergency access. That's a big one. Emergency access for us. Adversely affecting air quality, the removal of so many large and productive trees, the lack of setbacks detracting from the neighborhood sense of place, and the wildlife that will be affected. The report provides little if any mitigation in these issues. Please require the developer to mitigate some of our concerns. Our original comment letter on the draft EIR provided pages of mitigation measures that many of my neighbors and I would find acceptable. Please review that document

before deciding on the project as it currently stands. I also urge you to remind Mitchell Town Homes as a builder's remedy project and to ask the planning department to work with Signature to create less dense housing with more of a community feeling. Thank you. and I have 10 seconds left. Thank you. Thank you, Wayne Morris, please.

Hello, commissioners and staff. My name is Wayne Morris. I'm a resident of Viamonte, and I want to discuss the project's impact on biological resources. To me, it's astounding and frightening that a 600page EIR fails to address the greatest environmental threat that we face, climate change. Everyone agrees that trees are the best way to combat climate change. Trees pull carbon from the air and retain it. They also help cool the planet. Further, redwoods are superheroes in this regard. It's been estimated that one redwood tree can absorb more carbon than an entire acre of a typical forest. The EIR, however, would approve the destruction of 461 trees, including 96 redwoods, and replacing them with 542 saplings. These are saplings. They're 24 to 35gallon trees. I looked on um Slot's website and they say trees in that size are four to six feet. We're talking about 100 ft redwoods, 99 of them being destroyed and being replaced with a four to six uh foot sapling. A statement would say a statement was made that this project will increase the tree canopies. That is ridiculous. A 4-foot tree is not going to replace an 100 foot tree. I want to emphasize that the planning commission has the power to deny permits to cut down these mature trees. You can preserve trees. You can protect the environment and still approve more

houses. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. Lori,

thank you. My name is Lori Reich. I'm also a resident of the Amante. My concern is basically for the people who will live there. MTP has only small patches of green, less than 10% of the total acreage. No. Um, when I looked at it, there were no uh play areas for children uh or adults, no picnic area or outdoor game spaces, clubhouse or swimming pool for 422 homes, potentially 1,400 people, no places for residents to really gather. The major areas of open space are primarily occupied by paved roads, sidewalks, and what we call at Viamonte bios. I've never heard this term, this new system of underground. Um, so I'm glad to see that that change has taken place. So basically, I'm concerned about the residents quality of life. Extensive research compares high amenity well landscaped housing with green spaces, attractive design, and social and recreational features to sterile or minimal environments, mainly consisting of buildings and pavement. And I'm sorry it still looks that way to me. Um, in studies across urban planning, environmental psychology, public health, and real estate economics, several consistent patterns emerge. These studies demonstrate that living near green spaces and attractive landscaping is linked to improved mental and emotional well-being, including less stress, more happiness, and higher life satisfaction. Green areas with mature trees provide restorative benefits that can decrease fatigue and stress while boosting overall quality of life. Exposure to green space in residential areas has been associated with better cognitive performance for children. Communal spaces can promote social interaction and a sense of community,

encouraging neighbors to connect and strengthening community ties, reducing isolation and boosting neighborhood pride. Housing developments with attractive landscaping and amenities tend to sell at higher prices. Um, I'll jump to the end. Um, very quickly, these studies show that well-designed public spaces like plazas, gardens, amenity areas, and gathering spots are essential for owners well-being. Please include these quality of life features in this project. Thank you. Thank you. The next three are Dave Perkins, Stephen Pritsker, and Mark Pearson.

Okay. Um, if Stephen's ready. Hi, my name is Stephen Pritsker. I'm a resident of Viamonte. Uh, the ERR minimizes serious air quality risk for children and seniors living next to this site. The report identifies a monastery daycare 30 23 feet from the project boundary as the most exposed receptor. It admits that without mitigation cancer risks there would be nearly double the air district threshold. The EIR also acknowledges pollution here is cumulative and the region is in nonattainment. The cumulative analysis that factors in roadway emissions and multip multiple nearby generators indicate cancer risk during construction reaching roughly 54 per million at the daycare. Senior housing and a skilled nursing facility are within a 100 ft. Yet the report repeatedly calls the impact less than significant. The hu the huge assumption is that mitigation will work flawlessly. The analysis assumes tier 4 equipment and strict dust control work consistently for 4.75 years of construction. What's missing is enforcable oversight. Who is monitoring? What is measured? What happens when levels spike? The city approved schools, senior housing, and skilled nursing this close to the construction site. It has a special responsibility to protect the people who will hear who will feel these

impacts. If you approve this, do it with enforcable protection and findings supported by substantial evidence. require real time perimeter monitoring, public reporting, and clear stopwatch triggers. If pollution rises, protect vulnerable children and seniors. Please don't approve this without enforcable protection in place.

Let me uh ask staff um if uh they can indicate what the enforcement of construction monitoring how that how that would work. The city is uh building or department or shows a trip. Did you understand the question? Yeah, it's listed in the MMRP document and yes, it'll be part of the construction plans and be reviewed with the building division. So, for each mitigation measure, there's a specific

it's actually listed next to it in a table um who will be looking at. Yeah. And as far as just general supervision or monitoring of the construction in general, is that the uh city building department? Yes. Uh the city building uh inspectors as well as the um engineering inspectors as part of the permitting phase. Thank you. And there's some self-reporting as well.

Uh Dave Perkins, please. Good evening. My name is David Perkins. I'm a resident of Viamati. I'm 95 years old, a father of four, a grandfather of eight, a greatgrandfather of seven with possibly a few more. The reason I tell you this is I'm always looking for better places for my family members to move up and improve their quality of life. I was delighted when I read the Mitchell Town Homes was planning a a building complex in Walnut Creek. I was excited to see a layout of the entire area which even included two dog parks. As I looked further, I saw four green areas throughout the site. I was thrilled as I thought as I was thrilled as I thought it would be family parks and children's play equipment areas or and for adults to enjoy the wonderful outdoors of Walnut Creek. However, as as I looked more closely with a magnifying glass, I found the four green areas to be water retention ponds. The purpose to collect dirty runoff water. Without proper attention, these sites are great areas for mosquitoes and bugs of all kind. My close inspection finds absolutely no planned family or children's area. Further, the ground floor of many of the garage of the many of the units is the garage with stairs up to the living area all accessible and to the living area

which is accessible by stairs. What are the plans for assisting able uh disabled individuals or mothers with babies to get up these stairs safely? I have a simple question for those ladies and gentlemen who have the author authority to vote for or against this this project. Knowing what you know, would you move your family into v Mitchell town houses even if their plans were modified? I think an honest answer would tell you how to vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Mark Pearson and then Katherine Pearson, Tom Stone, and Russ Gray. Good evening, U Planning Commission members. I am Mark Pearson. I'm a retired biotech entrepreneur. I live at Viamonte. I want to focus this evening on just one thing and that's mitigating the air quality throughout the five-year construction period for the MTP. The EIR has generated a health analysis that shows that this project only falls below the Bay Area cancer risk thresholds after the MMR uh sorry the MM air1 1 and MMA2 procedures have been put in place. This means that air quality mitigation is not a side note to this project. It means that it should be approved or disapproved on the basis of actual air quality. So, I'm asking you to think about five things for project approval.

First, require T4 tier 4 diesel engines for all workplaces. Second require realtime monitoring continuously of particulate matter especially the nonvisible PM2.5 particles near the school and senior housing where children and senior seniors are at greatest risk. Fourth, acquire strict enforcement of anti- idling and fueling controls. And fifth, require advanced notices to neighbors and the school before major grading or heavy emission phases.

Thank you. So mitigation is what makes this project less than significant and approvable. Excuse me. Then these protection time is up must be transparent, measurable, and enforceable. Thank you very much, Katherine.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Katherine Pearson, a resident of Viamonti Senior Living. I am presenting you with petition supported by 179 of our 250 residents. These residents are concerned about the plan to place 422 town homes on 22.5 acres of land directly across the street from our home. Will the petitioners who are present please stand up? Whoever signed the petition, please stand up. Thank you. We support the

You can sit down. We support the redevelopment of this property, but we believe the current plan requires significant modifications detailed in our comments to meet the goals and standards of Walnut Creek and its citizens now and in the future. As one example, the MTP proposes to construct threestory single family town houses along Mitchell and Shaylands Drive. They would have only 20 foot setbacks from the curb and mature trees would be cut down. This would be a wall of front doors. The proposed design is neither attractive nor consistent with the rest of the neighborhood and the EIR proposes no mitigating measures. There are individuals copy of the petition for the commissioners.

Thank you. Thank you,

Tom. I am Tom Stone and I live at Viamonte and ask is there a more unsuitable site for this project in Walnut Creek? Medical and early childhood education facilities and senior housing surround this site. Elements that can influence the approval or current size and scope of a builder's remedy project are health and safety issues. A crucial question for the commission to answer is what exactly are the criteria required to deem a proposed project as too dangerous for the surrounding population? The young and elderly are uniquely susceptible to serious adverse health effects from the air contaminants that will be generated during demolition, debris cleaning, clearing, and construction activities. The analysis for air contaminants in the pro report are woefully inadequate. The report focuses on cancer risk, which generally happens over decades. understated are the more immediate serious health hazards for elderly residents with heart and respiratory issues and children with immature respiratory systems that will manifest far sooner. The commission should not accept the reports unsupported statements regarding air contaminants as true or complete. High levels of dangerous particullet will be generated during this project and the increased vehicular traffic during and after

occupancy. A safe level of PM2.5 exposure for sensitive populations is 12 micrograms per cubic meter. That level is already exceeded on moderate air quality days. The huge project will be putting the community at risk for nearly 5 years. The proposed mitigation measures are deficient. The health risks are substantial and serious. Please consider drastically reducing the size of this project and requiring realtime air monitoring to protect the surrounding vulnerable community. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is Russ Gray, and then it'll be David Atkin, Mike Heler, and uh Tac Mazuno.

Uh good evening, commissioners. I'm Russ Gray. I'm also a resident of Viamonte and uh this item relates to the earlier discussion of builder's remedy. Good discussion. Uh we respectfully ur respectfully urge the commission and the city attorney to carefully consider whether it is appropriate to allow this project to bypass local land use controls under the builder's remedy provisions of the housing accountability act. Under state law, cities that have a housing element in substantial compliance with state requirements retain their authority to apply local zoning and planning standards to affordable housing projects. As you know, Walnut Creek worked diligently and in good faith to bring its housing elements into compliance. And as Samar outlined and clarified, the city uh developed and implemented the necessary policies and programs and submitted them to the state. The state ultimately approved Walen Creek's housing element in October on October 24th, 2023. The project applicant submitted the preliminary uh application for this project just a few days before that approval. A reasonable case could be made that uh that the element had been de facto approved and implemented and only ad at that point and only administrative processing delays and mail transit delays between the city's submission and the state's formal approval caused the project it to be considered under builder's remedy. It's important because the project raises numerous committee concerns you're community concerns you're hearing about including health, safety, scale, uh, density, and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. The loss by the city of local control over land use does not serve the interests of the community and future residents. The Accountability Act allows substantial compliance to be determined not only by the state, but also by a court of competent jurisdiction. We we respectively request that the city seek judicial confirmation that Walnut Creek achieved substantial compliance when it

submitted its housing element. Then it was later approved by the state. If a court confirms that, then the applicant's preliminary application was filed after compliance was achie was achieved. The builder's remedy would not apply. Thank you.

Thank you, David. My name is David Atkin and I am a resident of Yiamante. Shadelland's Drive, a two-lane road, is inadequate for peak demands in the future. There is no way to add left turn pockets. The vehicle waiting to turn left will create a backup. If oncoming traffic is similarly blocked, gridlock occurs. This already happens and worsens when traffic from Agnosio Valley Road detours onto Shadland's. Ambulance calls to Viamonte are common. There was an average of seven per month between August 1 and December 31 of last year. Each response requires the arrival of two vehicles, a ladder truck and an ambulance. Theoretically, emergency vehicles have right of way. In practice, gridlock will hamper emergency response on narrow Shadelin's Drive. I observed a 10-minute ambulance delay on Oakrove Road during construction of Chick-fil-A. The report discloses that access to some driveways may be limited because vehicle Q lengths on Shadells are estimated to extend longer than a football field during the morning peak. The driveways that remain post construction serve major traffic generators. A queue that clogs the only roadway access to a senior facility on a daily basis creates a public health and safety issue because it will impede the simultaneous response of two emergency vehicles. No access or traffic mitigations are

being required beyond the preparation of a future maintenance of traffic plan. Sufficient planning must occur before project approval to demonstrate the public health and safety will be maintained. This includes unscheduled EMS access and continuous ADA compliant pedestrian paths throughout the five years of construction disruption. Thank you.

Thank you. Mike. Good. There we go. Good evening. I'm Mike Heler. Thank you for being here this evening. I want to add uh comments on the issue of fire and EMS response. The vehicles vehicle miles travel metric is all about reducing carbon footprint. It has nothing to do with a narrow two-lane street like Shadelland's Drive which is already congested at time various times of the day. Our ambulance needs are increasing partially because the state department of social services has changed several regulations that will require more ambulance calls to come to Viamonti. The two new bicycle lanes that are proposed will be wonderful for bicyclists. So, the EIR hopefully says that ambulances can just turn on their lights and siren and traffic will melt away. Presumably, that's by leaping over the bicycle lanes and getting up on the 10-ft wide sidewalks. It's not clear where is the traffic going to go to get out of the way. Congestion today results just from someone trying to turn, someone trying to parallel park or pedestrians crossing. The pedestrian crosswalk is needed and a good idea, but the fact is on a small narrow road, there's no alternative for traffic to make its way uh along the street. Disappointing is the lack of mitigating

measures proposed that address this issues of congestion and public safety response along um along Shadelands. All of the mitigation measures are during construction. That's a start. That doesn't address the longer term problem. Thank you. Thank you. Tac Tac Mazuno. Following will be Patricia Bettincourt, Laura Py, and Trans Brooks. Travis Brooks, sorry.

Okay. Thank you for this opportunity. I am Tac Mizuno, also a resident of Viamonte, and I would like to second the comments by Mike Heler. Uh, especially, well, that's what he talked about is traffic issues. Uh, some of my concerns are submitted in my comments on the written comments on the draft GIR. Um I uh regarding traffic, I understand that uh SQA does not consider level of service, but I I firmly believe that this is a responsibility of the city of Walnut uh Walnut Creek. On the issue of public services, my concern is on water supply as it affects fire safety. The uh DEIR focuses on fire department response time while deferring the question of adequate fire flow to water and fire departments. I found the EUR lacking in providing quantitative asurances. Um that is uh flow and pressure uh having assurances for the four uh for the fire services uh while maintaining service to uh Viamonte. Uh we have a uh sprinkler system. We also need uh flow and pressure. Please also clarify the size of water manes in Mitchell and shade lands drives. the the main and shade lens has been variously described in documents as uh both 12 and 24 in and uh just as a point of clarification the uh the agencies contraata county water and the fire departments are responsible agencies and I'm sure they have it under

control but it I think it really should be documented. Thank you, Patricia.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Patty Bittton Bender or Patricia. I am co-chair of the Viamonte Resident Council. Some years ago, city approval was granted for a senior living community to be the first residence project in Shadellin's business park that became Viamonte senior living home to 250 residents seniors. More recently, approval was granted for another senior community across Mitchell. That project may fast become a reality. With the pending approval of the Mitchell town homes project for me comes a sense of betrayal. My expectation was that the Walnut Creek City Commissions would provide some protection for our community of seniors. We are the first and as far as I know only residents in Shadelands. We have been good neighbors in the community utilizing businesses in Shadelands and neighboring shopping centers with minimal automobile use. We believe that adding another senior community would be similarly beneficial to the surrounding community. Additionally, senior housing opens the way for sales of single family homes, which we need. I understand the need for more and affordable housing in urban areas. The problem is the introduction of the extraordinarily dense MTP that will look and feel out of place in the neighboring areas. It will result in increased traffic, auto and bike, and decrease safety for drivers and pedestrians, especially seniors. Viamonte residents walk the orchard's biodal pathways many times a day to grocery stores for exercise to enjoy the lovely grounds around Viamonte. The biotal pathways have become more dangerous with the increased presence of children on electric bikes. This danger will increase exponentially when MTP is complete. Construction mitigations aside, please remember that the average

age of Viamonte residents is mid80s. For many, they will live their last years in the dust and noise of construction and cannot move away as we would incur a large financial loss. Can I uh uh Laura? Oh, no, you're Travis. Yeah, Travis. All right, thank you very much. Not Laura today. Thank you, Laura. Sorry, Travis.

No, it's fine. Um, hi everybody. Uh, Travis Brooks. I, uh, for the last 10 years have lived in woodlands in a house about 2,000 ft. I just checked on Google Maps from where this project will be. My daughter still walks to Valley Verdie under the beautiful view of Mount Diablo. Uh, I just checked uh, Zillow and Red Fin before this meeting. uh you know and selfishly was very surprised and and pleased to see that the value of our home and the cost of our home according to those sites has skyrocketed by more than 50% in the last 7 years. Uh so instead of you know being overwhelmed with selfish joy uh I'm troubled because that means we're in the middle of a really serious crisis. These housing prices are unsustainable and untenable for young people uh that are in the same position I was in 10 years ago. For them, it's impossible to buy a home and start building the equity that has been the lynch pin of the American dream for the the last 100 years. And the number one reason for this crisis is a lack of supply. New housing for the last 50 years has been denied or not even proposed because of a not in my backyard mindset and the interests of existing homeowners having a veto over any such projects. Endless environmental review that's not necessary. Endless requests for small changes to the project that ultimately just killed the project and and that's why we're in a crisis like we're in now. Uh the bottom line is as though as the staff report very accurately reflects uh you are required by state law to approve this project as proposed. They don't even have to make any changes. They've they've been very accommodating and uh proposed a very nicely designed project that I look forward to seeing. Uh and you know just to just to end that doesn't mean that we get to a bad result here. Uh the existing office building uh it's a it's a no longer very desired use. If you want to know what it's going

to look like in 10 years, just look at the office building on Citrus Circle that's vacant, dilapidating, and often has RVs in the parking lot. That's not the community I want to see my daughter to grow up in. I want her to be surrounded by vibrant housing. We've got Laura, Mark Orcett, and Ann Meyer. Should I go? I'm Mark. Mark. All right.

Good. Good. Good evening, chair, commissioners. Uh, Mark Orcut, president and CEO of the East Bay Leadership Council. We're a nonprofit organization on a mission to strengthen the economy and improve quality of life across the East Bay. Uh, EBLC supports this project because it turns an underutilized office site and parking into muchneeded housing along a major transportation corridor in a city with access to jobs and opportunity. We need more housing in places like this. Converting aging commercial properties into homes strengthens our economy, supports sustainability, and expands access to opportunity. We understand there are strong opinions about the project, how the project came forward. The builder's remedy process has generated real debate, but EBLC evaluated this proposal on its merits. Traffic concerns along this corridor are understandable. Fortunately, the environmental review conducted that concluded that transportation impacts would be less than significant and EBLC supports thoughtful mitigation were applicable. Simply put, housing near jobs, retail, and services is part of the solution to our traffic and affordability challenges, not the cause of them. For those reasons, EBLC supports this project and encourage you to advance it consistent with the staff recommendation and state law. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Anne Meyer. I'm a resident of Viamonte. I don't have prepared remarks. What I do feel is that when you look at this project, I know the stacks, the figures and so on say one thing. Living there is another thing. We already have enough traffic on the on the uh uh uh roadway. Can you imagine? And 800 cars or less leaving around certain times to go to work. We have all these families coming in with kids and uh it's it's not I don't have the figures but I do know exponentially or experientially that it's going to be a real problem. I look at the houses that you've proposed. I I I know that even Viamonte had a lot of negative things when it was built but these houses they don't have they look on each other. They're they are the um when you look at the the the buildings, there's only windows on the front and back and they look at more houses. They they don't have any kind of view. They have, you know, uh uh they sort of closed in. They're actually cages. So, this is not the kind of house that I would like to see. And if you were in standing in my shoes and looking at this housing project, you'd probably feel the same way.

Thank you. Uh, next three would be uh Ryan McMahon, David Blackwell, and Bob. Is it Ashfor?

Ryan.

Yep. I'm Ryan. Hello. Um, so yeah, my name is Ryan. I live in uh downtown Wallet Creek, a few blocks away. Um, I've lived in a lot of different cities across the East Bay and I love Wal Creek the best and I plan to stay here for a really long time. Um, I just wanted to say, um, this is somewhere where I'd like to live potentially if this ever does get built. Me and my wife, um, we really do like downtown, but this could be a place where we can get a little bit more room and there's still a lot of great amenities in that area, too. Um, and then also we only have one car and then I ride my bike a lot so we wouldn't add to a lot to the traffic as well. Um, a lot of my friends have had to move to cities like far away which like has it has like increased their commutes and like you know um affects the earth you know in in bad ways too because they're driving so long. They're you know like somebody mentioned cages. They're stay in their cars for two hours a day sitting in a cage right. So, um, being closer to jobs, being closer to their community, I think is really important. Um, my wife actually works for the county, too, and a lot of her co-workers don't even live in Contraosta County because they can't afford living here. So, I know these are not going to be like the most affordable. Some of them will be, but um, they'll be more affordable than what we have right now, you know, like than than a lot of the homes in the area. Um, so yeah. Um I do feel uh for the con for the Vermonte residents and the construction that these will provide. I live in apartment right now and there's construction right next door and it is really tough to deal with that and this is going to take a really long time to build. So I think we should do everything we can to make sure that um we limit you know the effect to the those residents living there um during this time because that that is really really hard to deal with. So um yeah, thank you so much D David.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is David Blackwell. Um I'm a longtime resident of Walnut Creek. I live in the Shady Glenn area for the last 17 years and raised my family here. Um I'm also a land use partner with the Alan Mackens firm in San Francisco. I've been with them for about 27 years, but I'm not here in an official capacity. I'm not here representing any part anybody part of this agenda item. I basically have no dog in this fight. The reason I'm here is because I love Walnut Creek and I strongly believe in in responsible planning. And what does that mean? Well, in my view, the core essence of that is is following the law. And in this case, the the state law is what governs here. It's been ablely laid out in the staff report, but without question, SB 330, the density bonus law, and the Housing Accountability Act, we use them for all of our projects because they are so important to the production of housing. And they've been strengthened over the years because the housing crisis has worsened. And so these laws are essential to essential to the construction of housing. And we can't go back to the days of business as usual where subjective complaints would be enough to derail a project. Now it the only way that you could possibly deny this project or reduce it is to meet one of the statutory findings which again staff laid out and it boils down to this. Is there a specific adverse impact to the public health health or safety and th that is not just that's not just a you know complaint by somebody. it has to be based on real specific criteria and those findings simply cannot be met here. So in some in my view if if you do if you want if you're going to follow the law you really have no choice but to approve this project. Thank you.

Thank you.

Bob good evening. My name is Bob as I'm a resident of res of Vimate. Uh, I would like to start by identifying some interesting phrases that I read in the EIR concerning health and safety. Sensitive receptors. This refers mostly to the very young and the elderly who would be most vulnerable to the air pollution that this project will be generating for about four to five years. Specifically, PM2.5 and PM10 are listed. PM standing for particulate matter 2.5 and 10 relating to the size in microns or micrometers of the air and dust particles. Since we cannot see anything smaller than 35 microns with the naked eye, all of these particles are invisible to us but when airborne are easily inhaled and capable of penetrating deep into the lungs and into the bloodstream. Leaving the EIR and moving to Google, I searched for health and environmental effects of particle matter, PM, specifically PM2.5. Here is a short description from the EPA. Tiny particles, big impact. And here is a their short list of provable effects. asthma, bronchitis, COPD, increased risk of heart attack and strokes, cognitive decline, and their separate list for small children, premature death, reduced lung capacity, lung cancer, impact to brain health, and none of these are referenced in the EIR. The EPA's recommendation uh remediation is to wear an N95 mask at all times during possible exposure. Back to EIR, there is no mention of supplying anyone an N95 mask at any time. Thank

you for your time.

Thank you. Before we uh move on, we still have a fair number of uh speaker cards to go. U we're going to ask to uh been asked to do a fivem minute break. Um and so we will resume at uh 8:09. to uh continue.

If you have your seats, please. Yeah, that causes more trouble than you want. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're about to continue. If you take your seats, please. Hey, you. It's right there. It's what it's for. If the secretary would read the next three names, we'll move along. If we could have uh everybody to sit down, please.

Ladies and gentlemen, it's time. The next names will be Matt Reagan, Cheyenne Gomez, and Tim Catril.

Perhaps you can repeat those once it's quieted down a bit. Can you repeat those names? Yes.

Matt Reagan, Cheyenne Gomez, Tim Katril. Next three speakers, please a long walk. Uh, chairman, uh, commissioners, my name is Matt Rean. I'm here representing the Bay Area Council. We're a business sponsored nonprofit representing the largest employers in the Bay Area. I manage our housing policy and as my boss likes to say, it's all my fault. Um, I'm not here to sing the praises of the project. You have our letter that sings the praises of the project. I'm here to talk about the process and what has led us to this point, the very imperfect process that's led us to this point. This should be a dialogue between the community and the project sponsor, but it's not. And there's a reason why it's not. And it's because rooms like this for the last 50 years have killed good projects. And we've had the resulting housing crisis has meant that the state has had to step in and remove discretion from local governments because rooms like this have consistently killed good projects and resulted in a housing crisis of unprecedented proportions. 40,000 Californians every single year move to Texas because they build homes in Texas and people can afford to live there. 200,000 people every single day drive into the Bay Area from their homes in the far-flung exerbs of Patterson and Tracy and Mantika burning gas on their way here 2 hours in the morning and burning gas on their way home 2 hours in the evening. So that's why the state has had to step in and take away your discretion. If you refuse to approve this project, this is obviously compliant with both the Housing Accountability Act and the Builder's Remedy. Your city attorney has said so, your staff has said so, you've heard from outside council that this does apply. If you

choose to ignore the law, the state is required to fine you $10,000 per unit. That's state law. That's $4.2 million you will have to pay to the state. A minimum of $4.2 million. If the state finds that you did it willfully, you chose to ignore the advice of council, they can then add punitive damages on behalf of the developer, then the state can take away discretionary funds, transportation and public safety funds. This has happened in other states if you in other cities if you want to test them. It is precedent. Thank you. Thank you, Cheyenne.

Good evening. Uh my name is Cheyenne Gomez. I'm an assistant business manager and the president of the electrical union uh IBW local 302 here in um Contraosta County. I'm here tonight representing over 150 W Creek households who belong to the plumbers, electricians, the sprinkler fitters and sheet metal unions. Uh we have a few thousand members within Contraosta County. For the last 30 years we've worked to support projects that promote sustainability and equity. We were the first trade organization in the nation to support a county's urban growth boundary to help encourage developments like this one in front of you tonight. Uh we have partnered with developers like Signature Development to gain approvals and build over 60,000 housing units in our county. With that history, it's no surprise that we are here tonight asking for your support uh asking for your support uh for this project. Uh we appreciate that Signature Development has taken the time to hear and be responsive to concerns raised by the project's neighbors. Um just thank you uh for your service to the community and we hope you say yes to the project.

Thank you. Tim, we're missing one.

Tim Katrrol hearing none. The next three would be Nick Nick Guchin Goodwin sorry Goodwin Susan Wolf and Michael Katsos. You're not going to need a timer for me tonight. I'm going to keep it quick since there is a a stacked house here. But uh good evening commissioners. My name is Nick Goodwin. the business manager for plumbers and steam fitters local 159 located in Martinez. Uh like a few others here in the room, I'm here representing the plumbers, the electricians, the sprinkler fitters, and the sheet metal worker unions that cover Contraosta County. I come to you tonight to speak a favor and ask for your support of the project before you. The commitment and partnership from from developers such as Signature Homes has helped in the successful careers of several apprentices uh where they get to start their career and hopefully at the end of it reach a a term all of us want to get to and that is retirement. Uh the project will be able to offer opportunities to our apprentices that have grown up in in your community and also will be able to leave their stamp and imprint on their with their career in in this community as well. All we hear about is the ongoing housing crisis and here's a project that will help solve a portion of this housing crisis. I strongly feel that this project is right for Walnut Creek and I ask for the support by advancing this project tonight. Thank you for allowing me to speak and the opportunity to be here. Thank you.

Thank you. Susan,

my name is Susan Wolf. Whoops. And I wasn't um planning to speak tonight, but I feel motivated to endorse what my fellow residents at Viamonti have said. And so I won't repeat that. I'm just going to give you some thanks, Mark. Some bullet points of things that occurred to me while I was sitting here. I haven't heard a word about asbestous asbestous mitigation how it's going to happen when it would happen and where would the vehicles be and the that where would vehicles be who are working on the project where would the construction vehicles be people who are on management coming to view the site are they going to do street parking where what is is that going to further aggravate the conditions um because it will there there will be giant vehicles and small vehicles coming in there. Um, I'm not opposed to having a project like that. I'm just opposed to the density and the ugliness of what I see when you get off the perimeter. It it it's my eye it looks ugly. And um I see kids riding their bike in the street. I don't know what the sidewalk looks like. Can a mom push a carriage on the sidewalk around the around the complex? I couldn't tell. This is beautiful, but it's the only one place it happens that I could see. I'm doing this now on my own. My fellow residents at Viet Monty might not like what I'm about to say and management might like not like but I would like to invite any of you to come visit my home in Viamonti and see how it can be done right with lots of open space lots of places to have lunch outside during the the warm the warm months. We love it. You know the way the servers come out with our food. We're sitting in the

beautiful in the beautiful spaces. come visit me at Viamonte. And and also just one word, I I had lung cancer a few months ago and I don't want to have to deal with all that stuff. Thank you, Michael. The next the next three speakers would be Jan Jan Warren, Susan Leic, and Ray Greenleaf. Right.

Good evening, commissioners, city planners, fellow W Creek residents. I've heard a lot of good comments. I'm not going to repeat uh expressing concerns about building density, about the loss of most of the redwood trees in this development. Um, but I'm coming here as as a retired engineer, a man that I'm used to working with facts and with data. And I read this EIR. It was very long. It was it looked like one of my old lab reports backwards and forwards. And the one thing that struck me which I thought was odd for such an important a project was there was so much language of affection, not language of fact. uh for example the traffic survey I have given some feedback and I would like to speak perhaps with Mr. Spencer on another occasion about some items, some sentences that just didn't make sense to me in comment rebuttals in the final e specifically page 2-11. Um, there's a comment that says, "Well, um, we know that the traffic is unacceptable going eastbound at both rush hour intervals on Ignaso Valley Road." It's like that already. So, um, having this project is not going to be accountable for creating traffic. So therefore, we're not going to assess this as an impact, but it's indeed an incremental impact to safety and to pollution, adding I don't know how many cars out on the road going in the same direction now out to work and back and on the weekends. So yeah, there's a lot lot to cover here. Um, the second thing I wanted to say is I really implore the city of Walnut

Creek to use social media for making transparency of our planning issues. Facebook and Next Door are available and they should be accessible because our city council members use them. Thank you. Thank you, Jen. Oh, I'm sorry. Is that Susan?

Yes. I'm Susan Lee. I'm the president and chief executive officer of Joybound People and Pets in the Shadellands at 2890 Mitchell Drive. I want to start with two comments. One, Viamonte is exceptionally beautiful. It is one of the loveliest communities, senior or otherwise, that I have ever seen, and I can understand why you all have a very high bar. I also know that, you know, I'm the mom of four kids and a little baby granddaughter. They would be thrilled to live in Mitchell Drive Town Homes and their standards just can't be quite as high as yet. Their main standard is affordability. And I really believe that this project delivers a nice home for the money. I will also tell you that we have 140 employees at Joybound People and Pets. many of them early career or midcareer, but even the late career professionals, veterinarians, and other highly skilled professionals have a hard time finding a a nice affordable home in Walnut Creek. Um, so the very idea that those 55 affordable units or some of those market rate units could be housing for those good folks who work for us at Joybound thrills my heart. I will also say sustainability is tremendously important to our organization. Our CFO here has crafted a multi-year sustainability plan for us. And let me just invite all of you and all of the future residents of Mitchell Drive Town Homes to come and enjoy the beautiful outdoor space in our lovely memorial gardens. We're happy to extend that to this community for those folks who can't have access to large leafy shaded beautiful courtyards such as Viamonte enjoys. But we're going to share ours with you. The other thing is that on sustainability um it's a walkable a true walkable community. Literally, you could live and work and shop in Shadelins and not need

a car. And that's tremendously important and a great value to all of us at Joybound. We hope to the city we're strongly in favor of approval. Thank you. Now, Jan, there you go. Now, Jan.

Hi, I'm Jan Warren. I live in the Woodlands and uh we were fortunate enough 40 years ago to buy a home there, which we could never afford now. Uh Walnut Creek is a highly desirable city with a wonderful quality of life, and a lot of people want to move here, but we just don't have enough housing. and we particularly don't have enough affordable housing. Um I have I have participated and supporting affordable housing for over 10 years here in Walnut Creek. Um I participated in the development of the orchards which people oh look we can't see our you know squirrels run around and we I mean they had a a lot more meanings uh than this one which is a benefit. Um, and I I I love having the Viamonte folks in our area and I love all the I mean, you can hardly get a parking place over in that shopping center. So, it's been very successful. The engineers did a great job. We were all people were concerned about, you know, turning in the traffic and they did a great job of of making it work for for people. Um, how am I doing? Am I out of time? No,

you have about a minute. Oh, okay.

Wow. So, anyway, this the the or is the same center that offers these amenities for those that live in Viamonty. My neighborhood in the Woodlands was up in arms about that uh Viamonte and some of them may be living there now. I don't know. Um so anyway, this this is a wellthoughtout project. I mean uh I live just off uh Oak Grove and Peach Willow. I'm going to get the dust and so forth as well. I'm not young either, but I am thrilled to be able to um welcome younger people, people from downtown who want to have a little more space. Uh people who can come to Walnut Creek and enjoy it as much as the rest of us. So, thanks for the project. I support it.

Thank you. Is it Ray? He left. Okay. The next three would be Linda Thompson, Sally Dhy, and Ununice Swinson.

Linda,

good evening, commissioners. I My name is Linda Thompson. I'm a resident of Viamonte Senior Living. With over 400 town homes proposed in the Mitchell town home project, it is fair to assume that an additional 800 plus vehicles will daily pour onto our local streets and ultimately onto Vienna uh excuse me, Ignatio Valley Road, which is already heavily congested. Even now, at times during the daily commute, the traffic is backed up onto Shadelland's Drive, blocking the entrance of Viamonte Senior Living. I'm concerned about the impact the additional traffic will have on the senior residents and our ability to safely use the crosswalks around our community as well as resident access to and exit from our underground parking with the increased traffic backing up on Shadelins. I am particularly concerned about emergency medical services and fire department vehicles being able to enter and exit Viamonte's driveway to assist in medical emergencies which occur frequently in a senior community. This is a major safety issue. I would hope the planning commission would see the value of requiring the Mitchell town home project to reduce the number of town homes proposed and require them to do more to mitigate the increase in traffic they will create. Thank you.

Thank you, Sally. Yep.

My name is Sally Dherty. I live in 2801 Shadellands and I am opposed to the Mitchell town houses because I think they are so dense. Right now we have a beautiful business park with trees, streams, park-like features. It's going to be replaced by mega housing project with very little green space, fewer trees, and no streams in an area that is called the orchard or the Shadelands, neither of which will be present. I want to remind you that housing projects in San Francisco and Oakland are not fine places to which um anyone wants to live and that is going to be your legacy if you uh submit this project as is to Walnut Creek. Thank

you, Ununice.

Good evening everyone. I uh I had prepared something and written it out on my computer and then I tried to print it out and the printer didn't work. So I just have to speak. Uh my story is just a a very uh personal one and I understand that housing is very important and I live at um Viamonte. I live on Shadeland's Drive. I recently have been uh diagnosed with a lung a lung disease and so my concern is what is it going to be like to live there for four or five years and have dust and particullet and all kinds of things pouring into my apartment. And so it's just a personal story and that's all I have to say.

Thank you. We have four more. Barry Barry Tivas or Tias Lana Georgie Eva. Oh, okay. Who's that? Barry Lana. Steve. Steve with the green ink. R. Yeah, it starts with an R. The rest of it and Cheryl McKenna, please. Where's Por there?

Steve, thank you. Um, I would like to say that um, I live at Viamonte and I've been living there for five years. Um, and it's a wonderful place to live and I think Walnut Creek is a great town and I'm an engineer, a retired engineer and I admire the fact that the streets don't flood when you get heavy rains and that the traffic lights work most of the time. Uh but and I've dealt a lot with governments in in my career and I think you guys are getting bamboozled to be pushed into an unex a an excessive use of this builder's remedy. I don't think that was the builder's remedies. I'm all for affordable housing, but I'm but I don't think I think these guys are taking advantage of you. And they could build a suitable complex with affordable housing without elbowto elbow um uh buildings and without destroying the the the green space that we have. I mean, that's one of the nice things about Viamonte. We have these we we we look across the street and they've got these huge trees which do wonderful things for all of us. Everybody knows that. And they going to cut them down. There ought to be a way if they were at all sensible and not just looking to make all every buck that they can to preserve those trees and still have an affordable a doable project and have affordable housing. Um it seems to me that they're just trying to push push it to the envelope and elbowto elbow um um units with no

care at all about the e about fitting into Walnut Creek. Thank you. Thank you.

Oh no, that's Cheryl. Cheryl.

Good evening. My name is Cheryl McKenna. I'm the chief financial and chief operating officer for Joybond People and Pets. We're located at the corner of Mitchell Drive and Oak Grove Road. I've heard and very much respect our Viamonte uh neighbors comments and concerns this evening, but I'm here to express my excitement about this project and the positive energy it promises to bring to our corner of the Shadlands community. It represents not just a new development, but a welcome infusion of life and activity and possibility into an area that has been overly quiet since I started there. I've been with Joybond for six years. And during that time, I've watched our organization and our community grow and evolve. Yet, we continue to sit next door to this vacant lot and across the street from an office park that is overly largely empty. These underutilized spaces have long felt out of sync with the vibrancy and optimism that defines the mission of Joybound and the goals of the Shadellands Park. Joy BL Joybound's campus is a place where people come to make connections. The revitalization this new development will bring aligns beautifully with that spirit and in increased activity in the area will not only strengthen our neighborhood but also deepen the sense of community that we at Joybound work hard every day to foster. And I'll admit selfishly that I'm thrilled about the potential for new volunteers, new supporters, new families coming through our facility. The more engaged our community becomes, the more people and pets we're able to help. Thank you for opportunity to share my support and I believe this development will be a positive step forward for the Shadell's community.

Thank you. Are we uh uh two more Lana? Is Lana here? Last call for Lana?

Oh. Oh, is Lana Porsche. Okay. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Laura Patch. That's it. I am shocked to be the last person speaking. Um, hi everyone. I'm Laura Patch. Use she her pronouns. Um, as many of you know, I'm very involved in Walnut Creek uh government and politics and community. I sit on the transportation commission and I've run for city council twice. And I say that because I love Walnut Creek. I grew up in Contraosta County and really care about it. And when I got to move back, I chose Walnut Creek because of how much I love it. And yet, in the last 3 months or so, I have actually seriously been considering moving because it is very difficult for me to afford to live here. Um, this is the exact kind of housing project that this city needs. This medium density allows people my age, younger, and those around that age to have a home that feels like a home, is not an apartment, but still has a community feel to it. Um, I believe that the developer has been extremely accommodating to the requests coming from the design review commission and from other comments. The playground, for example, is really fantastic. There is a very similar complex that is on my road. Um, it's been a great addition to my neighborhood area. It's unincorporated, so it's not a feasible place for me to live. I'd have to give up everything I listed about being involved in the community. Um, I also just want to address, yes, traffic will change, but some of the earlier comments that have been mentioned about 800 cars seem outdated. I don't know anybody my age who has a who is a twocar family. Um we are talking about 400 units that most likely you will have at

most 600 cars and they're not all going to be moving at the same time. Um it's not like 800 cars are going to be during those commute hours. So I really hope that you uh pass this. And um just a note that on the the waiverss, the setbacks are really what allow for this medium density to exist. So I hope that that doesn't become a sticking point. Thank you all. Thank you. We we have one more speaker that just dropped a card and it's wit is wit.

Yeah, buzzer beater there. Thanks for I appreciate it and if it means anything, I'm a zero car family. So um good evening commissioners. Whitturn on behalf of the housing action coalition. We're a member supported nonprofit. We advocate for housing across California at all income levels. We're super excited about this project. Um just strong support. This is a common sense use of land. Um over 400 units, family size units in high opportunity area. Um and the affordability here is really a standout being double the city standard requirement. It's going to be huge for low-income families. And it's really just a meaningful commitment to the uh the families and essential workers that want to stay in Walnut Creek. Um, and beyond housing, the neighborhood benefits are really real. Um, open space, dog park, critical safety upgrades. Um, these are direct responses to neighborhood feedback. Um, and they make the Shadelins area safer for everyone. And, uh, a final reminder that you have a legal obligation to approve this project. Um, it's sustainable, familyfriendly, and aligns with the city's housing goals. So, we urge you to move it forward. Thank you.

Thank you. That was the last. I don't see anyone else racing up to the podium. So, so I will uh actually I won't close the public hearing yet. Um before the applicant uh has 10 minutes to respond, I wanted to ask the traffic engineer if you would uh come up to answer. No, actually question. Yes. And chair if you would keep the public open for that portion. Yeah.

I backed off that. I Okay. Uh yeah, I I just wanted to um uh as been pointed out the the uh VMT the vehicle miles traveled is useful for SQA but perhaps not for other purposes of of evaluating traffic but you did more studies than that. Could you address the uh impact of uh or what the impact of the uh current office use is and how that compares to the the proposed project on on emergency vehicles in particular? Sure. I will address that.

Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. So, the chair asked about can I address comments that were made specifically about um emergency vehicle response times and also how that compares to the current situation and then how that might change with the project as proposed. Can I paraphrase that? Thank you.

Okay. Um, so we we did take a look at that and I'm going to back up a little bit because it it relates to several things that we have in our analysis and um the the office park generates more trips and uh I know a lot of folks have moved in to Viamonte in the last several years and the office park has not been pushing its leasing as much as it was previously. So it doesn't feel like it's it exactly. But um if nothing else changed, the office could just say this is what we're going to do. We could lease it and we have to look at that as a condition of what's the potential for the office park and then how does that compare to what's being proposed now because those are basically the two conditions. What we have now is kind of we're coming out of this post-pandemic condition. Um that is uh a little bit different. The project does have the potential to generate fewer trips on a daily basis and in a peak hour basis, but as I said earlier, it does change the directionality a little bit. So again, with with residential, more outbound in the morning, more inbound in the evening. Overall though, it's a significant reduction in trips. And that's what's in both the SQA and the nonsequa traffic analysis. And I use that to start off the response because it does matter. When we looked at safety in the secret document, emergency response times in particular, um we have a couple of ways to look at that. One is when we look at the intersection analysis in the non-sequel report and it shows in tables, there are several tables in there. I happen to have table 12 from the traffic report in front of me. Um it does it shows a comparison of a no project to a project condition. Generally, there aren't big differences. is they're very similar. In most cases, the project results either

in a similar or a slightly lower average delay. But more importantly is at all of these intersections, it's not showing failure conditions. Now, with all respect, I I know that everyone's saying, "Well, that's not right cuz, you know, I go out there and I'm waiting through a cycle after a cycle or it's getting hard and I can't get out of the driveway and so forth." We're not saying there's not traffic out there. What we have to evaluate in a project is what does this project do compared to if the project was not there. That's the the basis and that gives us the applesto apples type comparison that we are prescribed to do. And the project quite frankly would have not a very noticeable result compared to an office park. And that's really the the the bottom line if you wanted to interpret all of the documents and everything else with respect to traffic. speeds, delays, and so forth, response times for emergency vehicles compared to each condition, whether it's today or in the near-term future or in 2040, it's going to be it's it's very very similar. And that's the the essence of it. So, where there are where there is congestion, where there are some cues or whatever, if you don't have the project, you'd have that same condition. That's the the and and our comment response and maybe it wasn't phrased as eloquently as as um as it could have been, but the essence is the project's not resulting in the effects. And that's what you have to evaluate is what does this project do and then what can you condition this project to do based on its own merits. Outside of that, if there are concerns about traffic and safety and delays and and driveways and sightelines or whatever, those exist regardless of the project. It's we have to separate, you know, concerns and and everyone's concerns are valid. People who live

here, people who drive here, people who work here, and so on. But it's what is the project doing? The project's not changing response times in general. What we also found now if we saw like hey things are just so terrible an emergency vehicle can't get through in a situation that is something we would flag because that is obviously an issue that's a safety effect and if it exists today if it exists in the future that's not to say there are times now when it's not congestion and and you have those situations but the project's not going to change that the what I did hear in some of the comments also which um I do hear a lot I you know I' I've been doing this a long time and I I work on a lot of different projects in different communities. Construction period, which however long it lasts, um those are in in secret terms considered limited. They're short-term. They come and they go, right? I heard a comment earlier about when Chick-fil-A was under construction and then there were some issues with traffic and circulation during the construction period. Each construction project has its own construction traffic management plan amongst other things. That is something that the city prescribes and that also talks about where how do you bring in the uh the bulldozers? How do you bring in the construction equipment? How do the workers access the site? What are the hours of construction? What's the traffic lane control? Do you have to relocate a bus stop? What do you deal with sidewalks? You have continuous pedestrian activity and bicycle activity and so forth. All of that is prescribed in that document so that you maintain that access throughout the construction period. And I believe that's also monitored. There's requirements. They're pretty strict actually. So I I want to just kind of sum it up by saying it's not that we're saying there's no traffic or that things aren't going to be different um from a transportation perspective, but the project's effects are pretty much the same as if the project was not there compared to the office park. And that's a that to me is

is very telling in terms of you know an analysis. Thank you. And if I could expand on that.

Yeah. Um could I ask could I ask uh Jana from First Carbon Solutions to come up and maybe give us a two-minute walk through of of SQA and the process to get to to get to the MMRP and then specifically the the alternatives how they were generated and evaluated and then the relationship of the air quality mitigation measures with the MMRP. Okay, I'll try to get I'll try to get to all that. Let me start with a kind of a SQUA process overview. Okay, so SQA requires any project that requires um discretionary approval. So it requires a city board or a county commission to approve. um it requires that jurisdiction to look at a project um via a whole host of topics which we've showed before and um within that host of topics there are very specific thresholds um and that is where we define what is in SQA considered a significant impact. Your concerns that you've raised are all valid. Under SQA, we have very specific and narrow thresholds of what is considered as significant impact. And then we have very specific items that could be considered as mitigation and that mitigation must have nexus meaning that the impact of the project must create a significant impact in terms of those thresholds to be able to require mitigation. So under the law of SQA that is how you can require mitigation and that is how you conclude that there is a significant impact. So that's a basic SQA primer. What was the next item?

Um that's the the alternatives how how you arrived at the alternatives and how they're evaluated.

Right. So under SQA you are required to evaluate alternatives and the point of those alternatives is to reduce any significant unavoidable impacts or if there are significant impacts that are mitigated to less significant to try to create those make those come down even further even though they're not significant. So for this project we had two alternatives that we considered outrightly. one being no project and that's kind of what um what Mark was speaking to in terms of just the existing office park stays. Um would that reduce some impacts? Yes. Would but there are no significant impacts to reduce. Um it would just be status quo as it goes. As somebody mentioned, all of the mitigation measures, the majority of the mitigation measures, if not all of them required for this project are for construction and they ensure that during the construction period, there are not significant impacts related to air quality and the health related to air quality. There's not significant impacts related to noise. Um there's uh not significant impacts related to construction traffic. Um so under the no project alternative, that's one situation. The other alternative that was considered was a reduced density alternative. Um, and that one gets tricky because this project was submitted under the builder's remedy. They cannot change their project application by more than 20%. So, what we did is we said, well, okay, they can't change their application by more than 20%. Let's reduce the project by 20%. And um, evaluate that project. Did it reduce some of the the severity of some of the less than significant impacts? Yes. Did it eliminate any of them? No. You wind up having the same mitigation measures. Um so those were the two alternatives considered directly in the AR. We also consider alternatives um they're called considered but rejected and that means they're not fully analyzed because they're simply from the outright

infeasible. Um one of those alternatives was a senior housing option. Um and that is essentially unfeasible because of the builder's remedy application issue. proposing senior living um specifically housing restricted housing on this site is not allowable by the existing general plan designation or zoning. Um therefore if we were if someone were to propose that as an alternative they would have to go back to the start provide a new application and request different approvals a general plan designation redesation a zoning reszoning um that's a whole different application process. So it's it's not feasible and so it wasn't fully considered.

Okay. Anything else? I just there was some discussion about um air quality and um uh to tier most of the mitigation measures that are already in the MMRP related to air quality construction activity. Yeah, we I we actually have our air quality expert here tonight and maybe she can come up and speak on that.

Hi everyone, my name is Jackie. I'm a senior air quality scientist with First Carbon. Um so yeah, the air quality the construction related impacts were analyzed in accordance with Bay Area Air District guidance and recommended methodologies. Um the Bay Area Air District is the agency with authority over air quality throughout the 9ount Bay Area. Um and the impacts were analyzed against thresholds that Jana mentioned and we the analysis concluded that with implementation of mitigation the impacts would be less than significant. the cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations and non-cancer chronic um impacts would be below the identified thresholds. Um a note about the mitigation. So mitigation air 1 requires dust um control measures during construction and uh mitigation measure 2, air 2 requires the use of tier 4 construction equipment on all equipment. Um tier 4 construction equipment reduces emissions by 90 to 95%. Um, so it's extremely clean construction equipment and that would be enforced through the MMR RP that was um discussed earlier. There any other questions on that?

Uh, anybody questions? Press chair. This is a complicated topic and so um I do have some experience in this. When you're doing this analysis, the requirement is as such that you literally have to put the manufacturer of the vehicle. Can you go into that because that's that's important in in the mitigation measure. So I

in the modeling and it's interesting because I'm reading air 2 and it literally discusses even the manufacturer the identification number the engine number and that's I I I really want you to go through that because your job is hard in the sense that they are required to provide you literally the exact amount of vehicle whether it's excavators, skids, um back hose with the identification number the horsepower. Mhm.

So this is not this is serious how you're modeling. Can you go but I am not an air quality expert and can so a and after you explain that can you also disc uh describe the power and what backmed and carb do as part of all that? Yes, maybe I'll actually start there. Um so the Bay Area air district and I was employed there for 10 years actually prior to joining first carbon. Um they have regulatory authority granted by the public the state's public health and safety code. So they are a public health agency. Uh they have regulatory authority over stationary sources of of air pollution throughout the 9ount Bay Area. So that's things like gas stations, um refineries, um dry cleaning facilities, industrial facilities, um uh facilities of that nature. And the air resources board at the state level um has jurisdiction over mobile sources of air pollution such as cars, trucks, uh trains and and so forth and construction equipment um because those things move throughout the state. So it wouldn't really make sense to regulate those um in a local area. So setting the framework there. I'll talk a little bit more about the modeling and your question. So your question about um documenting exactly the the equipment that will be used um and ensuring it's comp in compliance with this mitigation measure that actually falls on the applicant um to do that and they will actually have to provide all of that information as part of compliance with this mitigation measure and the city will be um will um be charged with enforcing it. In terms of how we model it, um we use air quality modeling software um which can look at different scenarios and different types of equipment and the emission rates that are associated with the different types of equipment. So what we'll normally do is um model a project's air quality

impacts on um using average construction equipment and we'll see where that lands and in fact we did that within the ER as well and found that impacts would be would exceed thresholds. So we then modeled it assuming that construction equipment would use tier 4 emission standards and that was sufficient to decrease air quality impacts below thresholds. Does that answer your question?

Yeah, thank you. And then and then last but not least that ju just and that's kind of like the final point of it is that the submittal and proof of implementation of all of that equipment is required prior to being able to grade. Absolutely. In fact, yep. Um the MMRP states that the method of verification would be preparation of a construction management plan which Simmer spoke to. um submittal of proof of implementation during construction. Um that would be verified prior to issuance of a grading permit or a building permit during construction. And the party responsible for verification would be the city of Walnut Creek Community Development Department.

Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Anything else, Chip? Okay. Thank you both. Can I ask a followup on that? Sure.

Um so I just want to make sure that our community is able to follow along. Um, so one of the things that I'm looking at on my screen right now is exhibit C to attachment one of the MMRP. Um, so this is the table um that shows the mitigation measure. Uh, then there's a column for method of verification, timing of verification, who is responsible for the verification, and then there's columns for verifying that it was complete with a date and initial. Um, so I just want to make sure the public is aware that that exists. Um, and it does include um, everything that's been talked about here. Um, and I know during public comment it was mentioned tier 4 diesel engines. Um, and that is listed on here as well under the mm2. Um, so, um, I just had a question about is there, um, ongoing monitoring of the PM2.5?

There's not ongoing monitoring of the PM2.5. No. So, the way that you determine that is through the modeling. Mhm. So we we modeled the PM2.5 construction related emissions um in accordance with Bay Area Air District recommendations and found that with use of this lower um emissions equipment tier 4, the PM2.5 concentrations would be below um the health-based threshold set by the Bay Area Air District. Thank you. One other thing I also wanted to just point out for the community um under the um mitigation measure air1 uh one of the requirements is that the construction contractor post a visible sign with um a telephone number and um a name for um for anyone to contact for any dust complaints and uh that would go to the Bay Area Air District actually and they do have enforcement officers who will um come out and investigate complaints.

Excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me. We're not taking questions from the audience, okay? We we be buying everybody breakfast before long. So, just if you you've had a chance to speak and and we're trying to get what answers we can. So, uh thank you. Um any other questions? Are we in still public comment? Yes. Yeah. Oh, I know. Okay. Uh I think everybody's okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Now I'll ask the applicant uh has 10 minutes to uh respond comment.

Yeah. Thank you. Um Jonathan Fern once again. I I don't I don't have 10 minutes worth of rebuttals. I think the experts did a good job of uh describing a lot of the concerns that we've heard. Um I all all that is to say is that we like you said we've agreed to the mitigation monitoring response plan. We uh will perform the construction management plan prior to pulling a grading permit. So all the stuff that you heard that we have to do we'll do. We'll have uh the uh uh disturbance coordinator listed on the site. Um as it relates I did hear a comment about uh asbestous. We'll do an asbestous survey prior to tearing the buildings down uh where you go in and figure out how much bestus and lead based paint there is. Then you'll have a special remediation contractor that will do that work. We will do that as well. Um and then lastly, I'll just um mention about trees. You know, we don't um want to tear down a lot of trees. Um but we did look um we did took we took that very seriously uh from the community and from the DRC. Uh even after the DRC asked us to, we went back looked at every tree to see if there was any we could save that was an addition. uh but just in as as it laid out with our um utility plan and our site plan, it just wasn't feasible. So, we were happy that we could add more trees, but unfortunately, we couldn't save them, but we we certainly looked at that. So, thank you. All right. Uh with that, I will close the public hearing and uh bring it back to the commission. uh the uh we're asked to uh kind to a two-step process. First look at the EIR um and I would suggest that we can discuss the EIR um deal with that and then pick up the the various other U resolutions to go. So with respect to the environmental impact report, do I have comments?

Somebody might want to start. Okay, I can start.

Sorry, I was trying to be polite and let let everybody else start. Um, one of the things that I like to look at in an EIR is if the um, MMRP includes things that are more than what I like to call the bones and the stones. It's it's it's a saying, right? It's um you know um the bones is which they have in there. if you dig and you find something, is it a bone or a stone or um just the pre-construction surveys? And so if there's anything beyond that for me, that that's, you know, to my fellow commissioners, that's kind of how I I like to look at an EI is is there anything beyond that or in an ER are we passing something which is called um a statement of overriding considerations, meaning that there was no mitigation at all. And that was one of the first as I poured as an engineer. I poured through all the documents. Um I'm in a room full of engineers here. I heard a couple of you. So thank you for coming out here. Um but that was that was for me a positive thing to hear was that it was it wasn't things that were were not passing or reviewing statement of overriding considerations, meaning that there's just no way that that mitigation, pardon me, that impact could be mitigated. and that the um MMRP wasn't anything beyond the bones of stones as I call it or the pre-construction surveys. Sorry,

am I not loud enough?

I'm sorry. Did you guys hear my comment about how I love that there was engineers in the Okay, at least you heard that one. Okay, I'm going to I'm going to synthesize everything that I just said. Um, sorry. I always tell my children not to yell at me and now I'm I need to speak up. Um, so essentially um to to synthesize what I just said, the be the best thing that I always look for in an EIR um when I'm reviewing it in an MMRP is that there's no statement of overriding considerations, meaning that there's no possible way that that impact could be mitigated. And to me, I did not find that. So that was extremely important. And then the other thing that I always look at um for um ERS and the and the subsequent MMRPS is that there's nothing beyond the regular bones and stones that type of pre-construction survey um that would kind of lead to many of of the folks comments that would go beyond the issuance of grading or building permit or during construction because then that kind of has a red flag alert to me of that's interesting that it couldn't be mitigated um notwithstanding the general construction. So I'll I'll say that about the EI for that topic if anybody wants to add something.

Commissioner count.

Um so I just want to make sure we're clear for the public about what it is that we're doing here. Um as far as it as far as the environmental impact report um so please correct me if I say anything wrong here. um we are not um sort of litigating the science here. We're not scientists that are checking on the validity validity of the report. Um rather we are certifying um that the EIR was in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the SQA. Um, we acknowledge that the studies were in fact done by these independent sources and that the findings were based on that data. Did I say that correctly?

Right. That's that's correct. And you're looking at whether or not there's evidence um, you know, substantial evidence to support the conclusions uh, which you can draw from the studies. Thank you.

The comments, Commissioner Quark. All right. So, um I wanted to say kind of my thought process at looking at the IR and how I how I was approaching this. So, I do accounting for my day job and auditing and a lot of what I look at is risk management. What are the risks of things that can go wrong when we undertake um projects or other big other big um parts like this? And then once we identify those risks, how do we address them? And so what I like about the EIR is that it it seems to follow the process for me um looking at okay what is the proposed project out there how does it compare to the existing conditions and then um what are the risks that come with it. So, for example, a lot of people here have mentioned air quality is definitely a big concern and that has been identified as a risk um to be looked at and to be addressed. And so with the mitigation measures in place, I I do like that okay, this is the condition that's at hand that should be addressed and then this is what the this is the steps that are going to be taken to address those conditions to reduce the risks that are um inherently present in such a project of this undertaking. So um I think because of the risk assessment that's been done and the steps that have been taken to uh address those risks, I think it seems to me that the AR has done its due diligence and has identified the um appropriate steps during the construction and the eventual existence of the project.

Let me let me just summarize a bit. There's there's three three things that that can be found in an EI. One is um there's no significant impact environmental impact which is fine just you know that that that works. There is a significant environmental impact um but it can be mitigated uh to a point where it's not significant uh and that's uh 10 or 12 or 14 situations here where that was the case. um uh and in those cases uh the applicant has provided uh assurance that those mitigations will take place in the in the process of the construction. Um the third type is vice chair noted is uh there a significant environmental impact. It can't be mitigated but because of some overriding consideration we're going to do it anyway. Okay. there were none of those and that's that's very helpful to to be able to um have confidence in the EIR. Um so I would uh invite a motion

actually um just before you do that I actually advise um if the commission you know if you're finished with the ER components that you go on discuss the project and you if you're ready then you go on with the motions at the time that you finish talking about the project. Is there a reason for that? Um and the reason the reason for that is uh what's it's generally good practice to to reach that conclusion at the end and also just from a technical standpoint under the permanent streamlining act if you certify the ER it technically triggers a time by which the city has to approve a project. Um and so unless there is a specific reason for that then I'd advise you just continue with this.

Thank you for the explanation. All right. Um, I'll uh table that suggestion and uh move to uh consideration of the uh project itself. Like to start with

um I guess I'll take a shot at it. I guess I would refer to a different project. Um, our predecessors in this position going back decades have tried to make Walnut Creek a place to live, work, and play. And losing losing the work aspect of it by removing a possibility of a office complex is limiting that. That said, um the state of California has demanded that we honor the builder's remedy with that and um but looking at the project, it looks like a very decent project and is would very be a good asset to this community. Thank you,

Commissioner Moran.

Uh thank you microphone. Um thank you for everybody that came out and spoke uh and wrote. Um I we've heard concerns about the traffic and the schools and the safety and the trees and all that and I just want to know that we we take all this very sincerely. Um and so thank you. Um my thoughts are that you know we have to operate within the constraints of the law right and that's state law which limits what we can do. You've all heard the reasons. uh and SQA demands that we just look at the impacts and then look to see whether they've been mitigated and we have to make a determination based on that. And the other thing is that this is an aging office complex that is not going to come to its full use anytime soon because the world has changed and we need housing in our communities. And the way I see this is that a lot of people are not going to be happy with the outcome. And we have to make judgments just based on all the factors involved, the community impact to the neighbors and the need for housing. So, I support the project. I would support a motion to approve it. I'll let my fellow commissioners speak, but I just want to know that we hear you. uh and we're working within the constraints of what we've been given and it's not an easy decision and thank you and I think that um we can move forward.

Commissioner uh Klopp Quaclo sorry it's not easy.

Uh so I want to thank everybody who came out and took the time to comment on the EIR, comment on the application, write letters, be part of the process. It's really important that we have this kind of community dialogue. That's what makes Walnut Creek a great place because we can respectfully discuss uh different opinions. I personally am a really strong housing advocate. Um it surrounds everything that I do in my personal life to really look for us to increase housing supply in Walnut Creek. I think that this is a a a wellthoughtout project. I feel that the developer has done his best to respond to community concerns and I think uh when I think of my kid who wants to live in this area and can't afford and many people I know whose kids want to live in this area and can't afford this is the kind of project that we need to move forward. So for that I support it. So thank you else Quac.

All right. Um, so I was I'm actually very excited for this project. to me as someone who is um at the age where I'm looking for housing and I'd love to stay in Walnut Creek for all the reasons that you all have spoken to for the community, for the um for the access to amenities in the area, the um the schools that are here, the parks lands that are available. All of that makes Walnut Creek a a great place to live and I enjoy it and I do want to stay here. But at the same time, at the same time, um there's also my own life priorities. You know, where do I want to see myself living in the next 10 years? Where do I where do I see myself raising a family? And if it were possible, I'd love my answer to be Walnut Creek, stay here um just as you all all selected Walnut Creek to be your city. to live in. So, Mitchell Town Homes represents that opportunity for um people like me, my friends who have been looking for housing. Um people who that I know who I went to college with that eventually left the state because they couldn't afford to live in the Bay Area where they grew up with. Um and it's very hard for their parents because they have to go very far to visit their kids when they live abroad. It would be wonderful to bring their kids home and to have um people be around their parents. I'm fortunate enough that my family is still here and I'm able to be nearby to them, but even my siblings are being are feeling the pressures of the housing here and the um impacts of it with where they're starting their lives, where they're starting their careers, and whether they can be close to their parents, to grandparents, and everyone that they care about. So, housing is an important issue for me. I do appreciate this opportunity and I think um that it does it does the Mitchell Town Homes

does represent an asset to the Walnut Creek community especially um the walkable communities of the Shadelands. So I do support this project count.

Thank you. I too want to thank everyone who has participated in this process and who came out to speak tonight. um we learn so much when we hear all the different perspectives and that's how we can come to the best decisions in in the city that we love. Um so thank you to our union members who talked about how this project would bring apprenticeships um right here in town for people who live here. Thank you to our younger people who are talking about wanting to be able to live here and what it means um and how life may be different. You might not have two cars or necessarily even one car. Um so being able to picture what that looks like from real people who live here and want to stay here is very helpful for us to be able to picture what what it will look like when people move in to this community. um and hearing from Joybound to be able to hear from an employer that's walking distance who has employees who would like to live and walk to work as well. So all of that I think gave us a little bit of a better picture of you know what this could actually look like. Um, and I want to thank um the people from Viamonte who came here to talk about all the different concerns particularly around construction and um and health uh questions around air quality. Right? It's so important that we monitor those things and that we do have a process um and that we are transparent about it so that if we run into problems in in the midst of construction that everyone the whole neighborhood can can protect us, right, and can report it and that we have the Bay Area Air Quality District who has those standards and they will come out and inspect. Um so I think I have learned so much tonight um from all of you and hopefully you've all learned from each other as well. um about what this project can look like

and how it can be kind of a win-win for everyone here. Um so um and I also want to thank the developer for being responsive to the community. That was not a requirement given the laws um that are in place for this particular project. Um and it didn't have to happen. Um but I think your cooperation and trying to be responsive in the ways that you could have made it a much better project. Just looking at the uh the design review comments about um you know areas where people can congregate and and picnic and play. Um the original uh design had a place where people could trip and fall down into the middle of the thing that was just supposed to gather water, right? We know what that's like from the parking lot of of the orchards, unfortunately. Um, and so being able to really be responsive and be willing to invest in that change. Um, and other changes like adding the playground. Um, you know, th those types of things really make a big difference. Um, so, uh, I'm definitely supportive of the project as it stands. I think it is needed housing. Um, and I think it has become a better project because of everyone's input.

Well, Thank you. Well, as you leave, let me make my comment that uh with a big crowd, sometimes things get a little out of hand. Some things people can get very passionate about things and say things perhaps they regret later. Um this is not that kind of group. Um this has been a very very uh civil and uh constructive uh discussion and a lot of the points raised allowed us to get answers to some of those questions which helps us to make the decision as well. So, thank you all. Vice Ney,

I'll keep this super short. Um there was a lot of comments which I thought were beautiful about children and moms and seeing that I have um two kids under seven. It um I as a as a mommy who moved here from San Francisco living in a 700 foot apartment with a a toddler and I was pregnant. um anything in Walnut Creek seemed beautiful and loving for to raise my two girls, which I'm doing right now. And so to me as a mom, it it meant a lot as an engineer also to know that there was a lot of thought that went into providing the Silva cells, which are pretty expensive underground chambers, great for sustainability to be able to provide those areas for the kids. And I know that sometimes you you have to move up, right? So, that attached product isn't probably what we're all used to with wanting, you know, bigger yards, but I can assure you that in a lot of the developments that I've seen Oh, is the lights going down

someone someone's sending a message, I think. Um all all I would say is that those those um alley areas that you see a lot of times they act as woundorfs which is a a livable street and I've seen it in action in other um developments. And so I just I did want to address that because that was one thing that was brought up about where are the kids going to play? Where are the moms going to have their stroller? So, um I do support this project whenever you're ready for that. Um I think we are getting to that point. Uh I think that if we want to do the EIR first now you should do there's a motion on the certification of the EIR.

I move that we certify the environmental impact report and adopt the mitigating mitigation monitoring and reporting program. A second. You call a role. Commissioner Commissioner Strong. Yes. Commissioner Clark. Yes. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Turn on my microphone. Commissioner Count. Yes. Commissioner Klopp? Yes. Vice Chair Knighting? Yes. Chair Anderson? Yes. Uh motion. The eyes have it. Motion carries. All right. Does someone have a motion to uh deal with the design review, the vesting tentative map, the density bonus, the tree removal, and the drip line encroachment permits?

I'll do it. All right. I move that we adopt Go ahead. Go ahead. All right. Um before I do that, is it as amended because there isn't an extra condition at the end of the resolution? Yes, it would be as amended. As amended. Okay. So, I move that we adopt um the resolution to approve the vesting tenative map number 9683, final design review, density bonus tree removal and tree drip line encroachment permit for Mitchell Town Homes project. Second. Any further discussion? Not call the roll. As amended. As amended. Commissioner Quac. Yes. Commissioner Strongman. Yes.

Commissioner Moran. Yes. Commissioner Count. Yes. Commissioner Klopp. Yes. Vice Chair Nighting. Yes. And Chair Anderson. Yes. You guys have it. Motion carries. Thank you very much. And uh that item is completed. Um a break. If you would uh those who of you who are leaving, if you would uh do so quietly and if you want to discuss it further um the hallway is available. Um but we'll move on to the next item. Do you want to take five? Uh let let's take five. meet back here at 9:29.

Okay.

Uh we have another hearing tonight. Um it is on the uh Porsche dealership plan development re resone excuse me plan development reszone design review tree permits and assign ordinance exception. Okay of a staff report.

Yes. Switching gears. Uh Simmergale again. City of Walnut Creek. Um we are here tonight now to consider the second item which is the Porsche dealership uh and service center. It is a plan development reszone and design review. It's a recommendation from the planning commission tonight to move the project forward to the city council and the applicants uh team Steven Scanland um and his team are here tonight as am I to answer any questions that you may have after the presentation. And to quickly orient you with the site um it is zoned service commercial which does allow automobile dealerships um by right. Uh the site consists of three parcels that will be merged um that total 2.3 acres. Uh the existing site has a mix of older buildings. Um there is a restaurant, the Masses, as well as some other um underutilized buildings that are vacant. Um and the surrounding area consists primarily of commercial uses. However, there are residential uses um on Barton Court uh directly behind the site. And I guess if you can see it here, Barton Court. And here's just a closer look at the um existing uh site conditions and the buildings on site. Again, just more photographs. Here's the Mass building. Trying to use this, which is located right there. Uh fronting North Main. Uh this is the other building that's also fronting North Main. Um this is the building that you can see um that is fronting um Second Avenue. And then there's additional buildings that are um uh located further within the project site. Um I have identified those with the star. And now moving into the project information. Uh this does in this

request before you tonight uh is a construction of a new three-level auto dealership uh for Porsche uh which will offer vehicle sales and service. Um frontage improvements are also um being provided that include right-of-way dedication along both frontages uh a new six foot wide sidewalk on Second Avenue and replacement of the existing sidewalk on North North Main Street. And uh the request before you tonight also includes tree removals, uh new landscaping, new trees are also proposed, uh new signage, a sign exception is requested as part of this project. And uh this project did go before the design review commission and overall DRC did support the design and the uh PD reszone request as well and the sign exception noting that it's in scale with the development of the following com with the following comments and um all of these comments have uh been addressed as part of the revised plans. There is a condition of approval uh that does restrict um right turn on second a uh for um for test drive vehicles and then uh the lights out uh basically the business operating plan has been updated with the hours of operation. the business will close um no later than 6:00 p.m. um I believe all seven days of the week and um all of the um all of the light fixtures and the uh lights that are proh proposed as part of this project will be shielded and there will be no spillage offsite uh from that. So it's it's screened up to protect that um the west property lines and um the uh conditions those are typically standard conditions of approval that we have for all of our projects but um I believe the air quality um we incorporated um as because they're asking for this uh infill squa exemption and uh there was a memo that

was prepared to justify that there was less than significant impact so it's associated with that and the CMU wall rendering ing and the fence details are provided in this plan set. So tonight the planning commission is um reviewing this project to make a re recommendation on the squa determination uh the PD ordinance um the design review and the tree removal permits and this project is scheduled tenatively uh for March 3rd 2026 city council hearing where city council will uh then consider the squid determination and um consideration of all of the project entitlements. ments. So here is the existing site layout and circ circulation existing conditions on site and this is the new proposal. Um access will be provided from both second avenue and North Main Street into this dealership. And I just wanted to highlight that uh this building is um located approximately 30 feet away from the closest uh residential neighbor on Varton Court. Um and that and there which we'll go into more uh in detail later, but that 8 foot the sorry the CMU wall that is proposed will also be located here creating more of a buffer and um so the the the uh project consists of two areas. One is the uh main entry into the showroom. And here is the service center arrival area where uh customers could drop off their vehicles and the porter will take the vehicles in for service repairs. And then uh the remaining areas uh that are um highlighted here in orange are essentially um Porsche staff um spaces

such as this is the roof uh the ramp that leads up to the roof for inventory parking only. So no customer access. And this is the service shop um access and uh the parts and delivery um that provides access from the back into the partial basement. And here is the lower level garage entry again um for employee use only. Um and this is again for the purpose of um storing inventory vehicles um or employee parking. Um I'll just quickly run through all three uh floor plans. Uh this is the partial basement which is the ground floor. It is located beneath the main showroom and the vehicle sale and repair area. Uh there are 87 uh vehicle inventory storage uh and um it also includes bicycle parking and other support functions such as the car in interior car wash and part storage. And again for employee and staff use only. And the entrance as mentioned earlier is off of um as you come on from North Main. Uh this is the main um floor which is organized in three primary areas consisting of customer showroom um and that also has um uh public restrooms that's located over here and then uh the service shop um and 22 service bays are back here. um and all other associated support sport support sport support spaces such such as uh storage areas as well. And uh this is the um upper level partial open air roof uh plan. Um this includes a secondary showroom uh right along here. Uh there are offices and loun lounges and um the parking deck um has 676 inventory spaces available.

So tonight um uh the applicant is requesting a plan development reszone. Um it's essentially to provide flexibility uh PD provides that flexibility to make any deviations to city standards while meeting the overall intent of the zone. um which uh the service commercial zone does allow auto sales and service and um this PD is carrying um over all of the other development standards and regulations um with of course redefining the F and then the definition of base elevation for this project. And again, these deviations remain cons consistent with the overall intent and use of the current service commercial zone and all um all of the remaining uh service commercial zoning standards um will be carried over. And um now really just going into more detail of um the request tonight. um uh the.3 F is permitted in the service commercial zone and the current code um the exist existing definition of F has limited things that could be excluded and that's um I have that entire thing pulled from our code which basically this is the definition and there are certain things that could be excluded such as crawl spaces and garages um so um the the PD will provide that flexibility do exclude additional accessory like spaces. Um so as the PD already allows these exclusions uh the exclusions that are proposed tonight are very similar to what the code already allows just a more um more specifically more detailed and this is what the proposal uh shows that we're excluding basically the accessory spaces such as mechanical rooms, storage

areas, uh the vehicle inventory areas, uh stairwells. Um and the other change is um the way the floor area is calculated um is currently it's uh you take the gross floor area to uh net lot area. Part of this project is to calculate that with gross lot area as um shown here. And um here here are um basically all three of the floor plans. Um and I'll go into the next slide. I think it's a closer look. Yeah. So, all of the um pink areas which is essentially a garage like inventory garage um storage tool shed these type of things are being excluded to meet that.3 F and everything that you see that says it says contributing is the this area which is all customer customerf facing or customer oriented spaces. So this is um required to meet the um the.3 F and this has all been calculated as part of that. So why are we doing this is the big question. Um modern dealership uh layout basically has changed. Um it's it's now multilevel where it integrates all of the operations into one single building. Uh and a large portion of that building area does include these type of support sport support or accessory spa type uh spaces that are not really customer occupied. And our uh current uh city code is um dated where it's built for singlestory type uh surface parking dealerships and I provided a photo below of the existing dealership. Um, as you can see here, there's a separate buildings for or a lot of it is outdoor, right? Like the service repair areas on the out outside

of the building. Uh, and then they have a separate used car storage building. It's really so it was at that time easier to calculate the floor area for just the showroom which would then meet the.3 F. Um so so basically this PD request will provide that flexibility to exclude those accessory support sport spaces from the F to really reflect what's functional and what is customer oriented space for this project and um that approach does meet the um F intent and accounts for the modern integrated operations and this op uh approach essentially allows for more efficient operations. s and efficient use of land. Uh now moving into the um other request as part of the PD reszone is the height. Uh the existing height is um the existing height allowed um in the zone is 30 ft. Um the the site um I didn't have a better photograph, but basically the site uh really drives the height variation for this project. Um it's lower along this end where the mass a site is about 124 feet and then it moves up to 135 where I have the star is like the highest uh existing slope that occurs in this corner. And uh the way the current code reads is uh the base the way the base elevation is defined as the existing or the way we measure height is basically the existing or finished grade whichever is lower and measured to the highest point of the building. So the request tonight is really to um the base elevation will be defined as the highest existing grade on the project site and that highest ex existing grade does occur in that southwest corner as I identified with

the star and um here if you see so if we measure it from there it's 135 foot and and then we go to the top of the building it's allowed to extend up to 165 ft but that is still within that 30 foot um above the base elevation. So, it meets the 30 foot height limit um consistent with measure A, but it's just the way it's being measured from the higher point um rather than the existing or finished grade uh which the current code allows. Um I also wanted to point out that we've um we've had we've used for other similar sloped uh sites, we have used the same approach um for Hilton Garden in Oakmont and Sprouts. um they also had slope sightes so we measured. So we're not introducing something new. This has been done for other projects where we've measured from the highest existing grade. And here are just some um renderings of the um beautiful dealership. Um I'll let the applicant really elaborate more about the design intent, but it does meet the um uh city's uh design review standards and guidelines as um they they are providing a variation in materials there. There's articulation um uh the uh the proposed landscaping, their street trees as well as uh whatever areas that they could incorporate landscaping into to really beautify the site and all of that does meet uh meet the design standards. Um the primary materials are the um black and gray ribbed metal panels and the silver metal panels along with dark gray stucco and of course the uh entrance. I think I have a better better slide. Yeah, this one shows um this is really the corner of North Main and Second Avenue that really shows those clear story windows. This is where the showroom entrance is.

And um the other uh request tonight is tree removals. There are a total of uh 19 trees that will be removed. 13 of these trees have been administratively approved by the city arborist due to the uh size, species or health of the tree or some were undersized and could be removed without a permit. Uh the four uh remaining trees that do require um a recommendation tonight for city council to consider for removal are the three um valley oaks and one pistache. I have um highlighted those in the or circled those with the pink. Um and the three highly protected trees since they're being removed um the applicant will be required to pay the value of the trees because they are highly protected trees and that is a condition of approval um in your agenda packet in um I believe that attachment attachment to and same goes for the off-site neighboring trees. These will all be preserved and if there is any damage or during construction there are conditions of approval in place for that as well. And um here is the proposed landscaping plan. Uh there are a total of 21 new trees being proposed. Of those um 12 are the street trees that range in size from 24 to 36 in box. Um and the remaining I believe nine trees will be scattered throughout the site. And um there's also five gallon shrubs and ground cover um of various types that will be also incorporated into the project. And um here is the location for the proposed steel fence. And this is that split face CMU retaining wall that will be installed. Um, I believe the applicant team has a presentation and they'll go more into detail of how that height varies because of the slope on the par on the site and how it would look um if if you're

looking at it from or how high it will be if you're on on the west side on Barton Court. And the other request tonight is the uh sign exception. Um the Walner Creek sign ordinance allows 200 square feet of sign area um for any uh single commercial tenant or business. Um and the applicant is proposing two um wall signs. Um that total 91 square feet in size. However, the sign that is going to will be installed along North Main Street, uh because it's that ribbed metal panel system, um a backer panel, a flat backer panel was required. So, that takes that total to 145 square ft. Uh because the code requires we count the entire thing as the sign area. And uh the proposed total sign area for the entire project that includes the monument signs will be 275 square feet. and that's why the sign exception is required. Um the here are the here's the proposed freestanding uh monument sign that'll be located closer to the north north main street frontage. Um it is six feet in height and um less than the 25 ft 25 ft square 25 square feet that's allowed for freestanding signs. And here is the uh second freestanding sign. This is uh more of a wayfinding or directional sign. It'll be located closer to the service repair area um closer to that second avenue side and um it is 5t in height and total 14 square feet in size and staff does support the sign exception because all of the signs um are in scale with the building and provide are needed to provide that adequate identification.

And um I'll just quickly go over the parking. Uh there are 48 surface parking spaces for customers and vehicle display. The blue area you see is um this is for customer parking and the the lighter yellow or orange color is for uh vehicle display. And there are a total of 123 spaces for inventory vehicle uh storage space inside the basement as well as the roof. And um I also wanted to point out that under AB 2097 uh this project is exempt from the parking requirements as is within a half a mile of a portion of the site is within a half a mile of the Pleasant Hill BART station. However, the applicant is providing sufficient um customer parking as well as employee and inventory parking. Uh so as part of the design review entitlements um the project is required to meet the city's objective design standards and guidelines and this project meets all of those guidelines with the exception of the two that I'm going to discuss here. Um the uh the automobile sales guideline it requires that that the display parking um fronting north main uh cannot be uncovered. So, it needs to be covered or um integrated into the building element. Uh the applicant is requesting um a waiver to that or an exception and uh staff does support that exception as the primary showroom or entrance um on North Main Street. Um it's the closest um the outdoor display is limited and is secondary to the indoor indoor showroom. So, um this will just um provide or improve visibility, streetscape transparency and also a better customer experience for someone like me who's driving by and I see a Porsche parked outside.

And um the next one is for a um any new building, uh the parking needs to be at the rear or the side or within the structure. And in this case, uh, the applicant is providing surface parking stalls that's located along the primary frontage, but that's also necessary and staff does support that because the front entrance of the showroom is um the closest the parking that's being provided is right in front of that showroom entrance, which is the customer entrance. And um, the project does comply with all of the other design review standards and guidelines. And um this project um is uh subject to the environmental review and um after um after analysis and evaluation the project did qualify for a C categorical exemption. um under infield development project as uh the project the auto dealership does comply with the general plan and zoning and the proposed modification is minor in nature and it still meets the um intent of the code. Um it is less than five acres in size and um the site is currently paved and has been previously developed. So there's really um no the site doesn't have any value as a habitat for any endangered species. And as part of the SQA review, um first the city to really analyze and uh determine that um that we could um apply or recommend this um infill exemption is we required the applicant to submit technical studies u related to traffic, noise, water, and air quality. Um uh and all of those studies are provided as part of your agenda packet tonight. And

the results of all of those studies has um determined that it will be less than significant impacts. And the um fifth criteria to qualify for infill exemption under SQUA is that the site is currently served by all required utilities. Um and that is the case for this project. And with that, staff does uh recommend that the planning commission adopt uh draft resolution attachment one providing a recommendation to the city council on the class 32 exemption as well as uh the second draft resolution which is attachment two providing a recommendation to city council on the project uh the PD ordinance reszone as well as the uh project um project entitlements listed on this slide. And um we did receive um several uh public comment letters and I believe all of those letters have been incorporated into the agenda packet and there are extra copies in the back for the public. Um that is all I have but I am happy to answer any questions.

Very good. Any questions? Mr. Strongman. Yeah. Thank you for the presentation. uh very detailed like to talk about the um turning out. I guess it's the no right turn exiting the um

facility on um second. I'm sure Porsche will try its best to enforce that. Is it possible we have a official city sign on the other side of the street is no right turn? Um, I think I will um ask the uh city engineer u Matt to address that because that's not sure if that's required or we could do that.

Hi, Matt Redmond. Um, city traffic engineer for city of W Creek. Um, so your question is if we can put a a city sign facing the second avenue that says no right turn. No right turn in. But you facing which way? Facing the Oh, it would face it would be if you're coming out of the service area. I assume it's the service exit. Yeah, the park. It's no right turn. So that they they will not go down

uh second avenue. So, you know, we put signs in the public right away. And so, if that would be on the city on the property, then it would be for them to put and I believe that this came up at DRC and that they agreed to put that sign up for a no right turn for service for test drives. And I think you're proposing for everyone through signage because I think the neighbors would prefer that that all traffic goes down towards Main Street. Yeah. So given that this sign would be facing the property, I believe that would be uh a suggestion for the applicant. Okay. Thank you.

Questions? I have a couple. Um, can you go back to the the signage uh slides there? I wasn't sure that you mentioned an extension of the sign that's counted as part of the sign for signage. Yeah. Um, could you explain what that is? Sorry, can you repeat the question? Uh, you mentioned that that uh there's 200 square feet allowed and they're each 91 and a half square feet except that something else is included. on one of the signs as part of

oh yeah the backer panel. So I was really trying to show that both of these primary wall signs measure the same um they're 91 square feet in size but because this area here which is I guess shown right there is a ribbed metal system panel. It's not a flat surface. So in order to install signage on that they needed to incorporate a backer panel really like a flat surface right to get the to mount the sign on it. So I was just and that's bigger but

just trying to show because of our city sign ordinance it requires when we measure sign we measure the entire area. So because of that reason it's a backer panel it gets incorporated into that total signage. So that takes their number up slightly higher because of the panel. Um, so, so if I look at the rendering there, it appears that that backer panel is the same color as the it's black wall. Correct. Um, so basically you wouldn't see it. Correct. Yeah.

Um, okay. Thank you. Um, and then I had um on the two redefinitions that come up. Um, the first one is a base elevation. Um and it said that you know it has to to uh you have to choose the base base elevation that with a plan development that has a is the in covers the intent of the the requirement. Um and it says that the picking the highest point on the site is more accurate and reasonable. And I'm not quite following why that is. I mean, it would seem to me that you could pick the bottom of the site. That would also be quite accurate. Um, and whether it would be reasonable, I mean, it depends on how you're building the building. Um, but I'm not sure why. It sort of sort of makes it sound like that the high point is the obvious choice, and I'm not sure why that would be.

Well, I think because there's topographical constraints. Uh and as mentioned on the slide, the slope drives the height variation and it is lower on one end. So if we were to measure the entire building off of that side, then obviously it would exceed because you're measuring it from the existing or finished existing grade which would be to the highest point would then appear to be taller even though it's not taller but it's because of the slopes. So, um, just hypothetically, yeah,

if the if the top topography was reversed, you had a low point at the at the intersection and went up the back. Um, so that the the most people would see it that their view of it would be on that that corner at the low point, which now could be if you take the highest elevation, you'd be looking at a, you know, much much higher building than would be anticipated. So is it because that high point is actually right at the point of greatest visibility that that makes the most sense?

Do you want to take a sound? So we we use this technique in for buildings such as this that are that are taller than what our what our existing our codified base elevation right definition would allow. This building is taller than what would be allowed using our standard base elevation. and and so this gives us the flexibility to allow a modern dealership is what it does. Okay. So,

okay, I'm just trying to think of the the rationale for choosing that particular base level. Um, aside from it allows a taller building, um, which is sort of obvious, but um, it's it's it's the the the building height is measured from that highest point. So regardless of where regardless of where the the foundation of the building is, which likely going to be lower than that point, you're still, you know, that whatever's below that is is below the line and and it's not counted towards building height.

Okay. Um and then with the F um you redefine that to exclude spaces. Are those the types of spaces that are often excluded or are they usually counted? if it were not a plan development where you could redefine them under the I guess the definition of rentable floor area it does exclude these type of you uh like support spaces or um storage areas so in our code we do have something that in this case it looks like it's excluding about twothirds of the building it's it's an expanded list of of net edited out of net netted out uses

and how you use the space and again it's a reflection of a modern dealership Okay, other questions, comments the staff. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um, I'll ask the applicant to uh present. You have up to 15 minutes if you wish.

Good evening. Um, I'm Stephen Scanland, applicant. Um, Simma, you covered everything. I'm gonna keep this short because I know it's it's late. Um, so you why we're here. Um, you gonna use that?

Yeah. Um, why we're here, retention of the dealership in Walnut Creek. Um, consolidation of the facilities. As Simmer mentioned before, it's on multiple facilities. We've integrated all into a single dealership. uh relocation from uh leased land to owned land which will allow us to stay inside the city much much longer. We had about 5 years left on the current lease and then we're going to be looking for space. And then obsolescence avoidance. Um we're at that point where the old dealership is no longer meeting the brand standards and if we don't if we don't upgrade we we have to go. Um, we're at right right now Porsche is at a generation 5 dealership. This meets and exceeds the extent the intent of a gen a Gen 5 dealership. Um, it's a brand standard upgrade. Um, we've integrated the program. We've reprogrammed and replanned the dealership to meet current operational needs. What typically happens with dealerships is as they age and new facilities are required, they sort of tuck them in where they can, not necessarily where they should be. So the footprints become incredibly uh inefficient in operation. What we've done is I shouldn't say we Kendler and uh and Allegro have replanned, reprogrammed the site and integrated all what would be oftentimes external facility internally and captured so you don't see it, you don't hear it. Um it it doesn't exhaust. It's treated all inside the facility which we think is a better way to operate a modern dealership. And then additionally, there are new um diagnostics and other other components to the dealership that have been added that currently don't exist in the in the existing footprint. Um it's a planned development and as I I won't rehash everything that Simmer went

through. She did a good job of covering it. Um, we think that we've we've updated the dealership zoning consistent with what the SC zone allows. And as Simmer mentioned, there are things in dealerships today that 25 years ago weren't imagined and are really back a house. They're not they're not part of the uh public facing space. Um, the other thing that I think she touched on, um, and I think this goes to your your comment about grades. This is a really challenging site. It it breaks in a bunch of different ways in order to get in order to integrate the program, bring it all inside. We think we pick the most efficient footprint with the least uh visual impact, but we and it does capture the corner, which is the the launchoff point. Uh so we think that this is a a minimalist approach to uh this particular site. Um as Simmer mentioned uh we're we're looking for an infill exemption. We provided four studies traffic, air, noise and water. Um traffic we have a reduction of 320 320 trips. For air, our construction operations and health risk assessment are all below allowed limits. U for noise, construction was less than significant. Ground vibration is less than significant and operational noise is either shielded or enclosed or attenuated. So we think we really minimize the impact to the surrounding neighbors. Um, and as for uh water, uh, all of our storm water u both for construction and

post construction meet all of the water resource control boards uh, permit requirements. So, we're we're very compli we're we're extremely compliant on that. Um, and now I'll let James take you through the site planning. Thank you, Stephen. Good evening. Good evening, everyone. Um, my name is James Spence. I'm an architect with Ginsler. Um, want to start by thanking everyone for taking their time to hear us tonight, especially this late in the evening. Um, Samar Simmer did an excellent job um, walking you through our project. So, I'm just going to hit um, the very high level notes um, and keep this brief. Can I use this guy? Yeah. and have you highlight like this. I gotta get me one of these. This is nice. All right. So, here I'm gonna It's not on full screen. Here we go. Okay. So, just to walk you through a few of our high points um to walk you through our project. So, I wanted to start with site access. Um, we have two, as Simmer mentioned, we have one off of North Main here towards the north east corner and then one in the southoutheast uh southwest corner there on Second Avenue. We have two main approaches for our customers for this site. One will be those customers that pull onto the site. They will park on the site and they will walk into our showroom. The second is for the customers to pull onto the site into the service drive at which point the valet or the porters will take their cars. They'll usher them into either the shop or into a service space which is located either in the basement of the building or up on the parking deck. So that's kind of our um our customer journey that we have on the site there.

And then uh for the uh I wanted to point out the the fire lane that we have. So uh you can kind of see it's located there uh running from one curb cut to the next. So uh that is going to be our fire lane. Um we have extended the width of that to um adhere to the fire apparatus width that is the requirement by the city or um from the fire department. The western uh property line is something that we wanted to take some time to focus on today and that is the 8-foot CMU wall that Simmer mentioned that takes place on the west property line here along that drive and along that 30foot building setback that we have. So that CMU wall will run 8 ft off of the property or off of the uh the ground level. So, the elevation um it's a little harder to see cuz it's small here. Um but this is kind of showing an elevation if you were to look at it from the west side of the wall. It will maintain that 8 foot datim from the ground floor or from the ground plane as that shifts and grows lar uh grows taller uh as you move um down the site down the property line. So, what we believe this uh CMU wall is going to do is help block any um any noise that is coming from our site and then also uh it will help with uh the light spill over into the western property line. So, we want to be respectful of our neighbors uh west of um west of our property. So, uh we feel that this um sound barrier and lighting barrier will be a uh a good addition to our site for those reasons. We have kept our loading zone to the northeast corner of our site. That's the space you see here. Um that will be for parts deliveries, also for uh the oil um

oil transfer that they have to have on a about a weekly basis. And then um speaking of signage, just to touch on one signage uh point that um Simmer didn't, which is the we have the two signs, the two large wall-mounted signs, one facing North Main and then one facing Second Avenue. Both of those will be internally illuminated. The one on Second Avenue will be placed on a timer so that when the sun sets, the lighting levels for that sign are going to drop significantly so that we again avoid any lighting spill over into the uh the property west of us. And then after that, we have um our mechanical screening was the last thing I was going to point out here, but that will be better shown on and I'll go back. um that'll be better shown on our elevations sheet. So, uh we have all of the mechanical units that we have on our showroom rooftop and our parking deck uh accurately screened with kind of the same metal panel that we're proposing for the um remainder of the building. And then the next talking point I was going to hit on is just our um accessible pathways. So from each of our points of egress from the building, we have worked with the city to uh ensure that we have an accessible pathway from each of those egress points to the public way both on Second Avenue and on North Main Street which are shown here. Um we also have also have our accessible pathway to the uh the dumpster enclosure in the northeast side of the site. Uh this sheet is showing kind of the existing grade um that both Stephen and Simmer touched on earlier. Um showing the uh significant drop and the modifications that we needed to make to our design in order to respond to this

grading, which is why we have our uh ground floor plane is where the customers walk into the showroom and the shop uh or the uh basement uh is where you enter on the lower side towards the north of the site. Um we are taking careful consideration with our site lighting to make sure that we are avoiding any spillover um into the neighboring properties. So we will be shielding all uh light fixtures on our rooftop parking uh as well as our site poles too. And then these are just showing the um the specifications for those fixtures. Um, Simmer already did a pretty good job touching on our types of parking throughout the facility. So, I won't I won't repeat any of that. And then just uh one more uh kind of uh tag for the materiality used for the exterior elevations. So, like Stephen mentioned, this is our Gen 5 design for Porsche. Um, so we have a handful of materials that we are um uh suggested to use uh from the the OEM. We have our silver metal panel. That's what uh will face that um the corner of North and Maine. So, it's kind of giving that iconic Porsche dealership look or all of the storefront in as well. And then we have the uh Porsche black metal panel, which is the ribbed metal panel that Simmer mentioned. It's more of a dark gray. It's not entirely black, but that's what's going to be wrapping um the most of the shop towards the rear of the site. Um, we will have uh an accent band of white metal panel that kind of uh runs alongside the main entry point there. Um, and then the rest of the um the rest of the building, as I said, will be either the uh the black metal panel or um a stucco that's painted to

match. And that about wraps up my presentation. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant? Commissioner Count. Um, thank you for your presentation. Um, I think my only question is um the way that cars come in and out of uh Main Street and Second, is it a one-way or is it a two-way? They can go both. Both curve cuts will be two-way.

Okay. Um, and so then, um, can you talk about what it is that you've agreed to as far as cars coming out onto Second Avenue because I'm not I'm still not clear if that's all cars. No right turn. Take this one.

Yeah, I'll take this one. So, there's been a lot of conversation about the second a entry and exit, right? Um, couple things. uh test drives will not go up second. Not only because the public doesn't want it. I'm sorry. Not only because the public doesn't want it, but it's not practical for the dealership. It's a lie. When you bring someone into a a new car that they're not familiar with and you run them up residential streets, you're just asking for trouble. So, from a liability point of view, the dealership has no interest in driving test driving up Second A. with a Porsche particularly they go out onto North Main Street and then probably out onto the 680 because people want to drive a Porsche, right? Um the other thing is that if if people currently if people live in the neighborhood that are are going to the Porsche dealership a quarter mile down the street, they come down Second Street, they make a left onto North Main and they go to the dealership and they return the same way. We're not creating the only other trips that we would be creating would be trips created for uh test drives and we're and we're doing those up the street right now and we're not going back into the neighborhood. There's just no reason to do it. Um we're not we have no problem putting in a no right turn sign if that if that helps. Uh but if there's a if there's a resident of Walnut Creek that wants to go up Second Street, they're going to exit on North Main. They're going to make a right and a right and go up Second Street. So, you know, I I don't think we're creating any more any more trip or any more uh traffic on Second. I think that's more of a fear than it's a reality than a reality.

Questions? Uh, thanks guys. Um, can somebody tell me I'm It's probably my fault for not being able to find it. the back the the west side. Um what is that? Is it the glass and the and like the I guess let me let me if I'm standing in Varton Court which is this the street the court just to the west of the west side of the building and I'm looking you know if I got a shot through the trees what am I looking at?

That would be this elevation right here. So, you're going to see you're going to see the black metal panel, uh the ribed metal panel. We have an overhead door, a high-speed overhead door that goes into our shop, but that remains closed most of the time. Um, and then, uh, this is an overhead door that leads to the service drive. Um, and then this is the the silver metal panel that's wrapping the showroom. And then to the west of that, to the west of that, you're also looking at a wall, right? There's a wall, 8 foot wall. Yeah. Right. which follows the grade. Okay. And the and the panels are they're silver panels. They're it's not glass, I guess, is

No, there is there is no glass on that on that west facade. I'm just thinking about privacy if you're if I if I'm on Van Court. Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Question eating.

I have two I have two questions. Um the about this whole height thing. Um I don't see anywhere on the back side of it. Well, first of all, if you were to if if I'm not mistaken, if you were to calculate it from the lowest point, then the front of your building on the east side would only be 15 ft high. So, I I I did calculate that. But what's interesting is that then on the east side then from existing gray which is -15 feet all the way to the top of the parap pit that's actually 45 and 1/2 ft uh sorry it's actually there there is no there there's like a blue dimension that's 45. I'm not I'm not seeing 30 feet. Or or may or maybe it's because when I count from level zero to level two, that is 30, but then there's a there's an increase and maybe that's that parapit of that darker building. I don't know. I just didn't see 30 anywhere. That's why I was like curious. Do you see like the I know I can zoom in right here. This is why, but you guys can't. Um, okay. I I mean I I don't see 30 anywhere. I see everything is above 30, but I I trust you guys, I guess.

I think I think you can spot it. I might be pointing the wrong direction. There's a 30 from level one to level two is where the third is where that 30 is being for the other but for the but so you're talking about this this elevation here

cuz there's no there's no dimension to the top right so you start at -15 6 in and then to ba basically in my brain to be honest with you I counted 21 plus the 15 uh minus 2. And I was like, that that seems like it's more than 30 feet, but maybe it's not cuz I'm just exhausted. But I was like, I I I think that's more than 30 feet. The only place that you have the 30 feet is on the other side. But maybe my math is off.

Are you looking at the western office? I'm just counting this. You start at negative and when you go to here, commissioner, I think what's missing is is the base elevation. The base. Yeah. So, what we'll what we'll do is add a base elevation line through all the elevations. Yeah. Um you can see where this you can see where the zero is. Yeah. And and and I only bring that up because um the chair brought up why are you counting it from the top? And when I look at it, it's because frankly then your glass building would only be 15 feet high if we didn't allow that. So that was one main point that I that I noticed.

Uh my name's Austin. I'm the civil engineer on the project. Um I wanted to say that the base plane elevation is primarily a visibility calculation. Uh and certainly you would take the visibility calculation from the most prominent corner in the site, which would be the signalized intersection. And so the the discrepancy in the algebra there is because the existing elevation there is higher than our finished floor. So where you walk in that door of our future building, the existing elevation is higher than that. That's the leftover dimension that you're not finding. Okay.

Okay. Well, and then last but not least, um the I was reading through your operate business operation plan, which thank you for including about because there was so much public comment about test drives and sales and so I like that you had that. But my my question is how many employees I I I saw a number there for just one shift. I'm just curious how many employees generally speaking does will this employ? It's only a single shift. It's one shift at a time. Okay. It's just a single shift. So, it's the 43. Yeah. Every day. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Any other questions? Good. All right. Thank you very much. We'll uh by public comment, um we have several uh speaker slips. Um if you wish to speak and you haven't filled out a speaker slip, please do so now. and we'll get started. So this

this time Lana who had the chance twice in the last hearing will will now be up followed by Jordan. Hello everybody. Good evening. I'm very sleepy. I'm going to try to put my mind together so I can um speak. Um but yeah, my name is Lana and I'm the immediate neighbor um 24 court. So, we will be sharing a wall with our friends and um I'm not opposed to the project as long as you know like it takes into consideration the local community, the immediate neighbors and the economic health and the environmental impact. So, um a few of my concerns uh first the noise. Um it says that um based on what I glanced the repair shop uh the noise generated uh from the service shop will radiate through the open rollup door. Why is this door open? Because the the approval was based on the notion that this is going to be a futuristic state-of-the-art building. Enclosed everything goes inside. So I don't think it anything should be open. Um, and also it states that the shop hours will be 7:00 a.m. to 1000 p.m. So I don't know where the discrepancy is coming if this is a discrepancy, but I don't I don't think 7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. service shop should be like a good hours. And um, and why is the shop in the residential area? like the entrance it's right where the residents but anyway um so

it appears that there will be 40 48 parking spaces outside and 72 uh parking spaces on the open rooftop. So basically the building it's really not as enclosed as it sounded to be at the beginning. So that's noise, that's a safety concern um from my perspective. And also it says that the rooftop lights will be kept overnight for safety uh purposes. So the diff the distance between me and you guys, this is exactly the distance between me and the building. So with when we bypass the the the height regulations, I'm we I'm going to end up with this huge building, zero morning light, noise, and um I mean, yeah, it's good for the city, but for the immediate neighbors and also the wall. We were thinking to um it's better the the dividing wall to be 10 ft as opposed to 8 ft because that's going to help with the noise, that's going to help with the safety and also cameras. The concern was the cameras. um if there were cameras on that site, if all these cameras will capture our houses, if that's going to that's going to be like a privacy um issue um for us. And the setback of the building is like yeah, again 30 ft. It's going to be very close, very tall, and not as quiet as we thought it would be because the service shop is right next to right next to us. So, so yeah and also with the construction um

if if you could wrap it up. Oh yes. So with with the construction uh the one of the most important thing is the pest control rodent and um cockroach control because all these buildings are so junky and then when the demo starts this thing we're going to get infested. So with the pest control we demand that to be done like before everything else and that we if possible to be informed of you know of the situation if it's like if it's a really bad situation what what do what to expect. Thank you very much. Yeah Jordan.

Good evening. My name is Jordan Bluestein resident of Quiet View Court on Second Avenue. I'm a member of the neighborhood group Marquee Park Neighbors United. I use Second Avenue at the building site daily and I appreciate the project's landscape and architectural design. It improves the site visual and environmental quality. However, I have concerns regarding neighborhood traffic impacts, specifically on Second Avenue, a narrow residential street not suited for commercial activity. I respectfully request that the planning commission prohibit service and sales test drives on Second Avenue. I'm requesting an MUTCD compliant, no right turn sign installed at the dealership exit at Second Avenue. Additionally, I request implementing a curb design to deter right turns on Second Avenue. Signage alone is often ignored. These measures align with recommendations from the design review commission and the city's commitment to neighborhood safety. Thank you for your attention to both the design and neighborhood impacts of this project. And thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. We have Keith Keith O'Hara. He's coming.

And then Sarah Keller. Hi, thanks. Uh, my name is Keith O'Hara. I I have a construction company across the street on Second Avenue from the site. Um, Eco Performance Builders. Um, I also own the building I bought a few years ago. I'm excited to see something there. It's been dilapidated for a long time. Been burglarized about 12 times. I was burglarized last Sunday um for Super after Super Bowl. Um, so I do like uh something new going in so there's not crazy buildings and people living in them and things. So, um, but Second Avenue is pretty crazy. So, uh, that I'm one building in from the corner of Second Avenue, North Main, and it gets backed up there. Like, it's it's crazy. Like, I open my door in my truck when I park in my shop, and I you have to be careful. Uh, it's just an impacted street. A lot of people drive down it. Um, I don't know why we would exit out of that building at all on that side. Even if you did turn left, like that's right where the traffic jam is. Like people go as fast as they can to get to that stoplight for some reason. I don't know what the hurry is, but um and it's just a difficult thing. You see the signage on Second Avenue like, "Hey, this is where you go into the Porsche dealership." I don't really understand that because Second Avenue is a mess. So, um, it's a residential street, but a lot of people use it to commute to get to Buenav Vista or wherever they're going. Um, and then cars on Main Street, like we're surrounded by car dealerships out there, right? Which is great. Um, but they're mainly unloading cars in the median on North Main. Um, and so is that going to happen on Second Avenue? Because that will be a disaster. So, if anyone's planning on unloading cars on Second Avenue, I can tell you me and my neighbor building, which there's only there's only three businesses right there on Second Avenue plus this one. And uh, that will be really really bad. So, I don't know if that's the plan where cars are going to be unloaded. I

didn't see anything in the plans about that. Um, so, you know, I I'm not really sure what's going on there. And then, uh, I didn't get a notice for this hearing. We found out two days ago there was one stamp on a pole right by Mass. I happened to do my little walk and I saw it. My neighbor business also didn't get a notice. Um, and I'm literally right across the street. So, thank you.

Thank you, Sarah. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Sarah Keller. I'm a nurse and 23 year resident on Cell Court, the second court that was listed on the picture behind the west wall of the suggested dealership. There are serious concerns for residents regarding our physical safety walking past high-performance sports cars onto Second Avenue. The proposal, thank you, wisely states no right turns, but nothing is exempting an eastbound return, which is also a problem that was just mentioned um on Second Avenue. So, how can we completely keep this traffic off SE Second Avenue? People already drive faster than 50 m hour in this 25 mph zone and I personally have seen been aware of three fatalities at that intersection of North Main and Second Avenue. Another high concern that I have is privacy. nearly all of the westside residents of families with young children. The idea of having a 30 to 45 to 145, however you're reading that glass building um height with staff and patrons looking directly into our backyards through a 12-hour day is disturbing. Why is Porsche placing the building so close to residents who are only located on the west side instead of north facing with a larger defensible space? What allowances will the city of Walnut Creek give to residents who are affected? Can we extend our fences higher than the current six-foot regulations to protect the privacy of our children and fam families? Lastly, noise. For the same reasons of adjacency and objectionable building proximity, why would Porsche place 22 service bays facing the sole shared residential border simply for commercial aesthetics on North Main? Why not design bays away from the residents? An 8ft Mason wall does not seem equitable for the noise generated from 22 bays of 500 to 900 horsepower vehicles. It's improbable to assume that the 26 foot rolling doors will be down all the time because of air flow and

safety. So, um the we have to think about proposed operating times. What it was differently listed in the packet. Some were 5 6 that we heard now 7:10 p.m. I'd like to ask if this were your backyard and you were trying to host a meal um have a children to rest or go to sleep, what time would you like the noise to stop? I thank you for your late audience. Thank you very much, Barry.

Hi, guys. I'll be quick. Give me two minutes. My name is Barry Tyrus. Uh I'm a 50-year resident of Walnut Creek. I bought some stuff from the pictures back there. Um, I was director of U children's program for 25 years, Walnut Acres Children's Center and May the mayor's children attended and they're doing very well in school. The issue here is the social utility of the action of the site versus the social utility of the quiet, safe use of their homes by all the residents of Second Avenue. No right turn signage is not going to be enough. It has to be a physical barrier because if you look left on Main Street, you're not going that way. It's It's nuts. At 5:00, they have to go right. And that's what all of you might do anyway, even though the sign is there. Uh it's it's it's I don't see that barrier physical in the plan yet. Um when Chick-fil-A opened 15 approximately 15 years ago on Main Street, uh the the uh PC, you guys and uh city council underestimated the problem of traffic congestion and it still is is there. Uh can this also be the problem now? I'm not sure. Uh Matt Francois U uh city council uh member apologized for the Chick-fil-A disaster. Anyway, how many um how many um employees will there be? It says 46 a shift since the shifts are over eight hours. Uh except on Sunday, I know you address that and that's fine, you know, if you're going to keep it that, but you're going to pay overtime then if they're going to be working 9 10 hours, some of those guys. I mean, that's fine, but there might be more traffic congestion. Uh there's only 48 spots for employees only. And how will this parking on Second Avenue? I

how will this impact the location of the park of the parking that the other people might have to park at? And finally, uh read the letters from Jessica Clark. She she writes very well. It's in the packet. And uh the access last thing fail to address how do you access when you come out on Second Avenue and you go left, you know, uh from the dealership, you're going to have to go left on Main Street again, but then you're going to have to cross over uh that median and and Chick-fil-A, if you all are familiar with that, it's it's going to be another boondoggle right at the end if you're going to have to turn into the enter it on Main Street. Um

Thank you. Thank you. I I you know, okay, I appreciate it. And no hamburger selling. Okay. And Steve Senorelli.

James, you owe me a text back, by the way. Okay. Uh, sorry it's so late. Obviously, it's been a rough night for everyone. I will try to keep this as quick as I can. Uh, number one, the light pollution thing. Uh, they're asking for an exemption to have basically 24/7 lighting. It's honestly not really acceptable. Uh, I understand they want to secure their inventory, but they can easily put in their night vision cameras that would provide some of the same utility and just keep the lighting on the front of the building away from the residents. Uh there also I haven't seen any mention of gating on the property to secure everything. I think that would be also effective besides the lighting. If you've ever been in that area at night, the Subaru dealership has made the sky purple. I don't want to see a repeat with the Porsche dealership, please. It's honestly, it looks so uh alien. It doesn't look good on Walnut Creek at all. Um, I would like to see trees where the rollup doors are going to be to block any further noise that's coming from the shop door opening and closing. And when they keep it open, likely during summer months when it's too damn hot. Um, I haven't heard anything about fire suppression. They're going to have EVs on site being worked on with large capacity batteries. There have been numerous studies on the health implications of EV fires and the vapors that are toxic to not only the people attempting to fight the fire, but within hundreds of feet of the actual fire. I have seen no revisions to address their fire abatement approach. It needs to be

on this review. Period. And as far as the sign goes, it's absolutely the city's responsibility to get a sign that says no right turn onto Second Avenue. It's not up for debate. Thank you for your time. Thank you. I hope it resonated. That was our last speaker slip. I believe I believe that that is all the slips that I have.

Okay. Then uh I will turn it back to the applicant. You have 10 minutes to respond or answer some of the questions that arose. So um yeah, I'll touch on a few of the concerns um that were voiced during public comment. So um so right the the shop door on the west side. So I will I'll restate that the west facade does not have any glass on it. there's no um visibility from the interior of the store onto the west side of the site. Um and then the overhead shop door uh is a high-speed rit. So um yes uh the shop is conditioned so the door will remain closed for the majority of for pretty much the entire time except for the few seconds it will open for a car to come in or leave and then it will drop back down. Um so that should uh remain closed for a majority of the day. Um vehicle delivery that was mentioned uh that will not take place on Second Avenue. That will take place on our site uh at the northeast corner where that loading zone is located. Um so that will not take place on either North Main nor Second Avenue. Um I think that's all I had. Was there anything else you wanted to?

Yeah, we did phototric studies and they're part of the uh design package and um the lights are shielded, they're downlighted and there's no light spill off the property.

You won't have a purple sky. Don't want a white sky either. Won't have a white sky either. Now, these are shielded down lights and they they're on a dimmer.

Excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me. It's their time to speak. They have 10 minutes. I have two.

I I It's their time to speak. Please. I wanted to address the um possible traffic mitigation, traffic calming solutions for the driveway on second. Um we are very limited in what we can do there because that is a fire aerial apparatus lane. It needs to be 26 ft wide. It can't have crazy bumps in it or crazy slopes or anything like that. So unfortunately signage is the best we can do there and still meet the fire code. I also wanted to note that this building is fully sprinklered, that we're adding fire hydrants, that there's uh uh FDC we're adding uh and post indicator valve.

Okay. Um yeah, Commissioner CL, can you just clarify the hours of operation because I've heard a couple of different things. So, I don't know what was on the latest I sound like it changed

in particular the service area. Where did this stuff? Yeah. So service hours will be 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 5 days a week. Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Showroom hours will be 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 6 days a week. and then Sundays from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. So that implies that there would the service area would never be operating after 6:00. No, sir.

Okay. Um, as far as uh the wall height, um, uh, you know, given that the topography, uh, I can understand the people on to the west of the the site being concerned about, um, privacy, but, you know, the privacy is is and the noise is attenuated by a large wall. Um, is there any plan to treat the wall as far as uh, you know, any decorative elements or um, plantings that will grow over it or, you know, anything like that? Um, I'm thinking, you know, the sound walls along the highways, you know, they they tend to be, you know, have have interesting masonry and and, you know, uh, vines growing on them and so forth. Is there any plan to do anything like that to to soften that that

just what's in the landscaping plan currently? Yeah, we we do have planning along that that edge on on the outside between it's actually between the dealership and the wall. It's on the east side. There isn't much space to do uh much between the wall and our west property line because of the existing trees that are there. So, we're wanting to maintain those existing trees and

so that's the reason we just don't have much room for any landscaping on the west side of that wall. Okay. Um the comment about 247 lighting. Um you say it's it's down lighting. Um not polluting the the sky. Um is it on 24/7 the exterior lighting and um and is it different on the west side than the rest of the building? So the lighting on the parking deck will be aimed away from the west property line. The fixtures on the roof deck will and as well as the site lighting poles will be shielded so there won't be any direct light um visible uh from the west property line. Um and then like Stephen mentioned earlier, they will be on set on a dimmer just as the uh Porsche sign on the Second Avenue sign. So they will dim uh when the sun does go down.

Okay. Uh and finally, uh I'm not sure if Porsche has big electric vehicles yet, but um the question of battery fires is is certainly one. Is there some uh special suppression fire suppression? Um so so we have a um let me flip to the page. We have a battery storage space in the northeast corner of the site that's attached to our dumpster enclosure. So it is right here.

So and we are working with the city to provide the required fire suppression for that battery space. Maybe not. Okay, that's all I had. Anyone else questions? No. All right. Sorry, Brent. Commissioner, real quick, Commissioner Moran. Um, thank you, uh, gentlemen. There's been some talk about a sign. Uh, and I believe you may have mentioned that you'd be amendable to the concept of a no right turn sign. I just figured since you guys are sitting at the standing up there.

Yeah, we have no we have no problem with the no right turn sign putting it on the dealership. It's just as as um Austin pointed out, we have some limitation as as to what we can do topographically. Sure. At that entry. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So, so that's your response to the request for the curb the that that they were talking about is that yeah, the pork chop that can't be done because of we have to have fire access there. That's where the apparatus come in.

Okay. Any other questions? If not, uh, thank you very much and we'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the, uh, commission. Thoughts, comments, questions.

I'll start out. I think it's a very good project. Uh, it's a very much need something needed to happen with that site and it's not a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru, which is a good point right there. Uh, I would encourage having the no right turn sign on that entrance. Yeah, no right turn. So that um it discourages people going down Second Avenue. But I fully support the project. I would uh I I live actually at the far end of Second Avenue on Pona Vista, so I am very familiar with that road and it's, you know, if I were testing out a new car, I would not choose that road to drive down. Um, it it might be might be useful to uh uh perhaps come up with something if you know if people are driving out on their own, they can see the no right turn sign, but there might be something just a little thing you can put in the car that says, you know, please avoid Second Street because there's no reason they need to be on it and it's probably not useful for them or nor us nor the people around there. Um, that might be helpful. Commissioner Count.

So, also just to clarify for the public, um, we're not the final decision makers here. We're making recommendations to the city council. Correct. That's correct.

Okay. I mean the the way I'm seeing it the the if I'm reading this correctly and everything that you that you just presented the pro this project is consistent with the general plan land use and zoning notwithstanding those two minor items which was the height which sorry I didn't get that for a second and um how you calculate the F net versus gross. So I did want to just again we're not we're not the decision makers but when I'm looking at this I'm looking for consistency with what exactly was already part of the general plan designation and any applicable policy and zoning designation. So

I should um I'm also I'm not entirely sure I understand the rationale for the is the high point except that it is the most visible spot on the on the property but uh the way the building is is set there um the uh the height at that point is is a 30 ft not not counting the mechanical on top um and the height at the back and is, you know, well below uh 30 ft on against the base elevation, but also not not very high um against the actual ground underneath it. Um so I I'm I can I can accept those those heights. Um it's uh even without entirely understanding the rationale. Um, I I'm do I do have some concerns about uh the the people immediately to the west. Um because it's a it's a significant the size of the facility is significant. Um uh a lot of employees doing a lot of work there during the day. Um, I'm I'm glad to hear that, you know, that shuts down by six. Uh, so people can enjoy their dinner and go to sleep. Um, I'm not sure what what further one could do. One could raise the wall a little higher. That would help a bit with the noise. Um, but then it would be an even more imposing wall u facing the residential area. So, I'm not sure that's really a a good solution. Um, I think anything that would could be done um to make that wall less monolithic as viewed from the outside uh from the west would be uh uh much appreciated by

the people there. It's about all I've got. Mr. Klopp,

thank you. I'll just briefly thank everyone for coming and staying this late and staying awake this late. Um, when I look at this project, I think of a site that's unfortunately quite underutilized and really an eyesore right now and an opportunity to improve it, keep an important business here in Walnut Creek uh seems like an a good thing for us to do. And so I think the uh planners and the team have done a good job listening to the neighbors, trying to address the concerns and building a nice looking uh dealership. And so I do support it.

Count. Um, so I think this is one of those examples of where measure A um makes things rather challenging for our city to uh allow um businesses um as things move forward into the future um and the way that things change um there's certain types of businesses that that can't be in our city because of measure A. Um, and I think the creativity of building on a hill has happened a few times already. Um, to try to to try to incorporate um, businesses for for businesses like this to be able to stay in our city. Um so I think it just creates some um it's one of those unintended consequences of um you know a a citizens initiative is that as things change you know the council cannot change. Um the only way to change something like that and adapt is for the citizens to to make a change. Um so there are some creative uh um uses that have been happening it appears. Um, and uh, it it creates some bizarre incentives, right, to build on a hill if you need uh, something that's slightly taller. Um, but here we are. Um, I would suggest just in terms of the right turn lane, um, or the no right turn, sorry, it's getting late. In terms of the no right turn, um, I would like to suggest that, um, we edit the resolution. So on page eight of attachment two um for the draft resolution to just uh in the third paragraph to just cross out um vehicles test drives from um so that it would say additionally a condition of

approval has been incorporated to restrict turning right. So you take out restrict vehicle test drives from does that make sense? So, I'd like to recommend that as an amendment.

All right. Um, would you like to make a Well, actually, we we need two motions. One, we have two resolutions. The first is on SQUA, and then perhaps you'd like to make the second one, which would include your amendment. Um, and I note that uh if we go past 11, we are um according to the municipal code required to complete this. So, let's do that. Um, do I have a motion on the SQA resolution?

Um, okay. So, the SQA resolution. I move that we adopt the resolution recommending the findings and determination that the proposed Porsche dealership project is exempt from SQA pursuant to the class 32 infill development exemption. Uh, Porsche dealership PD ordinance reszone. Second. All right. Any further discussion? Not you. Call a roll. Commissioner Quark? Yes. Commissioner Strongman? Yes. Commissioner Moran? Yes. Commissioner Count? Yes. Commissioner Klopp? Yes. Vice Chair Knighting? Yes. Chair Anderson? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you very much. And we have a a uh motion on the second resolution. All right. So I move to approve the recommendation to city council for PD ordinance design review tree permits and sign ordinance exception application number Y25-058 um with uh the amendment to it on page 8 to cross out the words vehicle desk test drives from from the third paragraph

and chair if I may just to add to that we actually I looked at the resolution there's a condition about test drive so that condition that's under planning number three. Oh thank you. Um so that would also be modified um given your amendment if that's the motion. Yes. Thank you. Very good. Second. Hold on. Any comment? Take the role. Okay. Commissioner Count. Yes. Commissioner Strongman. Yes. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Commissioner Clark, yes. Commissioner Klopp, yes. Vice Chair Knighting, Chair Anderson, yes. Motion carries. Thank you all very much for your patience.

This is uh one of the longest meetings we've had in a few years. Thank you very much. Um are there any commission considerations? Uh no. Or commission member and staff reports or announcements? Not at this time. this late date. Uh in that case, we are adjourned. 10:58. Well done. No need to make no need to extend the meeting. Yeah.

So, you're claiming that's a minute three minutes fast. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.