 We're live. All to order the regular meeting of the Design Review Board for the City of Santa Rosa for October 18th, 2018. We can get a roll call. Let the record reflect all board members are present, except board member Zuko, who is abstaining due to a professional relationship with a member of the applicant team. Item two, approval of the minutes from the October 4th, 2018 meeting. Any comments on the minutes to add to the record? Seeing none. Those minutes can be entered into the record. Item three, board business. This is where I will read our statement of purpose. What makes the design review board's authority different than other boards? The review authority shall consider the location, design, site plan, configuration, and the overall effect of the proposed project upon surrounding properties in the city in general. Review shall be conducted by comparing the proposed project to the general plan. Any applicable specific plan, applicable zoning code standards and requirements, consistency of the project within the city's design guidelines, architectural criteria for special areas, and other applicable city requirements, such as city policy statements and development plans. That is the purview of this board. Moving on to public comment for items that are not on the agenda this afternoon. Anyone to comment on an item not on the agenda? Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the board. Moving on to item five, statements of abstention. We have noted Zuko's abstention on item 6.1, or item 6, I guess, on this agenda. Item 6.1, board member Zuko will be abstaining. Moving on to item 6.1, amendment to final design. I'm in the minutes from last week, sorry. Something didn't look right. Moving to item six, public hearing for preliminary and final design review of a major design review for Dutton Avenue Residences at 3150 Dutton Avenue. File number DR17-074, and we will look to Patrick for a staff report. Thank you, Chair Birch, members of the Design Review Board. The item before you is the Dutton Avenue Residences Project, also going by the name the Vibe Apartments. The project includes 107 multifamily for rent units. They would be divided amongst a two-story, three-story, and one-four-story buildings. And the unit mix would be 32 one-bedroom, 65 two-bedrooms, and 10 three-bedroom units. There would be 237 on-site parking spaces provided. Regarding the California Environmental Quality Act, an initial study was completed, which resulted in a mitigated negative declaration, which was circulated for 20 days ahead of this public hearing. The project is located in the southern part of the city on Dutton Avenue. And it is a 5.95-acre parcel. It's undeveloped. It's surrounded by predominantly industrial uses or undeveloped properties as well. So across the street is undeveloped parcel that is zoned for multi-family residential as well. To the north and south are industrial, light industrial uses. There's also self-storage in the area as well as food and beverage manufacturing. Immediately to the east of the project site is the Sonoma Marine Area Rail Transit Smart Line. And beyond that is county jurisdictional property that's predominantly residential, divided into triplexes and other multi-family uses. The project site itself is comprised mostly of film materials. There is a very small 0.037-acre seasonal wetland as identified by the Army Corps of Engineers on the eastern portion of the site. However, environmental assessment of it has found that it's largely dewatered and virtually without value for habitat. However, it is a mapped wetland according to the Army Corps of Engineers. The rest of the site is flat without any trees or shrubs or vegetation of any merit. In 2017, a neighborhood meeting was held for the project to introduce it. As far as I can recall, that meeting was only attended by staff and the applicant team. The project went before the Design Review Board in March of 2017 as a concept item. Then in October, formal design review applications were submitted to the city, which resulted in, after the city's review of the project, it was deemed complete earlier this year, and a mitigated negative declaration was posted for public comment. The general plan for the area is medium density residential, and the zoning implements the general plan. It's R3-18 or multi-family residential. The general plan calls for approximately 8 to 18 units per acre on the site, and the project is towards the high end of that scale, so it's approaching 18 units per acre. The general plan does provide guidance that on multi-family sites, the midpoint or higher be achieved in the density that a project puts forward. The zoning, as I said, implements the general plan. It calls for multi-family residential. It's principally permitted use, which means that design review is the only entitlement needed by this project. For zoning, the maximum building height is 45 feet. The project is below that building height. The same goes for lot coverage and setbacks. It meets all the development standards for the district. The prescribed parking would be 236 spaces. As was mentioned, there are 237 spaces provided. They'll all be on site. There's no street parking proposed with this project. As was mentioned previously, the project was before the board in 2017 as a concept. At the time, the board commented on the layout of the parking areas, with recommendations that Tuck Under Parking be considered. Also, there were comments on the building articulation providing access to the multi-use path along the smart rail, and also comments on the amenities, including to include additional amenities for residents and consider lengthening the pool. The project has responded to that concept review. There are additional amenities, including a barbecue area and a children's play area added to the project. Additionally, the project is in line with several of the city's design guidelines. The buildings have been designed with force-sided architecture. There's also a mix of building type. As was mentioned previously, there are two-story, three-story, and four-story residential buildings, as well as single-story, amenity, and leasing office buildings. The intensity of the site is located towards the center of the parcel, and steps down as it approaches the lower-intensity industrial parcels to the north and the south. As was mentioned previously, an initial study was prepared for the project that began circulation in September. As of this time, no comments related to CQA have been received by the city. One comment was received from the public when the public hearing was posted. It is from the owner and operator of the industrial site to the north of the project site, and they just expressed concern about the interaction between residential and industrial and had recommendations. There were three recommendations, one that an eight-foot tall concrete sound wall be installed along the northern property line, that housing units not be built against the property line, and that landscaping and design elements be implemented that would give a feeling of separation from the industrial areas adjacent to the property. So several issues were considered with this project during staff's review. One was regarding fire access, so one concern was that originally there was only one point of entry provided, so the fire department requires two points of entry for the size of this development, so an EVA was added or emergency vehicle access was added to the southern portion of the site. That also has to be, there's a certain degree of separation required, and it's based on the diagonal of the property itself, so the curb cuts were moved slightly to allow that EVA to be properly separated from the main entrance. Additionally, there is a median island in the entryway. The fire department had requirements that it be built in such a way that a fire vehicle would be able to drive over that it wouldn't impede fire access, so those have both been addressed. Additionally, engineering looked at stormwater and utilities for the site, so the treatment of the seasonal wetland that's on the site as well as the provision of utilities that's involved series of back and forth between our engineering team here at the city and the applicants team. Those have all been resolved. Just one point of clarification in the exhibit A that's attached to the approval resolution, the draft approval resolution for design review. The exhibit A are the engineering conditions, and condition number 25 has been modified slightly for clarity on the review authority for any changes to the project description includes the signalization or the striping of an intersection to the south of the site, and to approach that at the time of building permit applications, we wanted to provide clarity on who would be the review authority to look at what's being provided, and that's going to be the director of planning and economic development, so I'll just read off for the record the amended condition number 25 of exhibit A, and it is as follows. Located in the county of Sonoma, the Standish Avenue, Todd Road, Galati Avenue intersections, future traffic signal, and or other approved intersection improvements as determined by the director of planning and economic development shall be installed and operational prior to building occupancy release by the city building department. As proposed in the project description, the project applicant shall coordinate with the county of Sonoma on the installation of the traffic signal or an all-way stop control prior to occupancy release. I'm happy to go into more detail on the nuances of that condition if the board wishes. Additionally, the traffic was looked at for this project, which included off-site improvements, which are the two major intersections to the north and south. Those issues have been resolved. As was mentioned previously, the issue with the wetland has been resolved. There will be no construction over the wetland and no development over the wetland, so if you can see the notch in the circulation right-of-way on the east side of the property, it does completely avoid that wetland area, so that will just remain as an open space amenity. Lastly, the California Environmental Quality Act, the initial approach was to seek an exemption. However, because there were several topics that had to be investigated with more detail, the determination was made to do an mitigated negative declaration, which is a more conservative approach to CEQA, and that's the approach that we took today, and as was mentioned, it's been circulated for public comment and none have been received. Because all the issues have been addressed to staff satisfaction, staff of the Planning and Economic Development Department is recommending that the design review board by resolution adopt a mitigated negative declaration and approve preliminary and final design review for the Dunn Avenue Residences Project, and the applicant team is also present with a presentation that they'd like to give. Thank you. Thank you, Patrick. Any questions? I want to just, I'll start with any resolution that we vote on here. We'll add the modification to condition 25 of exhibit A as part of that. Be the right way to do that. Any questions for staff before we start? Scott, I can start down there with you. True. Patrick, I just need a clarification on a couple of things. Let me pull this up. Okay, so never mind. I answer my own question. One of them. How long has this property, and I guess the property across the street, how long have they been zoned medium density residential? Do you know? I don't have that information. I can probably find out though. Yeah, I was kind of thinking that if it had been recent, you probably would have included in your staff report in terms of like in the last five years or something like that. So is it that? Was that changed? Okay, cool. All right, cool. So that was my big question. And then I did have, I think some clear, I was looking at the applicant's grading and drainage plan, pardon me, and it has a reference to that Standish-Todd Road intersection. And I guess I'm a little confused where that requirement kind of lives because it's not exactly close, but not exactly far from the property. So I just kind of wondering where that kind of, was that a product of the EIR or was that the traffic study that's in here? Did I miss that? Built of the traffic study that found that traffic to this site would have an impact on that intersection. So rather than a mitigation, it's part of the project. So to accommodate the tenants of this property, that improvement will be made. There's also staff has reason to believe that that intersection is going to be improved by the county as a result of other development. So it's kind of a placeholder condition that if that improvement doesn't take place, the applicant will do so in order to accommodate their development. Sabra? I have no questions. Eric? None for staff. Great. Before we jump into the applicant presentation, does it make sense after the applicant presentation and after public comment if we were to maybe handle the two resolutions in order? I'm not sure that if we wanted to open a discussion on the mitigative negative declaration and work on a motion to cover that resolution and then move on to the design review. Does that make sense? Does that make sense to the board to separate the? Yes, we are. We're making two findings. So let's get through these. If it makes sense, we'll do the mitigated NIGDEC and then we'll move on to design review for discussion. So with that, we will look for a presentation from the applicant. You guys who are bad just can come down and join the staff at the table. Give us your name and your relationship to the project as you start. Mr. Chairman, members, thank you for having us today. It's a pleasure to be here after two years of working with staff on this project and after 11 years of post-having it rezoned to answer Mr. Weigel's question about the zoning. We have worked very, very diligently on this project. We have a good team here. Corey Krith with Access Architects is our architect. Jean Kapolchek who's sitting here is our consultant. And Narsay and Ken Taylor are associates of ours also sponsoring the project with us. The concept for this project is to develop a lifestyle community that would service both ends of the barbell in terms of the tenant population in Santa Rosa. We work very, very diligently to build a gated, secured complex that would enhance the lifestyles of millennials to retirees and downsize families. The unit mix and the physical configuration and utility of the buildings is such that we have always had consideration for lifestyle as the primary focus because our intent is to have very, very high tenant retention in operating this property. We don't want to have a cramped, uncomfortable space to live in where you've got people moving in and people moving out. We wanted to have a space that generates a really, really attractive lifestyle where somebody can enjoy the amenities that we have, which are numerous. We have a fantastic swimming pool area and spa. We have a great gym. We have a work area with sort of an internet cafe. We have meeting rooms and conference rooms, cooking area and a barbecue area both inside and outside. So the environment should be conducive to both those tenants that need to go to work every morning and leave the complex as well as those tenants that more and more today choose to work from their home. And this is a place that they could spend all day in. They get their physical activities, have a social element with the other tenants, plenty of places to socialize in and indeed have it be their community, not just their apartment. The focus that we had in terms of design, which I think we achieved very successfully, is to separate these buildings into pods where if you see the buildings themselves have the separations between them that allow for a great deal of fenestration to bring light in. To me, natural light in the living space that you're in is a key element to creating comfort and making it home. And so we have a much higher window count than you would typically find anywhere. And I think that will enhance the lifestyle. We have a four-story building in the back that's elevator served for a reason so that we can get elderly people and retirees and or people that are disabled to be able to transport up to the fourth floor easily. It gives us an advantage in terms of being able to lease that space at a competitive rate and it offers an additional premium for the view because we have great views from up there. You really do the hills are beautiful around the property. The property is in an industrial, light industrial area. I should focus on the light industrial. And of course all those considerations were at play when we rezoned it. And we're looking forward to the development of this asset because right across the street there's another 10-acre piece that's zoned for multi-family and these things go. There's a domino effect. So we think that once this project gets up and running in the southeast, we'll see a number of other projects following it. The noise study was comprehensive. It took into consideration the neighboring industrial uses. It took into consideration the railway behind our property and the summary of the conclusion was that the highest noise generator was really just that in the avenue, the typical traffic noise. There is no negative influence from any of the adjacent uses because they are light industrial uses. I'd like to turn the presentation over to Cory, if I may, to speak a little more about the design. I hope I haven't stolen all his best material. And then I'll be here to answer any questions, of course, that you may have. Thank you very much. May I? There we go. Okay. Good evening, chair and members of the board. Thank you for the opportunity to come present this project that I think Mark described very, very well. I actually don't know how much more I can add to it. I know that the focus throughout the design process was creating a livable community and that's been accomplished both, I think, in terms of the design of the buildings, the siting of the buildings, the central focal point being the courtyard where everybody will gather socially. There's variety. We work very hard with Mark to come up with a design that we think hits the mark as far as being forward-looking, interesting, exciting, contemporary. That lifestyle community that Mark spoke to informed the design process throughout and that extends to the amenity spaces that are enhancing this community and the choice of the landscaping treatments. So maybe what we can do is a quick little scan through the slides, focus on a few things that are probably most of interest. So how would I? With this one. So this is the front view from Dotten Avenue of the main entrance. We'll go quickly. We've all seen the site plan. There's five main buildings that circle the central courtyard, the amenity buildings or one-story buildings inserted into that courtyard, nestled by the residential buildings surrounding them. We'll skip that context image just showing the immediate context, distant views to the west and the east. Individual buildings A, B. A is three-story. B is two-story. This is building C, another three-story building. Then we get to building D in the back, which is the four-story building. So there's that stair-stepping, sort of the respecting of the scale of the streetscape and pushing the higher building to the rear of the site. Come around to the other side on the north and building E sort of closes off the courtyard. The amenity buildings, community center, fitness center, leasing office, facing out to the pool, building facades that you saw earlier. It was mentioned that the height tops out at well underneath the maximum height limit. But emphasis put on articulating the facade movement in and out, creating depth, breaking that parapet height by introducing elements that poke above and just change the sight lines. Use of color. I think a sophisticated palette of material and color. In keeping with the name of the project, the vibe. That was an inspired choice of name. This is the building's C, D and E and how they stitch together and how Mark spoke about the gaps between the buildings which allow really light to come in from two directions to almost every dwelling unit. Quite unique. This elevation really, I think, highlights the low-scale amenity buildings that are nestled into the courtyard in the center sections. And some additional perspective views. The materials. The landscape treatment. Worked with an outstanding landscape architectural firm, jet design. Dense planting all around. Variety of different planting materials. Emphasizing a screening from the roadway to the site itself. There's a berm along the frontage to provide a sense of security privacy. If Bruce was here, he could speak more eloquently to the landscape materials. But let me know if you have any questions. I'll do the best I can to answer them. And then I think that's really it. Because beyond that, we get to the civil drawing. Great. So we'll have questions shortly. Anyone from the public at this time wishing to speak on this item today? I've got someone. You can take the podium up top. Do I press the button? Okay. Yeah. Please give us your name to start and then... Yes. My name is CJ. I represent the property owners to the north. That's adjacent to this. And our biggest concern is what keeps the property divided from our property to the subject site. Is it just a fence or is it there's going to be a sound wall? We'll bring your questions to the applicant. And our questioning would be great, but I've noted that. Okay. And another thing. You guys identified the property as light industrial to the north correction. That is a general industrial property. So we have all types of uses from heavy to light. So just a correction. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Any other questions? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board and we'll bring questions from the board. I'll start with the question from the public as to the fence between your property, the subject property and the property to the north. It looks like a metal fence on the plan. Any plans for something more significant? There is an existing... Am I live? Am I not? Here we go. Thank you. There is an existing chain link fence with those slats of wood, I believe, the type that's interwoven into that chain link fence along that property line. And we have some landscaping that goes in there also to soften up that fence. The uses in the buildings to the north... The buildings to the north are essentially, I guess, office type buildings. Do we have an image of the... In the context map? There's a delicatessen in the buildings and a bunch of office space. A used car, wholesaler, some workshop types of uses in the back. But the property is generally light industrial use, whether... I don't know what the zoning is, exactly. I thought it was light industrial, if I'm mistaken. I apologize. I wasn't trying to misrepresent or mislead anybody. But if you are familiar with the area or if you've driven by it or seen the buildings, they're all essentially a two-story office building. And so the fence material between the two properties will remain as it is. And we have landscaping to soften up the impact between the two properties. It's a little bit perturbing to me to hear the neighbor raise this issue at this time because they supported the residential rezoning and they did not respond or appear at the neighborhood meeting either the first time around at the initial design review hearing or the second time around at the second design review meeting. And so their concern comes a little late and a dollar short for my perspective. But I think the dispositive answer to that question is the noise study. And the noise study found that there was no negative implication. Great. Thank you. Senator Burt, if I could just chime in. Just for extra clarification, the general plan and the zoning for the parcels to the north and south is general industrial, not light industrial. Thank you. Great. Understood. And I understand your answer as well. So Scott, questions for the applicant? We're going to go with questions and we're going to stay away from commentary. You're good with questions. You show us how it's done. All right. Well, my first question on my list happens to be the metal picket fence. So I don't want to put words into your mouth. So can you explain where the new metal fence goes? And it sounds like the two side properties keep their whatever existing fences are in place and in the front and the back get a new metal fence to tie that into a surrounded perimeter of fencing to the property. That's correct. Okay. And then on the landscaping wall facing Dutton, it's a little difficult to tell what that material was. It was called a pile wall on the plans. And in the rendering, it looks like it's kind of a metal quartet wall is can you elaborate on what exactly it is? You got it. You nailed it. It's a quartet metal. Quartet metal pile wall support back the dirt up, mound it on the interior property side. Okay. All right. And then what material are the carports made of? Are they metal or are they wood roof? Metal, I believe, but I'm not 100% sure. Okay. I call that as metal. Yeah. And then on the shorter buildings, how are you handling mechanical units so that your four-story product is not staring down on top of roofs with mechanical units like a shorter Vegas hotel that I've stayed at a couple times? Well, they make some very attractive rooftop units now, by the way, but I don't know, Corey. What was the answer to that? Well, I think the answer to that is that there's going to be very compact units on the roof. They'll be ganged together in the center and they don't stand more than about three feet tall. So they're not going to present a site issue for adjacent buildings. And they might add a little industrial flavor to the project, which is consistent with the neighborhood. Right. True. Good answer. And then the question is on the amenity buildings. Are they conditioned space? And if so, are they also going to have rooftop units or would they have ground units because they're single-story? We'll have wall-mounted units to condition those as opposed to rooftop units. Okay. I think those are all my questions. Drew. So I was looking through the plan set and I think Warren and I were trying to figure this out on, it says wood fence. And I just can't find it for the life of me. Where is this wood fence? Is it at the swimming pool or? It's on. Which sheet? A05.01 materials. Can we just use this again to scroll? So just, I didn't see it in any of the keynotes on all the elevations and whatnot. So I just. Sorry, that sheet reference again was. A05.01. That's at the beginning. Way back at the beginning. It's the one right before the landscape plan. Patrick. So the wood fence, that's in the bottom right hand corner there next to the lowy glass sample. I'm just trying to find where that. I think that's surrounding the pool. Surrounding the pool. Okay, cool. Just wanted to know where it was because I couldn't find it on anything. And then I had another question and trash enclosure roofs. Aren't they, do we, do we have a requirement in the city for them to be covered like from rain and whatnot as opposed to the trellis that's indicated in the plan set? Do you know? If you don't, that's all. We don't, we don't know. We think it's possible. We've asked the question before and I think the answer is yes. That's what I thought. Yeah. And I, yeah, because I just, I'm just going from my PRMD brain where I've been dealing with this and they want it covered. So that's why I ask. I think it's a SUSE issue. It's a SUSE issue. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Those are my only questions. So, thanks. Maureen. Pardon me. On your very first A1.01, I'm going to go to that in a minute, which it's, it's the, your cover sheet A0.0 right there. I noticed that it looks like Corten you have in this rendering. It's, it's a straight kind of a crisp line. What is that material? It's Corten steel and their panels of steel and they're installed at a bit of an angle, you know, driven into the berm. Okay. So you've got this kind of an overlapping thing going on. Okay. Kind of like Richard Sarah thing. So I noticed in the, in the, in the landscape plan, they were croissant shaped. They were, they were curving and they're, they're straight in here. This is what you get when you buy the cheap renderings in China. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So the material is correct. It's, it's true to the landscape plan that they're curving. I've, maybe that mark ties in with the sign that's there. It's a, it's, it's a sign that's kind of pitched in the, in the landscape plan. You have a pike sign that's just, you can read going up and down the street. So that, and then there's some other signs in the landscape that is kind of a laser cut or water cut glowing behind that. Maybe that's around the pool. It appears that this Trespa panel. Okay. All right. So there's, there's a monument sign and then you have a mounted sign in the landscape and I'm not, you know, again, it's really Michael's domain to speak signage. So I won't tunnel into that too much, but I'm just getting a clarification about the material. That's Corten. It appears that the Trespa aspiration was for the main pool building, your one-story building. Everything else is stucco. Yes. Okay. Yeah. On the wood fence, it looked like it was metal because it's painted charcoal, but I guess it's, it's wood. You have these long pipe pieces of wood that hopefully would endure maintenance over time, but around the pool building it's, it's a wood aspiration. You're going to have slat horizontal one way and in another direction. If you look back at your, your material board there that showed the fencing. As I understand that, I'm not sure where the corrugated panel is, but you have a wood fence and you've got part of its horizontal slat and then you're going to a vertical. So maybe it's thing stair step. So there isn't necessarily metal fence anywhere that's, that's wood painted, or was it mislabeled at the bottom there? That sheet A05.01. Just a question. Yeah, we're, we see it on the material board now tying it to the site plan. To fill in the airspace, we did get confirmation from engineering that covers are required on trash enclosure as part of the stormwater treatment. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, it's not, it's not a big deal. It's just a question. If it's, if it's going to be wood, then you want to make sure all the verticals are somehow. Yeah, so the honest answer to your question on the pool fences, I don't know. That's great. The objective, however, from an aesthetic point of view, my objective is the pool is a highly visible amenity. And if we go to the landscaping plan, you'll see that we've taken great care to make sure that in every path of travel in the property, there's something attractive to look at at the end of that path that will make you want to make that trip. Yes. And the pool amenity is particularly visible from the clubhouse and from the amenity building. So the fence treatment for that area has always, I've always intended it to be and it should be something that is very unobtrusive, thin in design and transparent in terms of view so that you can actually be engaged with that pool area. There's a private side of public, yeah, you want it to be stealth where you, and sometimes the other question on L1, I think this is still a question, you've got L1 up. It's fun how you've taken the pavers, there's a circulation area where you're sweeping into the property and you're turning basically hard left. It looks like you've got asphalt and you've got this kind of a seamless concrete kind of a plaza-like thing that comes in. Exactly. Yeah, and you've negotiated with fire the, it turns, it looks different when you look at the civil drawings, it's kind of a kink, it's just, you know, there's auto-cattered whatever lines. Here it's, there's more room to kind of, at slow speeds take that curve. I don't mind the idea in the landscape being true is that it's a more of a seamless hardscape and the tongues as I'd call them that come into it of the asphalt are there, but that you've negotiated with fire that as fire negotiates around those curves. Yeah, they're clear on this, they've approved the plan. Okay, that's all for me. Sabra? Although I heard it mentioned that at the March 2017 meeting you were encouraged to link with the proposed smart trail. I just didn't see where that linkage was. Could somebody show that to me? Attractively do that? Sorry. Well, the trail, the trail runs on the other side of the railroad track. Yes. So the only way to get to the trail, which is conceptually the way that the tenants and residents here would get there, would be to take their bicycles or if they're walking come out of the gate, take a turn and go down to Bellevue and then go up Bellevue to the controlled intersection of the train line and then cross over and pick up the bike path. So I'll accept that there's no easy way to do it because I certainly couldn't come up. I'm sorry, I'm having a little trouble hearing you. Well, it's okay. It's wonderful acoustics. I was concerned because in most of this area there is no sidewalk. You've arranged the design to be suitable for families. You've encouraged families and dog walkers and yet in most of the neighborhood there is no safe off street pedestrian transit. And that's why I was asking the question, is how does someone safely get to Bellevue to Robles to anywhere? There is a sidewalk that runs along the front of the property on Dutton and there's an existing sidewalk that runs up Bellevue in front of the delicatessen of the property next to us and then engages with the bike path on the other side of the railroad track. I see the sidewalk adjacent to the industrial business area. What I see is a deer path in front of yours, but I know that will become a sidewalk. Yes, it will. Okay, thank you. That was my major question. My secondary question deals with transit. Where's the nearest bus stop? The nearest bus stop is, I believe, do we have an image that shows the nearest bus stop? I can answer that. It's about 200 feet south on Dutton Avenue in front of the Amorosa Academy. So the building, if you look at the map that's on the screen where it says existing self-storage, the next building south is Amorosa Academy and there's a bus stop directly in front of it. Thank you. We did have discussions and are engaging in discussions with the transit authority to try to bring that bus stop closer to the property since we're going to have so many bodies there and presumably many of them will be hopefully using public transit. Whether they do that and the frequency at which they run buses from this location and I should add that we have engaged them to try to get bus service from this location to the smart station during the commute hours to be able to utilize public transit. There's been no resolution, but hopefully there will be some positive momentum. Excellent. Thank you. Eric, and thank you for your knowledge of the locations of bus stations. A retired police officer on the board is a fantastic... I'm sorry, excuse me for jumping in, but Jean just pointed something out to me that I had neglected, which is one of our conditions of approval is to put a bus stop in front of the property so there will be actual stop there now. How useful that will be depends upon the city of Santa Rosa's infinite wisdom in controlling its transportation system. Just to clarify, that's condition 35 of exhibit A and it would be a bus shelter pad that's installed. So if city bus or the county transit authority decides to add a bus stop there, it would be up to their transit planning, but it will be ready for one if they choose to put one there. Great, thank you. Eric? Thank you. Just a few questions. It probably goes back to fences. Can you describe to me again the perimeter fences? It looks like those are metal and will be on both the northeast and south side, is that correct? The two industrial parts and then... That's correct. Okay. And then and it looks like from the diagram it's a six foot metal fence that will separate the project from the smart tracks. What's the dimension of things? Right, iron. Six feet sounds. Six feet sounds right. And then the color palette, how do you guys pick the color palette for the exterior, the red, etc? How did we pick it? Yes. I imposed it on the architects. Those are all my questions. Thank you. And we fell in love with it. It's good. Great. Yeah, I think that I think most of the questions recovered. I was curious about the metal fence. I think that the metal fence that's shown on the landscape plans, I believe, is for the east and the south sides. And it looks like the chain link fence that's existing is on the north side. I'm sorry I misinterpreted the question because I view chain link as a metal fence. Sure, yeah. And then there is intended to be a gate. This will be a gated entry at the property and that same metal fence would run behind the the core tin planter elements across the west side of the property. Yes, it'll run behind the berm that we have. So it'll not much of it will be visible given the berm in the landscaping. Okay. And it probably wouldn't be fair in the context of a public hearing to not ask one of the questions that we had, and this is not editorializing, so I want to ask it and get it out there, about the concern that we had raised regarding engaging the buildings with the street a bit more. I understand your site plan very well, how you've laid it out. But there was a comment in the previous hearing about bringing buildings forward potentially. Our design guidelines asked for development to be, you know, at the street and not put parking between the street and the buildings. It's a unique site. I'm just curious if you considered anything site plan wise that would maybe not necessarily have to bring buildings forward but how we engage. The site plan looks very much the same, not to say that I'm unhappy with it based on where this is, but I'm curious if any gestures were thought of or if there's anything you feel like you can do to bring the project forward or give it a little bit of a forward feel. Legitimate question that deserves an answer. We did look at it after the comment was made, but as you're well aware, everything has a cost benefit associated with it. And when we evaluated the cost benefit of relocating those buildings in terms of what it did to the utility of the site, the expense of the development and to the lifestyle of the residents. Because remember, the highest noise generator in the traffic study is that in Avenue. So we don't want to have those buildings so close to the street. At the end of the day on a cost benefit analysis, we cited the buildings as we did. We believe that given the nature of the design and the color scheme and the height of the buildings, they will engage the street. You will see them prominently from the street and it will be a very visible and very attractive architectural engagement. And I think that the landscape design speaks to the fact that there's an effort to give the edge of the property an engaging feel and an upscale feel. So that works. But it was a significant point from the last meeting that I just wanted to address it again. A legitimate question and we're here to answer all of them. For us as the owners, it's very, very important for us to engage the high traffic count on Dutton Avenue because that's where many of our residents will come from. It's also equally important for us to engage the backside of the property because the smart rail riders are going to see this every day when they commute and we're hoping some of them will choose to live here. So we made a very special effort to make both sides very attractive. We didn't just ugly up the backside because that's a business generator. Great. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant before we bring it back to the board? Okay, Drew, we'll start with you. We'll bring it back to Eric. I just had one as I was looking at the site plan a little bit more. Is this the lightning round? Yes, it is. I just I missed this. What is a trash staging area? Is that something functionally for the operations? Yes, it's an area where the trash trucks can negotiate to pick up the trash. No, I mean you have trash enclosures which appear to be designed to allow that functionality. There's something on the east end of the property behind the four-story building that says trash staging area. When we spoke to the waste management folks, they needed an area where the trucks could negotiate, make a turn, where the wheeled containers coming out of the trash area can be moved to the truck. So that area is the area that they required? Oh, so maybe this is my question. So the two trash enclosures that are indicated on the site plan are really to serve kind of building A, B, C, E, and that trash staging area is serving the four-story building because you have an internal trash collection system via chute or something else. Correct. Did I miss that? Okay, cool. That's what I was missing, I think, on the plans. I just didn't see that, so that answers my question. Thanks. Eric. Sorry, I lost my earlier question. In the wetlands, the small, very small wetlands area in the paved parking area, is there any separation there other than just pavement to dirt? There's no fencing or anything like that? I believe that there, I know that there has been discussion about putting a low fence along there, you know, to keep pedestrian traffic out of the four-inch depression, that's the wetlands. But I don't know if that discussion ever made it to the plans. I believe, however, that it is addressed in the consultant's report and in his response in the CEQA document that there would be some kind of a border along that line. Okay. Yeah, if I'm not mistaken, and we don't need to necessarily go look it up, but I think that the boundary of the wetlands and the boundaries of fire retention areas, it's pretty prescriptive what needs to happen, and it will probably be addressed in the building permit, right? There's some pretty distinct... Well, certainly during construction, there's standard requirements for how you isolate those areas as far as operation of the development once it's completed. I believe that the environmental documents said that they didn't raise a risk of pedestrian foot traffic damaging those wetlands, but it would be an operational decision on how that's treated. Good. No, I appreciate it. I have one more question. Patrick, maybe you can help me. I thought I saw reading the material coming in. There was an issue that was raised with the commercial development to the north that our public speaker had addressed, and I thought that had come up once before, and I couldn't find it in the material. Am I wrong on that? I don't recall that issue coming up before the letter that was received, which was forwarded to the members of the board. Yes, and I got that last. Okay, so it may have been the noise study that maybe rang my... The noise study did take into account the surrounding development types, and there are mitigations associated with that in the environmental document. Okay, thank you. All right, without further questions from the board, we'll move to the discussion from the board. We operate on Rosenberg's rules here, which is a little different approach where we look to entertain a motion to start discussion, so the motion comes up quickly, and then we drop into discussion, try to get to a more focused motion. Per my earlier proposal, does staff or anyone on the board object to looking for a motion on the resolution regarding the mitigated negative declaration first? Does that work? Okay, can I get a motion on the mitigated negative declaration, and then we'll move into discussion. Chair Birch, I would like to make a motion to approve and adopt the resolution of the Design Review Board of the City of Santa Rosa adopting a mitigated negative declaration for the Dutton Avenue Residence Project, also known as the Vive Apartments, located at 3150 Dutton Avenue, APN 043133013, file number DR17-074, and wave the reading of the text. Do I have a second? Second. Discussion. We'll start with you, Sabra. We'll work back to the motion maker. One of my concerns was the fact that the fence is not a perimeter fence coupled with the fact that we didn't see an illustration of it, and when we vote on this today, we are voting on the fence design. I think that will be in the next motion on design review. This is just the mitigated neg deck, so we'll come back. No discussion on this. Okay, Eric? Scott? I have a discussion. No discussion. Warren? No discussion. None here. We get a roll call on the motion. Birch? Hedgepeth? Aye. Briar? Yes. Goldschlub? Yes. Kincaid? Aye. Weigel? Aye. There you go. That gets us through the mitigated negative declaration. Now we'll move on to the design review. Is there a motion on the resolution that we received? I want to point out for a motion maker, this resolution covers both preliminary and final design review. So if that suits you to make the motion on both pieces, great. If you want to make a modified motion, we can talk about that as well. I would like to make a modified motion. Is that okay? It's you. Let's do it. Okay. I move that we grant preliminary design review to Dutton Avenue Residences 3150 Dutton Avenue file number DR17-074 and wave reading of the text and defer final design review to staff. Do we have a second on that motion? I'll second that. Great. And we will start the discussion. Maybe we start this discussion with the motion maker just given a quick background as to the modification to staff's resolution? Sure. So I think that when we were asking questions, I kind of saw some potential conditions arising that require revision of some type to the submission. And so we have in the past very successfully done this method of providing commentary and conditioning of your project and then deferring it to staff for review. And I have lots of faith in staff to kind of roll with how we condition your project. And that way you don't have to come back and see us again. Staff, good with that. If we reach that conclusion, if we do, reach a motion on this resolution? We're fine with that and we appreciate the faith in staff. Super. So Scott, let's start with you. Discussion and comment on the project? Yeah, sure. Overall, I think the project is well appointed. I think I was one of the few that was okay with the parking in the front as long as the landscaping was burned for the very purposes that you stated earlier. If memory serves me well, we did have a discussion about the Dutton noise. And I think there's some merit to it, particularly after seeing the traffic report. I also appreciate that you've, you know, faced the taller buildings in the rear close to smart because I think it will be, you know, an attractive thing to drive, you know, while people are driving by on the smart train to look up and see balconies and activity and stairways and going through an industrial area. So I appreciate that as well. I think one comment that I would make and a condition as it related to the trash and closures is I do think it's going to need to be covered. And when it is required to be covered, I'd rather see a metal roof than a wood trellis just for durability. I think from a long-term maintenance perspective, it's going to make a lot of sense for you. So that would be a condition that I would like to see added if we reach final. The other thing that, and I don't think this is a strong condition of mine, but I would encourage is the friendly neighbor conversation of potentially having the neighbors to the north and south consider replacing their chain link fences with your financial help and installing the metal perimeter fence that you've designated on all four sides. Again, I'm not going to condition the project. I just want to put it out there that I think that in creating this living space that you're trying to create, it falls a little short in having a decent nice metal perimeter picket fence on the east and west side and then kind of leaving what's already there even though there's an ability to landscape and such as just chain link throws you directly into the industrial field. I would just encourage you to look at that and I don't think it's necessary. I don't want to see two fences because then it leaves room for things to happen in between two fences and it's ugly, but I'd encourage that conversation to happen. And then I think as much as in love with the red color that you are, I think that the brighter red is a little much for me. I think it's carmine red, but crimson red or the darker red works well. The bright red, you'll hear it later, probably with some negative connotations to the area, but also I just think it's too stark of a contrast for me. I'll see what my fellow board members have to say about it. And again, I think that it was difficult to know what the carports were actually constructed of. So I think we should clarify that they're constructed of metal roofs as well. And I appreciate you taking the whatever 12 year battle and getting this off the ground. So I look forward to driving by and seeing it built someday. Thanks. Thank you. Drew. So one of the things that I think I try to make a point of saying is when we have a good package, I want to acknowledge that and thank the applicant for that. So thank you for putting together a really good package gives me personally a lot to react to and keeps my questions low. I think generally speaking. So thank you very much for putting together a really good package. I appreciate it. I grew Scott on the fence thing. There's so many really nice elements and it just kind of it's like a forgotten thought for the kind of three sides. And obviously the trash enclosure bit because I brought it up. And the canopy parking as well with, you know, they're all kind of it makes sense that they're all standing seem metal roofs or something like that or corrugated metal roofs to kind of fit the vein that you have kind of elsewhere in the project. You know, I funny enough, I was just on design reward. I think like the week after you guys saw this project for concept. So this is my first time seeing it. I I both like and dislike the parking situation on the Dutton frontage. But I think the section that you have indicated on L2 kind of assuages some of my dislike of pushing the buildings back because you were addressing that frontage in a way other than just putting some some plants and calling it a day. You're actually birming it up. You're adding some height with some various trees and then the incorporation of the fence. So I, you know, I think had you not done that, I'd be really wanting you to move buildings. But I think with that, I think that kind of I'm less concerned. I do actually have one question that I realized that I didn't ask. And it's it's I think because it's only occurring on building A and B, I think. But it looks like there's the little shed roof kind of on the corridor. Is that right? There's like a little metal shed roof monitor. Yeah, I don't think it's limited to just A and B. Could you turn on your mic? Well, no, yeah, I mean, I think that's great. Oh, okay. It's just it's reading a little bit differently. I think color wise on some of the renderings that's it's fading and building E a little bit. There's a it's in building E, but it just fades a little bit. It's hard to read. So that's fine. I just was double checking on that. Everybody likes coverage. I have a I have a love hate with the color two. I kind of love it because it's bold. It's modern. It's aggressive. And I think sometimes you need to do that. But at the same time, it's bold and modern and aggressive. And I'm not sure it makes a whole heap of sense here. But I'm not. I think color wise, you guys are fine. I'm not going to push the issue. Some of some of the other board members want to push that. That's fine. But I think you've made a conscious decision to go bold and that's great. So that's why I kind of love hate with it. I think I do have one kind of comment materiality wise that's kind of bothering me. And while Stucco is great because it's relatively inexpensive and you can kind of do a lot with it, you know, you do have kind of a variation in your control joints and kind of articulation of the Stucco elements. I really feel like the buildings themselves, the multifamily buildings, not the amenities building are kind of starved for one more material because they're, you know, you've got kind of these two or three materials on the amenity building. You've got the corrugated metal siding. You've got some Stucco. And then you've got the Trespa panels. And so for me, materiality wise, tactily, it feels like the fact the decision that you've made to go with all Stucco on the multifamily buildings, I think is somewhat of a mistake. You should have, like I think, you know, kind of the stair tower on Building D or some of the other kind of taller volumetric components could potentially have another material. And maybe that is a Trespa panel. I know Trespa is ridiculously expensive. So maybe it's a panel that looks like Trespa, like fiber cement, maybe that's a little less expensive. But I think that would create kind of that depth. I think that you're trying to create with the volumes and the forms, but I also would create it tactily for me. And then then I guess the last thing would be, I think we need to define what the fences are around the fire pit and the swimming pool. And in all honesty, I think if you're going to introduce wood around the barbecue area and that fire pit and whatnot, and then not do it on the swimming pool, I think it's kind of, I think some kind of wood that's transparent around the swimming pool, so that all kind of matched and was warm in that inviting area. I think it'd be really nice. Even if it was painted charcoal like you have it, I think it'd be really nice. And that way you would, then your metal fences outside, your wood fencing is inside. So there's a small transition there. But other than those things, the portrait parking is great. The overall tree layout, the boss is nice with amenities, the bachi court and the different kind of things going on in that courtyard, kids play area, all those things. I feel like those are going to be really nice spaces to be in. And I think the only thing on the planting that I guess I'm a little confused about is just the varietals of trees, because they're not defined anywhere. At least I couldn't find them. Are they later? Oh, they're there. Okay. They're mine. You're good. So thank you very much. Good morning. Thank you for coming. Okay. I just wanted to comment on one of the things I asked in the question session. Firstly, I agree with Scott on the fencing. And in general, there's a concern about colors. My earlier question sourced to the Corten, which is a wonderful, rich, authentic material that it's beautiful. I know that working for years with stuccoes, various, particularly the reds and the blues, they fade. And I think about the carports and how the carports, there's a level of a kind of an anodized or a natural aluminum, your perforated metal railing. That's going to be silver. Your carports typically are going to be silver. And this corrugated metal is silver. I contrast that with the front of the building, which is the Corten. And I love the name Vibrant. And I was, today I went by it again in the corporate center park. There's a wonderful building. It's the newly constructed Kaiser Clinic. And it has an oxide red. It's not an orangey red. But it doesn't offend the eye and that it is vibrant. It has this kind of a lasting timeless color quality to it that I think would compliment the oxide more. I'm not a real fan of the, you know, the Trespa panel. It is expensive if it were me. And this is all about conversation talk. You've got a standing seam metal roof just disposed to the central amenity building. I'm not here to arbitrate how expensive it would be to start cladding with standing seam metal other buildings. If it came down to it, the most visible buildings are obviously the four-story and these larger buildings. And there's a kind of a quietude. I don't want to use that word too much here. But the amenity building is a low slung, gracious building, beautiful landscaping. I mean, the landscaping is a tour de force already in colors. You've got succulents. You've got blues, olives. You've got 58 shades of green. And I know Mark, when you first mentioned coming out of the desert being inspired, plants are a huge drive. And I think the eye is so quenched with plants. It may be an obvious thing that the buildings are more neutral. It's a little institutional. The thunder and white is, in the sunlight, a pretty stark bright white. You can get into slightly deeper tones. The gray is, again, institutional charcoal. And charcoal is a very popular color these days. And I'm not asking the charcoal change, but since we don't really have samples, my hope here in conversation is that one of the real pleasantries of the project is driving down Denton, seeing all that quartet. That is a deliberate choice. Kind of like I mentioned, Richard Serret, it's this kind of triumph of layering your buildings and trying to retain the sociabilities you want. Job one is you want everyone to like each other, not hate each other. And it's this whole central court common buildings cozying up is your forte. That's the underlying reason that the project is arranged. The quartet and the layering with landscaping is a way to at least show pleasantry to a noisy street. But I'm not feeling it between the exotic red and the quartet. I'm feeling like if we could revisit the red, still have a warmth to it. But for reasons about fading, for reasons about just being so much in love with the quartet, I can see that the perforated metal railings are a segue that the charcoal and the off-white work beautifully with the silvers. And that you want to have this accent color. I think your door skins probably are also going to be zippy as well. So I just I wanted to bring up that sure you want it to be friendly. It's a great project. I have no contests within landscaping, the site plan, the building articulation. But all the accents as that epoxy brush goes on the stairwells, goes on the awnings. It's a color all through. And the whole burgundy magenta side of things can be a little bit to me, this is colors are so personal. So that's why we it's a volunteer board. No one's paying us to say this. But these kinds of magenta colors, I find them on various restaurants and so forth catch the eye. But I think if somehow the color could be rediscovered as having longevity in life, but having an elegance to it, a soothing quality, I can still use the R word. Is it red? Is it oxide red? I just wanted you to take a look at least of the color red on that clinic. Because I think it's a great segue with your core 10. It's still full of life. And if Kaiser is thrive, then mark your vibe. So that's all. Thank you, Warren. Sabra. So I'll come back to the fences and say I agree with the idea of having the fence and go all the way around the project. I think that that's an important design element. And I think it unifies the entire site. I recognize the economics of it, but it still strikes me as a really good idea. I would have liked to have seen whether there's a difference in design between the fencing that's supposed to be on the front and the fencing that's supposed to be adjacent to the railroad tracks. I recognize that one is six feet tall, but the purpose behind that fencing is not just to keep the dogs inside the play area, but also potentially to discourage people from going over the fence. And I don't think the design I see does that. And I imagine that you have a plan for dealing with that. I just don't know what it is. And that's what I meant earlier. I'm neutral on colors. I like strong, bold colors. I don't really mind, but I recognize that Corten has a yellow undertone and that the reds you have chosen have a blue undertone, and they just don't work as well together as Warren mentioned. So looking again at those colors to try to make them not unified, but speak well to each other is fine with me. I like the strong grays and the bold use of form and shape and contrast that I saw in the exterior design. To me, the red is just a minor note, but you all have the challenge of finding what's available. That's not my challenge. Eric. Just a few comments. There's kind of a theme here with the fences at least, and I agree with everyone else. I think the fencing, the middle pickup fencing needs to go all the way around the property. My recommendation would be on the east side that separates the railroad tracks that you have something similar to like spear tops or some other type of top that would really prevent anybody from climbing the fence. We find railroad tracks, bicycle paths or pathways for a lot of different types of people, and also having that middle and that would enter come into the complex, plus having that good neighbor fence and having a metal fence preventing traffic going from the commercial areas as a shortcut into the apartment complex. I'm glad to see you have a gated front. I think that'll be a benefit to the tenants there in regards to the parking car ports. I would encourage you to look at adding solar as well. I didn't see that in the plans, but it's not necessary to get the project built. I think it's a great, a good project. My background is slightly different than my fellow board members. I have 29 years in law enforcement, 27 here in the city of Santa Rosa, and I can tell you that I have spent a lot of time in this neighborhood. This neighborhood experiences probably more gang activity than other parts of town is the nice way to say it. The reason I'm giving you some context and background, I supervised our gang unit for two years. I worked undercover for five years. I've worked gang projects, drug projects, all in the surrounding neighborhood, and I would advise you not to use red as a color for this apartment complex. The predominant gang that is in the surrounding area are serenios associated with blue. There are a couple Nortanio strongholds in the neighborhood. An example of some of the gang activity is Neville Street, which is directly to the east of this project. In 2009, we had a homicide that started a multi-year gang war between vio serenio locos and Angelino Heights and involved a lot of crime. I think having this project as red as it is with the red accents would be a mistake. It would invite a lot of graffiti. It's something that you'll be constantly cleaning up. I shared a, if we can go to, is it Attachment 5, the front of the, the front picture, Patrick, the Vibe Apartments, the very first slide. Here we go. I showed this photo and a couple others to some officers that I know here in Santa Rosa, and they described it as, wow, Nortanio Village. So, again, I would discourage, and I'll leave it up to building and planning to make that the final determination, you know, in regards to whether or not to allow this color. The only other thing I would encourage is, you know, I think the name is great, Vibe Apartments, but I think it invites some problems if you look at the monument sign in the front. Our, you know, the gangs here in, in our area use Roman numerals to identify themselves as Nortanios are 14, Serenios are 13, and that V is used quite a bit with their Roman numerals for XIB for 14, VSL for the name of the gang, VSRN which is another Nortanio gang, you will have, right now I've driven that area. There's not very much gang graffiti in the area, but that does come and go in waves according to gang activity, and that monument sign will attract a lot of attention, and will be very expensive for you to maintain, to keep clean and to repair damage. So, I would encourage you to maybe think about a different name, not use, so that way those letters aren't used on a monument sign there. And again, I apologize, I have a different perspective than my fellow board members, but I would hate to see a great project that you've spent a lot of time designing for the tenants to really enjoy, to attract an element that would, would not be as enjoyable for those tenants. So that's why I give you the warnings. Well, that was an eye-opener. That was outside of, I think, normal, some normal design review per view, but I think it's a really, it's a good, it's insightful, so I appreciate that. Thank you, Eric. As far as signs go, I'll just throw it out there from Warren's earlier comment. Signs are not, there's no signage in this application that I think is going to be considered, so there's a separate sign permit. The little Chinese monument sign plunked out front is not that great, and there's certainly a lot more to work with, with the Quarten wall. And I would love to see what you guys could really do for a, for a sign eventually, but that's a separate permit. So, my comments earlier about the site plan, I just, I wanted to acknowledge, wanted to go back to the original comments and acknowledge as a board that this is a unique site, and I appreciate what you've actually done by bringing the project together so that when you arrive at your parking space, as you described last time, and you enter into the project, you're in the respite and restful surrounding of the landscape design in the project. So, I'm comfortable with it. In looking at this, I did struggle a bit as I looked at the 10 acres across the street, and I'm curious how we'll all be looking at that project should the corner of Bellevue and Dutton end up being a residential corner where I will feel much more like I would like to see the residential come right up to the corner. Different piece of property, different project. I'm just, just sharing my, my, and maybe by the time it resolves itself to the portion of the block that's across the street from this project, it will be more appropriate to again have bermed up and, and backed off a little bit. So, I got, I got comfortable with it, but I wanted to ask the question. So, thank you. And so, going back, I think that this is a very, very different site than we're dealing with a lot right now. A lot of the infill sites do have adjacencies to existing single family residential or what will be multifamily. This project is just, is by itself, so it's a bit of a compound. And I think that once I got comfortable with looking at what would be a successful project on this property, I do appreciate how you laid the project out, and I think it's great. I'm, I'm concerned for the, for the board and for staff that we don't have a carport design at all. I mean, I, that just it's a, it's a, it's going to be a prominent feature of the project. And I appreciate Drew's resolution to defer final to staff, but I, but I don't know um what we've seen as a carport design or what we can hang our hats on. It's in the renderings. Okay. It's kind of like the, it looks like the Anadolm. Chair Birch. Yes, if I may. I think that there's enough information within the, I think what Warren is referencing in terms of the the renderings, the exterior renderings, but also, I think we can give staff enough, excuse me, we can give staff enough direction based on the information that's contained on a 2.6. So we, I think we can condition the carport structure and say, you know, you know, roof must match building G roof or similar, similar material, trash enclosure, you know, structural framing, HSS or something like that. I mean, you know, that seems, I mean they look like it, I mean, these carports look like their HSS probably or something like that, you would think or prefab kind of metal, something, something. I think there's enough there that we can probably give staff direction if staff is comfortable with that. If it's relatively clear. Well, I looked at the detail on 2.6 and, you know, that's, it's a CMU wall. I could easily direct, I mean, we could easily direct staff and in fact, just essentially having made it part of the discussion here this afternoon, direct staff to the renderings of the project. I just, it's going to be, they're going to be such a significant part of the appearance of the project, but they're not detailed out here. So we could reference both of those things through in the conditions that would be fine. I'm the metal covered roof on the trash enclosure. I think I'm in the same boat. I'd be more comfortable with than would just for long-term functionality. I was, I think that like several members, the colors are interesting here. What warmed me up to the color scheme was landscape plan, because I came to recognize it essentially with the berm at the street and then you get layers of landscape and you get buildings popping up a little different than a lot of Santa Rosa projects. A little more Dubai, it feels like, feels like sort of driving along boulevards in Dubai. There have landscape fronts and you see little popped up tops of very intriguing color that make you want to know what's back there, but you're probably safer to not run up the berm and look. So I think as a very different project, I'm really comfortable with it. Eric's input is probably very real world. I think that a lot of the other color input from Warren about the conflict between maybe the Corten and the sort of Carmine red that we have here, I think it's, I would prefer not to play with your, let you guys make the decision, but I like a lot of the things that have been shared and there's possibly an opportunity to work our way away from what may be a sensitive color in this area by moving a little bit more toward a Corten and seeing where it goes. But I mean at this point, I don't think, and I can ask the board, I don't know if there's anyone on the board who wants to condition any color change, other than just to take the input that you got here tonight and you know, see where you want to go. I would be perfectly happy to see this intriguing red and white and gray popping up above the green of the really well done landscape plan. If you guys modified it to match the Corten, I'd be happy with it. I'd probably be least happy if you doled it out, if you made it disappear and it became another gray, that would be my least favorite choice. And I don't think I heard anybody here say that they would be unhappy with a bright pop color. So I think there's two ways we can condition it if we're concerned about something with the color. So I think one way is it's a combination of a shall and a consider, quite frankly. I think it's shall maintain, shall maintain bold color scheme, which says we like the color scheme that you've brought, shall maintain it, and then consider alternate, you know, alternate colors based on all of Eric's real world experience in terms of what problems that color selection might bring. Is it possible to make a comment in response to the comments or should I wait till it's all done? Well, we are going to end up asking you if you're happy with the conditions that we set out, so I don't see any problem with getting a comment now. I would be happy to hear from you. Color is such an individual thing, and it's also a time-based thing. I mean, certain colors that are hot today aren't going to be hot five years from now or 10 years from now. So thinking about the project more in a more global sense than in a more specific sense, a macro sense, the idea has always been to create a very, very calm space on the interior and in the units, but to create a disturbing, bright, vibrant color combination on the exterior. So we are happy to go back and take a look at the colors, but what I don't want to do is, I don't want to lose that mantra. I don't want to lose that. I want to have these buildings be vibrant and have a contrasting color combination that pops and makes it really, maybe agitates you a little bit, but makes you curious. I'm really comfortable with that. I think we all are. I came up with a condition. Consider alternate shades of red or other bold accent color, and the reason that I want to say that now is because if we're going to, there's a piece of this now that I've got to be cautious about what we've discussed here. And with this going back to final design review defer to staff, if we pass the motion, we've got to give you guys some latitude, should you change the color, since this is the color in the application. So consider is of our shells and considers. Consider is for you guys to think about. Staff may ask the question, but at this point, it gives you guys a little bit of latitude with color to listen to what you heard and to play with it. So. Yes. Yeah, I would certainly not want to hold up the project over color that is nowhere near my intent. And that's why I want to give staff the the that freedom to make make those decisions. You know, what I'm encouraging you to do is to stay away from the bright red or the bright blue or the way to describe it. 49 or red and la Dodger blue. Those are the colors that can create some problems for you, but certainly we should not be a detriment to this project in any way. So just trying to protect your project and the people that are living there in regards from having some some negative impacts. Great. Let's see. I am just about through with five five conditions. Let me start with a read back to the board on conditions. Number one shall provide metal roof on trash enclosures. Number two shall provide design of carport structures for review and approval that structure represented in project renderings and materiality on material board. They gave me an iPad and I didn't realize that, you know, Patrick wasn't going to necessarily be my first line of defense to transcribe these conditions for me. I sort of gained a I gained a task. Number three shall upgrade all perimeter fencing to match metal fencing and fencing gate detail on page L five. I think that's the that's the six foot metal fence. Shall provide fencing design for pool fire pit and was it botchy areas? What was the other area barbecue areas? I got that far with the condition. I think that one of one of my concerns about the pool area specifically is there's so little definition to what the pool fence is. And I know there's a lot of requirements around pool fences that you're going to end up with metal posts and you're going to end up with some wood in some directions. You may or may not end up with much wood on a pool fence. I know enough about pool fence design. We are also studying the possibility of some glass panels in order to be able to open up the visual engagement with the clubhouse. So as long as staff has the the power to work with us on that I think we'll come up with something that everybody likes. Yeah and the thing that and I and the thing that I think we would all think was a was a big bummer is if we ended up with the fence and gate detail from landscape page L five as the pool fence and and so one condition that says use this detail the other condition says don't use this detail. I don't know if it necessary I'm just going to say shall provide fencing design for pool fire pit and barbecue areas to enhance amenity spaces. That's not getting me anywhere. I'm trying it's an upgraded it's an upgraded fence to meet the spirit of the of the fence illustrated in the doc in the documents. Could you just maybe make it say make it look cool? Well see I know Patrick understands that it's it's the public it's these people we're speaking to you right. So the condition we've used in the past is to match aesthetics of surrounding buildings or something like that and that gives the designer latitude to make it look cool. Since the surrounding buildings are cool see see yeah shall provide fencing design for pool fire pit and barbecue areas to match aesthetic of surrounding buildings. Number five consider alternate shades of red or other bold accent color colors. So those are the five conditions that I got to based on what I heard coming from multiple board members things people felt strong about. Is there anything else that from the board that you guys feel strong about that's not in the conditions that was maybe from multiple directions? I'll ask Eric but I think you made a good point in the on the railroad track side I'll call it the east side. The fencing consider a greater deterrent to be able to scale that fence whether that the the Maristar fence makes anticlimbed fence that I'm aware of is pretty cool looking without metal spikes but I just say just like it yeah kind of like at the top you can it's it's like a spear but it's it's not so Roman region but I think that's a consider actually I think I think if we override the fence uh this is a question for staff if we override the basic design review guidelines for fencing that has to be clearly spelled out correct they are they are guidelines so they're not requirements I put together consider more intrusion resistant fencing on east side of project gives the applicant the latitude to increase the height the the the density of the picket some some sort of uh drastic Roman legion top to the yes the fence okay did did you want to augment on this as far as not having a monument spine just encourage the signage on the wall of the frontage of the project I'm okay okay I'm okay I think I think given what you guys are doing for a front entry I would imagine the sign will come out we're not going to end up with something with PVC corbels so those are the six conditions I've got I can read them back again Patrick I've got them here if that's if that's good do you need to do we need another read back before we move to a motion or move to a vote we need a we need a second here conditions we need we need two things we need a friendly amendment to add the six conditions actually I I I'm kind of in agreement with Warren I like to throw in a little consider about the signage okay quite frankly just a little consider not a shall I consider and the consider is just to to avoid monument signs that are tagged or I don't know if you can do that I I think it just needs to I think staff hears it and hears the concern and it's certainly up to the developer and I think I can probably make it simpler and that signage is just generally not in our in our purview unless we were unless we're making that decision about whether or not something's an architectural feature that a sign can be placed on we're pretty much signage signage free here so I'd agree with that the points are well taken I think staff understands that I think the applicant does and we can revisit this in more detail when the sign applications come in and I just asked the chair if we would recommend that you inquire with the applicant to see if they can accept all of these conditions as well perfect we got there with one of them let's let's take the rest I have a problem with the fence excuse me the problem that I'm thinking about is that I'm pretty darn sure that the neighbor to the north is not going to be very cooperative about replacing the fence and so we're going to be stuck with either having a double fence or having the existing fence remain so I don't know how to deal with that also the neighbor to the south is an industrial use and our property face is their parking area I'm not sure that we necessarily want to have a picket fence separating those two properties we may want to have one of those chain link fences just like on the north side with the interlaced wood so when the cars are in the parking area of the industrial property and they got the lights on they're not shining into the buildings and such possibility as for the back of the property the railroad side of the property I am in favor of some kind of a solution that is more deterrent to climbing and intrusion though I can't be underwriting the the the the ultimate result that somebody may try I mean I'm not going to I'm not going to represent that I'm going to create a barrier that's going to be impenetrable but I am willing to explore something that that is more functional that said I have never studied the site in the late evening hours in winter such as now when it's getting dark to see what the lights of the train that travels by do in terms of a reflection that would create light pollution to the building so it's entirely possible that once I do that I may want to have a fence solution on the east side in the back again you know where the rail track is that is more opaque like maybe again a chain link fence with a you know the the laced material through it or some other solution it's more opaque to keep from you know getting the train lights hitting the building so those are my concerns about saying that we will use the picket fence all around the property well unless unless I'm misreading the plan right now you've got a metal picket fence detail on page l5 that wraps the east and south sides of the property and and the and the west side as well I understand how I think that the only thing that we I think the only thing that we're conditioning is that that same fence be used on the north side because right now you've got a set of drawings that locks you into that metal picket fence on three sides so so that was our I believe that was the only change we we were asking for right but what I guess what I'm trying to say is in the discussion about the fence you have made me rethink what we have and I'd like to have the opportunity in in your motion be worded in such a way that I can work with staff to create a solution that would be both aesthetically and functionally viable for the project I'll jump in and take take this take the boundaries of the property one at a time here I think that the metal picket fence from l5 is a really is a reasonable really good aesthetic solution behind the berm on the west side of the property leads to the what would be a rolling gate I'm assuming that's that's fine that works in material yeah on the on the north side of the property there are a relatively limited number of parking spaces that face the adjacent property to the north it looks like the fence it looks like the existing fence must be something on the order of 10 to 12 to 15 feet forward and there is landscaping on the perimeter of the property there on the track side we've got the what I think is primarily the dog run in the bioswale and the fence set back to the track we're really tied up to the south side and the buildings are tied up to the south side as well and we're probably only six feet from where the fence is represented to the spaces so I think from my perspective and I think what I heard from the board as we talked about the fence was we like this consistency of this metal picket fence that captured your landscape pulls the project together from the inside I the track side the track side of the project for me could be a fence that was more dense the fence that was a little taller there's a there's a number of good reasons to to go there I just I just get concerned on the two neighbor sides as to whether or not we don't want the the good clean aesthetic fence that matches up with what's going on I'll take other comments from the board I just wanted to share that those that details in the documents right now so appreciate the concern in regards to lighting coming from the from the adjacent parking lots into the apartments I think that's a that is a valid concern surprised that you don't think the neighbor from the north is going to be cooperative based on one public comment if there were no other comments well I've got it I've got a history with the neighbor to the north so I'm without putting it in the record I can tell you that I think it's going to be a problem okay so I I understand the concern in regards to protecting the tenants from that lighting from vehicles especially if those vehicles are in the parking lot at four or five o'clock in the morning for different businesses so I it I'd like to hear from staff in regards to if they feel comfortable working through that those possible changes and and how they feel about it it's really up to the the board to to give staff a level of of what you'd be looking for in a fence so if it deviates from the plans typically what we do is if something was discussed at the meeting it goes back to that review authority so we would ask the board to tell us how much of a deviation from the plans the board would be comfortable with before you'd want to come back for what we call as a modification to final design review it's not noticed we would just bring it back in front of the board for your consideration at that point I'm in agreement with chair birch I mean you're what's in the documents or what's in the documents and you blocked in on three sides pretty much and so the only thing that I think maybe we could do excuse me would be I think the the south side component is a critical issue in a way with lights and you know the train track side we could potentially provide a condition that allows you to have two types of fences perhaps an opaque fence and a translucent fence a translucent fence being the one on l5 and an opaque element that we could perhaps easily condition maybe no yes thoughts matching the aesthetic of the of the open picket metal fence which gets to be I mean the problem is is that you're going to close up any kind of a fence that's not slats and chain link you're you're into a whole different fence you're into a board fence you're into is you know more core 10 I know Sabra my my thinking on this is that in the event that multiple fence types are required that you would need to come back to just get a quick approval on that because generally when we approve a site plan we're approving the elements that are in that plan they're not notional and and while it may be that you need to engage in a little re-engineering of certain parts because you discover some things later that becomes a problem for enforcement so if you can't give pretty much a standard fence all the way around I think we're going to have to see it again yeah I'm comfortable with the condition that we that we put forward and drew Drew's comment to see if we could build something into the condition about I don't know that we can give staff I'm just trying to think of how we can give staff enough direction to do it so from my perspective if we were if we were straw polling I would be comfortable with the condition that we have in in the motion at this just chair rich could you reread that into into the record we have two conditions related to fencing shall upgrade all perimeter fencing to match metal fencing in fence and gate detail on page l5 and that's what the name of the detail is fence and gate detail the second condition regarding the fencing is condition six consider more intrusion resistant fencing on east side of project which does allow that track side of the project the latitude for intrusion I could say we could add intrusion or light or light blocking so that there was an opportunity on that east side may we add that if I try to get the neighbor to the north to agree to change the fence and he chooses not to that we can use a matching fence to the south where the industrial park is so we would have in essence the front of the property would have the fence which is currently shown on the plans the north of the property would have the fence that's currently there and the south of the property would have a matching fence to the one to the north the rear of the property it would be the condition you posed it's my feeling and word can share I think we're not happy with the aesthetic of the chain link and the slide correct correct also when I'm looking at the the third page of those the specs there's the buildings are set back well over 30 feet probably 40 feet from the railroad tracks and then both to the to the north and the south of the of the apartment complex you have multiple parking spots parking that can the even the tenants vehicles can shine their lights into into those buildings so I don't think the parking from the adjacent properties is going to make any any more difference than than the vehicle the tenants vehicles which are even closer so and with a 40 with the building's 40 feet back from the tracks and I'm not a train expert but I would certainly be surprised that the lighting was would make an impact so I'm I'm comfortable with with with the direction that that we've laid out already I I just took a look at the google earth image of the existing fence and it is not the rotted out crappy chain link fence that I imagined and it does have an impact on my thought about the north side of the property I think the condition would be setting up if that fence is on the property line is one where we would be imposing having the applicant put a fence one foot south of this fence and that you can see through and see the chain link I want to have one quick comment um I've had in 1987 I built a building I put star jasmine against a wall it's a solid wall it's there today in 2018 um like 30 years later but I know you've got a buyer retention landscape architect he's not here and you what you're trying to do is create a ground plane for water filtration but if there's if there's any thought about having a vertical screen of plants this could even be on the on the train side there's some really hardy vines that can perform and be solid frost free that's a petition are you but in in the bioswale I don't know that that would well it's for the bioswale stands alone the bioswale is not affected this the science of how the bioswale works is intact if you use a vine it's a vertical plant I don't I don't think there's a conflict but that's just a thought if you um if you go to the site and you stand can we get the um the site plan up again please discussing the fence thank you so if you go to the site and you stand approximately where the outside of building C is and you look toward where the fence line would be what you'd be seeing is a bunch of parking spaces not covered and some shops with roll-up doors that on the average day have a bunch of vehicles outside that they're tearing the engines or transmissions out of I don't think that's really necessarily the kind of image or view that I would want to have from that part of the property and I don't know how a more opaque fence like the one on the north side of the property would be intrusive in any way because nobody from the street would see it not visible from the street the only place it would be visible from is the interior of the project and the interior the project is important to me it's not a public amenity it's a private amenity and I hate to see a project like this being held up over an issue like that I mean right now you know the the issue seems very um tangential to me given the other considerations that Santa Rosa faces in getting housing we've been working two years on this project we understand and you've got a bunch of developers looking at that tv set right now that are going to say what crazy to go to Santa Rosa to build anything we're solving one final detail here I think you're bringing some good common sense to the table so let's take a deep breath we'll get there okay easy easy for me Sabra do you want to I actually want to offer a suggestion the fence to the north is what I would consider very industrial the proposed fence to the south would be equally industrial with chain link and the barbed wire on top which is what's on the north and the interwoven wooden slats we're not intending to put barbed wire on top of the fence the fence to the north already has it okay but I'm saying to the south I would not it's fine but but that gives a very industrial feeling I would suggest that we instead encourage that industrial feeling by looking not so much at the fence as proposed on the front of the site behind the core 10 as the standard but recommending instead a less residential look and feel still with the all important security gates which I oppose morally but but look at this more as how do we bring that industrial feel of this neighborhood onto this site and so I would say I my feeling is I want similar fencing all the way around and I don't have to make it similar to what's on the front of the building that is you can change what's on the front of the building I share that chair birch if I may real quick please I don't want to see you guys back here I think we condition your project you go you build everybody's happy and I think for me what's problematic about this one element is that everything else is so exceptional that there is one little piece that's such a tiny little afterthought but it's such a huge component of how your project is potentially perceived and so I don't I agree with sabra I don't I don't really care about the type of fence I just want the fence to be the same so whatever works for you I think will work for me as long as it matches kind of the aesthetic that you're setting out and I do absolutely do not want to see you with this project back here again I want to condition it send it to staff and have you guys build some really great housing so that's what I want and that's where I want us to get to so does that make sense from my perspective well I'll try not to take it personally about you not wanting to see us again but yes it does make sense yeah so we have from my perspective we have a fence that is acceptable on the north side I brought bias to the discussion by imagining a dilapidated fence till I took a look at it and it's intact it's a nice fence yeah the so the question is do we do we at least condition a fence of the quality of the north side or better for the other three sides of the project I think that's I think that's winter winter chicken dinner I think that's I think that's the way we do it yeah I think it's the way to do it I can accept that the directions so we're actually saving you from your own drawings at this point why do you think I came here saving you a few bucks um so let me let me I'm going to read the six conditions or five conditions let me back up here I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to keep the six condition consider more intrusion or light blocking resistant fencing on east side of project and that gives you the ability to think about security and think about light back there regardless of what you're doing and I'm going to say perimeter perimeter fencing at northeast and west sides of property to match sorry south past my dinner time perimeter fencing at northeast and south sides of property to match fence design shall be of at least current standard of north fence or better is that enough for staff perimeter fencing at northeast and south sides of property shall match fence design shall be of at least current standard of north fence or better I would say uh without the bar wire or with or without the bar wire I don't know what you guys want but the fence on the north has barbed wire I think that condition six potentially encourages barbed wire on that side of the property okay on the east side of the property by definition the fence will be different than the north and south because you want to have it be you know climb resistant or you know returned and that was my understanding that's why I was asking for the read back because I think what I heard earlier was to match the design aesthetic which gives a little bit of flexibility for that point that you just made fence design um bill where were you in perimeter fencing at northeast and south sides of property shall match fence design shall be of at least current design aesthetic of north fence or better I think for the first sentence um shall match design aesthetic that's correct and staff does understand the points made and is happy to work with the applicant to the stand but the fence on the south will not match the fences on the north and the fence on the east fence on the east getting late in the day it is I'm mixing up the directions too we've given you that option to consider a different fence at the at the east side terrific so and you know it may be that it's very much the same but maybe there is barbed wire on top of that portion or we're talking about the east side we're talking about the tracks yeah okay so we need a friendly amendment to do two things one is to add the six conditions as read the other I think we do need to read the modification to the condition 25 into the or do we I think earlier in the meeting you had stated that that was understood as part of the motion okay perfect so we get a friendly amendment for the six conditions sabre I would like to make a friendly amendment accepting the six conditions second does I think the second I think instead of a second we have the motion maker accepts I accept the friendly amendment and the second accepts accepted okay and is there any further discussion on the motion can we get a roll call birch hi hedge pet hi rear yes gold hi kinkane hi weigel hi there you go let's get it built moving on to item seven board member reports item eight department reports oh I'm sorry I just wanted to say that the waterways waterworks waterways committee next Thursday is going to take a tour of roseland creek to look at the impact of new development in that area so that's a thing to keep in mind especially since we have a new creek master plan coming forward great give us give us your impressions at the next meeting would be great thank you department reports no department reports and item nine were adjourned