 way a whole box. The last thing my kids want to do is look at my scrapbook. No, that's actually that's new photos on your computer. You know, don't ever show it to anybody else. Yes. Okay. All right. Good evening, everyone. I'm going to call to order this May 3rd 2018 meeting of the Capitola Planning Commission. I want to begin by letting everybody to know that this meeting is cable cast live on charter communications cable TV Channel 8 and AT&T Uverse Channel 99. It's being recorded and will be replayed next Monday and Friday at 1 p.m. on Charter Channel 71 and Comcast Channel 25. You can also view the meetings at the city's website which is www.cityacapitola.org and our technician tonight is Lynn Dutton. I want to ask everyone as a reminder please turn off your cell phones and when you come to speak at the podium, if you will sign your name so that we can have that for the minutes. With that, we'll have a roll call. Please, Jackie. Commissioner Smith. Here. Commissioner Newman. Here. Commissioner Welch. Here. Commissioner Westman. Here. Chairperson Story. Here. Join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. A Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Well, you're welcome. You should come here more often. You'll get to say it more. Next, we'll have oral communications, any additions or deletions to the agenda from commissioners first? From staff? No additions or deletions. Did I understand you wanted a continuance of the minutes of the meeting? Please. Okay. So we'll deal with that when we get to that item. And next, we'll have public comments. This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the planning commission on items that are not on tonight's agenda. Is there anyone here for that purpose? Seeing none, I'm going to close the public comments portion of the meeting. And we'll move on to commission comments. Comments from commissioners? Hearing none. Staff comments? No comments. Okay. Well, let's move on to approval of the minutes. I've been advised that this particular set of minutes is not actually complete and ready for action by the commission. So I'll entertain a motion to continue. Also move. Second. There's a motion in second. All in favor? Aye. The motion passes unanimously. And that item will be continued to a future date. Next we'll have, we have the consent calendar. This is, there's only one item on the consent calendar tonight. This is an item that will be held without a formal discussion and hearing unless somebody wishes to pull it for further discussion. Is there any members of the audience that would like to pull the consent item for a concerning 110 Keptola Avenue sweet one for more discussion? Seeing none commissioners? Move approval. Second. There's a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next we'll move on to the public hearing portion of the meeting. The first item is a design permit application for 1350 49th Avenue. This is a application design permit application for a 670 square foot addition to an existing single family residence. We'll begin with a staff report, please. Thank you chairman story. So 1350 49th Avenue. The existing residential development is a one story non conforming single family home is located in the jewel box neighborhood. The intersection of Topaz Street and 49th Avenue. Residential structures in the area include one and two story single family homes and the surf and sand mobile home park. The proposed first story additions included 226 square foot one car garage and a 61 square foot addition to accommodate a hallway stairwell to the second story on the front of the home. The proposed second story addition is a 379 square foot living space that includes a master bedroom, master bathroom and closet. With the first and second story additions the proposed project is 1833 square feet which is a floor area ratio of 57% conforming to the maximum floor area ratio for the lot. The applicant is requesting a variance for the proposed garage to extend 13 inches into the side yard setback as indicated here. In relation to the variance request staff finds that the following special circumstances are applicable to the subject property. The lot has a very irregular shape as a four sided polygon with no parallel or congruent sides or a scaling quadrilateral for any geometry fans. Typical lots in the jewel box neighborhood are rectangular in shape and approximately 40 feet wide by 80 feet deep. On this lot the frontage is 60 feet wide. The side lots are 30 feet deep on the south side and 71 feet deep on the north side and the rear lot line is 74 feet wide. The unique lot shape provides an atypical area in which to locate a rectangular garage. Most properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located are able to accommodate the required 10 foot by 20 foot covered parking space due to the fact that they are regularly shaped. Granting the variance will allow the applicant to enjoy the same privilege as those properties. Based on these findings staff can support the variance request. The existing home is a non-conforming structure because it does not conform to the front side or rear yard setback requirements. The structure also extends beyond the south lot line into the adjacent lot. The proposed project was reviewed by the building official and does not exceed 80% of the present fair market value of the structure. So the proposed addition is a permissible structural alteration to the non-conforming structure under our code. North elevation, south elevation, east elevation, and west elevation. The addition features horizontal wood siding that will be painted Coronado moss green to match the existing home and has white trim and the eaves. The roof will have composition shingles similar to the roof on the existing structure. Staff recommends approval of application 18-0050 for the addition to the single family home including a variance to allow 13 inch encroachment into the side setback based on the findings and conditions of approval. That's what I have for you. Thank you. Are there questions from commissioners from the staff report? I just want to confirm with staff that we did receive a letter from one of the neighbors concurring and approving the exceptions. Yeah, we had three neighbors come in one day together actually and ask a lot of questions. I spent about an hour with them and went over the plans and the reason why things were designed the way they were, the reason for the variance. And by the end of it, one of them said he wished to actually support the project. So he sent in a letter. Thank you. And I did speak to staff and asked them about the issue of the existing house encroaching on to the adjacent property and they informed me that they had discussed this with the city attorney and he didn't view it as an issue. Good. Thank you. So at this time, I'll open up this microphone for members of the public that wish to speak on this item. Is anyone that wishes to speak? Yeah, please come on up. Hi. I'm John Hallfaker and I'm still working. I haven't retired yet. Thank you. I was delighted when Rick, my neighbor, asked me to help him with his project because literally I'm right across the street. I'm the main person that looks at his house. So that's my, I wanted to do it. Well, it was a tricky design and with the staff's help, we worked out all the problems. So I think it's going to be a good project and a good addition to our neighborhood and I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The commissioners didn't have any questions. Anyone else that wishes to speak on this item? You're none. I'm going to close the mic and I'll bring it back to the commissioners for discussion and action. Who would like to begin? Ed. So that's a really funky property and I think improvement is long overdue and will be welcome in the neighborhood. As far as the variance is, I agree with the staff. I think that the conditions for a variance are satisfied with this application. Anyone else? I would agree. Excuse me. I have no issues with it. I think it's fine. What sounds appropriate for a motion? Is there... You want to make it? Okay. I'll move approval with the conditions as stated in the staff report. I'll second it. There's a motion and a second. So I'll call a roll call vote. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? It's a roll call vote. Oh, yeah. It's a non-roll call vote. That's right. Thank you for that clarification. Well, maybe I will do a roll call vote. No, I think we can agree that the motion passed unanimously and congratulations to the applicants. Next we'll move on to item B, which is 318 Riverview Avenue. This is an application for design permit for demolition of an existing two-story single family residence and construction of a new three-story single family residence, which includes a variance request for parking standards and open space located within the CV, which is Central Village Zoning District. So let's see before we begin with the staff report. Mr. Chairman, I will recuse myself due to owning property within 500 feet. Okay, thank you. Are you going to? Yeah, and as well. I have an office right across the street from this location, and I think in the just to not have any perception of a conflict and since we will still have a quorum here to act on this item, I'm going to recuse myself as well. So I'll turn the microphone over to the vice chair. As indicated, we're addressing an application at 318 Riverview Avenue for a design permit for the demolition of an existing two-story single family residence and they're requesting two variances, one from the parking standard and one from the open space requirement and we'll have the staff report. Okay, thank you. So in addition to being in the Central Village Zoning District, this property is also in the River Avenue Residential Overlay District and the Old Riverview Historic District. The section of Riverview Avenue between the railroad trestle and Stockton Avenue is made up of one, two and three-story single family homes and condos. There's a dense neighborhood with very little parking, many historic homes, many non-conforming structures and little or no setbacks between buildings. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing two-story single family residence seen here and construct a new three-story single family residence which includes a variance request for parking standards and open space. The existing two-story residence is 1,127 square feet and the proposed three-story residence would be 2,085 square feet. The proposed structure is rectangular in shape with a recessed entryway on the first story and a deck on the stepped third story. The structure has almost 100% lock coverage. The proposed siding on the south elevation is cement plaster on the first story with board and baton on the second and third story. The third-story deck has an obscure glass railing. The first story and a portion of the second story of the north elevation will be cement plaster and the remainder of the second story in the third story will be board and baton siding. Board and baton siding will be used on exposed portions of the second and third story on the first story. The project includes a number of parking spaces, parking dimensions and open space standards for the CV zone. Three spaces are required for the single family home, one of which must be covered. Interior covered spaces are required to be 10 feet by 20 feet clear as measured from the interior wall surfaces. The application includes two covered spaces that at 10 feet by 18 feet 6 inches do not comply with minimum dimension requirements. The project has no open space. The project includes two standard lot size and lot dimensions. In terms of parking standards, two 20-foot deep spaces cannot be achieved in tandem or side-by-side on a lot that is 19 feet wide by 39 and a half feet deep. With a variance for parking dimensions, however, two slightly substandard parking spaces are proposed. In terms of number of parking spaces, residences of up to 2,000 square feet in floor area are required to have two parking spaces. The proposed area is a third parking place, but a third parking spot cannot be achieved within the lot. Staff did a survey of the area and identified three residences for which variances were granted for parking based on the small lot size. Riverview Avenue is challenged with very limited on street parking, so staff has concerns with allowing a variance for the required third parking space to the impacts on street parking. Staff recommends approving the variances for parking space dimensions, in terms of open space, on the small lots on the north side of Riverview Avenue, 90% development is allowed without any setback requirements, and the 10% open space must be located in the front part of the lot. The proposed project has almost 100% lot coverage in no open space. However, staff surveyed the lots on the north side of Riverview Avenue, and several have small patches of open space or planter boxes, but none of them provide the required 10% open space requirements. In addition to that, staff recommended that open space homes had either received variances for the open space requirements or existing non-conforming. Staff recommends approving the variance for open space. Staff received several public comments related to the location of the third-story addition and deck. We created this diagram to illustrate where the proposed addition and deck would be located in relation to the adjacent properties of Riverview Avenue, which is located at 320 Avenue. 320 is the one on the left, and 316 is the one on the right. Staff also requested that the applicant submit a streetscape of 316, 318, and 320 Riverview Avenue to show how the proposed development would look next to the adjacent properties. The staff recommends the planning commission deny the variance for the third parking space, and require application 18-0045 at 318 Riverview Avenue. But if the planning commission chooses to approve this application, staff recommends that the following floodplain condition be included. At the time of building permit application for construction within the floodplain or floodway, the applicant shall provide a no-rise study performed by a licensed engineer in which verification of the structure's impact on the floodplain or floodway is provided. Any questions of the staff? No. I may have one later, but not right now. No, I may ask a later. We'll see where it goes. I just have a couple, and now it's probably as appropriate as later to ask. In the matrix that you provided on page 59, there are a couple of the units that had received variances in the past that were variance better serves the zoning ordinance, and I was wondering what that means, and what those variances were all about. Yes, those were from the approvals of variances in 2003 and 2006 for 316 Riverview Avenue and 320 Riverview Avenue, and I think it helps if I just read you the full finding, because it explains it a little better. So the variance to parking will better serve the intent of the zoning ordinance and residential development guidelines than will the literal enforcement of the requirements of the ordinance. Let's follow it up with the same findings about small lot size and dimensions. And 316 and 320. I know 305 noted that it was for historic preservation. Were either of the other ones demolished and rebuilt, or were they remodeled? No, they were remodeled. Thank you. One last question. At 322, there was an in lieu fee paid. Is that program still in place today? No, thank you. Okay, we'll open the public hearing now and if there's anyone from the public that would like to comment on this application, normally we hear from the applicant first. Good evening co-chair commissioners. My name is Derek Van Allsdine. I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have. I have a few comments regarding the request for a variance. It's very clearly the variances for the open space is a I think a moot point. Everybody's used that ground space. There's very little ground space to use. And it's very difficult to make these projects work nicely. We've tried to do that and present a new building that will take care of the inefficiencies of the building that's there. We're replacing a building that has one parking space. A lot of these parking spaces aren't even used for parking and that's part of the problem I think on Riverview. And very few of them have two spaces. The and a number of them, I think there's six spaces there's six projects or properties that have gotten variances for just these same reasons. As staff stated and thanks Matt for doing an excellent job of putting this together. There's only so much space front to back or side to side for that matter. So how you use it is crucial. There's a lot of space on the first level that we can't use. That's counted as floor area ratio. And there's the only thing that sends us over is the deck which is 85 square feet. So but the deck is crucial because it's the only outside space that they have. So it's the only private outside space that's usable for them. As far as the variances are concerned, the cats out of the bag on this one, there are a number of variances on Riverview for the same reasons. I'm going to respond a little bit if I may to the neighbors that sent letters. I think that the sidewall issues, although they may appear to be huge to them, they actually being a little bit forward of each one of them give them actually more privacy. The south side is where the sun comes from primarily and what we'll be blocking would be mostly the east light. So in the morning, if anything but even at that I don't think that the sidewall is blocking very much of their light or open space. So I would urge you to approve this with the with the flood certification as requested. So I had one quick question on the front of the building, the garage doors can you tell me what those are going to look like because they're a pretty dominant feature on there and I couldn't quite understand it from the plans. We can show those. Can you put those up, Matt? With the bars going across them I didn't want it to look like a jail. They look like bars because this is a condensed version so if you'd seen it full size those black lines that you see are a lot lighter when it's full size. This is a sectional garage door it's a wooden garage door that's sectional and the lines you see going across will be almost not visible. Right, so the door will actually go up like that. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. I have one question and I don't want you to give me a blow by blow but can you sort of walk through because we did get one letter from one of the neighbors about the construction timeline and they indicated that they thought that it was going to be a 10 month kind of construction. Can you kind of walk through a little bit of what that timeline would look like as far as exterior construction versus, you know, you get the thing built and then you move inside. It's not 10 months of total disruption to the neighborhood. No it's not. First you have to do a surgical demolition when these buildings are so close together and I believe that's called an Egyptian method where you literally take it down from the inside piece by piece and part of the reason that we're demoing this building rather than remodeling is that it's not in great shape it was done with slumpstone and not adequately reinforced concrete block and it has drainage problems so we're going to be able to fix all that with the new building. Blow by blow it will do a surgical demolition take the building down from the inside it won't take maybe two months to pour concrete and do the exterior shell okay two and a half months maybe I'm guessing and then we can move inside. And the demolition will take less than a month. I would think so. You're probably looking at three and a half to four months maybe half the time before the shell is finished. Any questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to address us regarding this application? Just decide it's okay. You'll both get a turn. It's a race. It's a race. I've been living across the street from the proposed site for 45 years. I think there's should make note of the actually the certain characteristics of Riverview Avenue and not that stretch particularly in between the trestles on the bridge or Stockton where it's it's a two way but it really shouldn't be it really shouldn't be but it has to be because of garbage trucks that have to back in there and then go back out because they can't go through the trestles. I'm addressing this situation because well personally because of the parking and then the capital is the biggest issue is parking and the density and as well as the character of the buildings that are built and actually the way this is drawn up is probably an improvement in what it is now and it looks like they have a front door and that's pretty unusual that they don't have a front door and poor people but aside from that it's the Riverview Avenue is like 12 feet from white line to white line and there's no turning around then even though this would is an expansion for someone's pursuit of happiness or income or even your taxation transient taxation I guess the term is I think that's a little optimistic as far as speculation goes because I see a lot of empty houses and rooms on that street they can't rent them because the people hire clean firms team Belinda and they jack up the rents enormously but aside from that my most important concern is that I've gotten to know Nelson that lives in 320 and he has been sorry to he's been diagnosed with Parkinson's disease I'm sure this could be verified you could see it it's obvious and his concern is the impact of all the construction and I've spent my whole life in construction my whole adult life I know what goes on this is a lot of jack hammering a roto hammering nail gunning the whole thing and I think I think 10 months is very very optimistic in this theater where it's going eventually it would take place but I want to say that the timing is all wrong and that is my basic statement thank you very much anyone else hello my name is Nelson vineyard this is my wife Leslie we're the owners and the occupants of 320 riverview adjacent to the house under discussion we did some notes today and I'd like to just go through those in a semi random order and then Leslie is going to speak for a minute as far as the design proposals the proposed living area at the top of 318 requires the framing over and finishing of a new wall as proposed we read so my apologies to someone who can write better than I can an additional 4 foot for a total of 12 foot visible new wall such a wall would effectively turn what is now a beautiful open deck area into a tunnel impacting our light, air, view and privacy this is the first proposal as shown in the request and it requires a variance two alternates that do not require variances at least in our mind design alternate one which we've done shows a dog leg design come out parallel to our common side wall and then break over and give up the additional 85 feet that you need for the parking variance there's also another variation that you can do of that rather than do a 90 degree dog leg you can come across and go to diagonal approximately 8 feet out 8 feet both ways and a measurement of about 12 feet in between that would really be our preference the design alternate number 2 it would give us the maintain allow us to maintain the most light air and everything else that we love so dearly parking variance we're in agreement with the planning recommendation that the parking variance should not be granted current parking conditions on the street are horrible and approval will only make it worse and encourage additional variance requests as it is we still have to park at the police station periodically and we have had guests ticketed and towed and we have a fairly small car and we're covered tandem end to end with about 3 inches left over and we have to time it very carefully and look out the front window to see if anybody is across the street because like Lars mentioned there's only a 12 foot wide wide 12 foot wide lane to lane out there and the car I happen to drive has the handling of a blimp roughly so we get trapped in there all the time where we can't get out and finally say forget it we'll just we'll walk and we approve we are in concert with the parking variance a side note watertight okay we would we would request that a watertightness test be performed by a responsible subcontractor to the subsequent to the completion of the work that could be put in the the job site specs for that to be done we don't have a common wall we have two walls about 2 inches apart we have been working for 3 years to try to get all the leaks that are coming in stopped we're not comfortable with closing that back up without checking the water and the water test involves you know not just squirting it with a hose you squirt it up a few feet and you go inside and you look you squirt it up another few feet you go inside and then you look it's kind of a long process but well worth it because you really only need to find one leak to get that whole process work oh I think I think I'm going to let you read okay oh logistic impacts impacts on the surrounding residents such as haul out deliveries start time worker parking resident parking noise dust all those need to be addressed on a logistics plan which should again be made part of the part of the permit as well as asbestos and lead because it's guaranteed that there's both asbestos and lead in that in that place there are a couple of really really good materials they have a lot of really really good properties and several unfortunate ones so we would look for that to be done please okay so we'll go to the second part of what passes for my presentation over the past several years I've endured several medical challenges including hearing aids which spend any time with me I know which were not fully successful cataract surgeries, cancer diagnosis seven months about seven months ago I was diagnosed with dementia with Parkinsonian symptoms called Lewy Body Dementia which is the affliction that Robin Williams had and about six months ago I had a total knee replacement surgery in preparation for the stairs in our current in our house at 320 the thing that worries me the most is the dementia from diagnosis to average life expectancy between five and seven years from diagnosis to average life expectancies between five and seven years though I will be severely impaired before then it's pretty horrific we had lived off and on in Capitola for about 30 years first in Escalona the same apartment building as Stephanie Arlen our three children were all born at community hospital and we were married at Star of the Sea we have owned 320 for about four years with the intention of retiring here following the dementia diagnosis we decided to accelerate our plan I retired immediately and within six months we began our move to Capitola we finished moving about three weeks ago and we were shocked to see the notice on 318 just when we thought what else could possibly could possibly happen we have our answer we finished moving about three weeks ago there are several things that I've wanted to do for years so kind of my bucket list I want surfing stand up which is where Lars comes in in part stand up paddle board and open water swimming I've been out there in the water every morning since we got here and it's not getting any warmer whatsoever my LBD seemed to be progressing faster than we had hoped especially with regard to memory, executive action and hallucinations both visual and oral I see little things scamper out of the way as I walk around I see and I would swear that our son is home he's home I know he's here there's a sensation of feeling that somebody is in the room with you and I keep wondering where he is temper hallucinations both visual and oral temper and patients are also areas of concern noise, dust, change, activity and confusion are all triggers and result in agitation and confusion as well as an acceleration of the disease we are very concerned that the work at 318 especially with the construction time of approximately 10 months which we heard about earlier today will be too upsetting and something Nelson cannot endure Nelson's medical records can be provided from Stanford if need be being retired we are home during the day and separation between the two homes is one to two inches we would to be foreslow on top of the construction noise Nelson just left after 35 years would be unbearable and medically detrimental I retired in September after 35 years in the construction in the Carpenters Union I was a commercial superintendent in San Francisco San Jose Harvey West Park all of those places I was the guy if we had a project get in trouble that they sent in and I didn't have to do anything but finish they didn't care what it cost just finish and so that was me and now we had a yard sale to prior to moving down here and they took the change making thing away from me because I can't even make change so if any of you need any checks the the options as we see them if the work proceeds regardless of the impacts we can relocate temporarily there are several options there we can sell our house but no one is likely to buy 320 while 318 is under construction and if we sell it beforehand we have to let the people know we can try and mitigate the noise and construction impacts and limit the hours of construction as best we can I also taught Microsoft project the scheduling software actually taught a DPR in my last company as well so I know we may be able to sit down and isolate the noisy parts of the operation and we'll make ourselves scarce or something along those lines but I think scheduling them would be great not just have the guys show up and we're here to you know push all this stuff away or jackhammer this stuff or implode it so thankfully at least in my part that's all that I was going to now my charming wife oh my brother lives on 47th everybody hi I'm Leslie Vineyard and I'm looking at this Riverview is a very impacted street as far as parking goes and part of that is that variances have been granted a lot of it is that it's so close to the village and there's a lot of different people parking there we are one of the homes that got a variance but oddly even though our square footage even how you calculated with the garage because it's 1600 something it was well under 2000 but at the time we got our variance three parking spaces were required we have two covered so it is we we support staff's recommendation of not approving the parking variance I think they're over by 85 square feet that's a pretty straightforward redesign if there is a redesign we would recommend pulling that deck back where they're constructing the wall on the third story pull it back even with our deck area the wall is going to be yes block off our deck instead of it being open we'll have a wall there and we would like to see that be also the wood wood instead of a concrete wall and would like to see it actually painted our color so it looked more like blending with our property but so yeah the variance and I think that if you approve a variance it is going to encourage other applicants to apply for variances also and I think at some point it has to stop because variances may have contributed to the problem that's there I mean not even all the homes are occupied and that parking is impossible I mean we don't go out because if we have a space on the street we don't want to lose it because right now we can't get in moving in we can't get two parking spaces in to put it in perspective we're seriously considering buying a smart car we are going to yeah despite the fact that someone we know may see us they're embarrassing but yeah so I think our main concern I mean there's a lot of things that would be nice to see some architectural relief in this design other than a kind of a flat box type that are coming in but I think our main concern is when we got Nelson's diagnosis I mean it wasn't 24 hours and he he retired he turned in his notice at work we came down here we were on a busy street we wanted the quiet the beach you know be able to walk to the beach have it quiet we are yes an inch or two this construction is it will be in our living room against our bedroom wall you know it's um and we're home we're not we're not gone eight nine hours a day at work we're home so it's it's really an impact it's going to to be very detrimental to Nelson with his condition I mean he sniffs now with all the dust that's just gonna go crazy and after exertion he needs to nap you can't nap with construction in the morning the back alley is where the workers will have to come because the front there's no room that's right under our bedroom window you hear them talking I mean you can hear anybody talking now you know that's back there so it's it's really going to be quite a high impact that we have to our life I mean that what we were looking for and I mean I'm really stymied on what can be done about that we can you know we request that the hours be cut down closer to nine to six that the construction is almost secondary to how it's going to impact our living situation so so I don't know thank you very much for your comments and we'll take them into consideration thank you so is there anyone else in the public who would like to speak on this item if not I will bring it back to the commission um seems like we have a number of different issues do we want to deal with them one by one do we want to tackle it all at once how would what would be your preference I don't mind doing it one by one I want to open space and then there are a couple of them for me I mean we can hear from for me it's um the big thing is really demolishing an existing building and building it back up with variances in one of the tightest I can you leave that one up one of the pictures that one that one um the capitol of village and the river view avenue area between Stockton and the trestle is really the heart of the community there's a lot of historic homes down there that make it a very quaint area but it's also over the last few years we've really become a vacation rental zone with a lot more traffic than it has had in the past so we have opportunities to make the parking better having a fully enclosed tandem 2 car garage that's substandard does not encourage a lot of parking so I have an issue with that but in my tenure on this commission we've also found ways to have some kind of landscaping in the front and whether you call it open space or whether you call it landscaping I think there should be some and when you tear down the building and start over from scratch it seems like there's more of an opportunity to do some of those things than you know you're always going to see and I just hate approving a design that doesn't provide for any of them but why don't we start with the parking you know we've all looked at the plans we've looked at the dimensions on the lot and clearly there's no way that you can get two standard parking spaces on that property I mean even if nothing is built on that property there's two standard parking places and for me we do allow compact spaces even in our commercial district the 18 and a half feet and I could live with the two substandard parking spaces because we are getting two parking spaces probably would want to include a condition that garage area be used for parking of vehicles not for other activities but if we could add sort of that condition in there then I sort of feel like I can live with the two substandard parking spaces because that's all we can get and it's better than what's there right now which is one parking space would you require the reduction so that the requirement is two spaces and we're issuing a variance for the substandard size I'm not in favor of the variance for the extra 85 square feet I do think the project needs to conform to the requirements that we have if you have two parking spaces this is you can build the 2000 square feet which is for the substandard size of the parking spaces but not for any additional square footage so I could agree with that I'm pretty much in line with that I have no issue with the two reduce size parking spots reduce them to the 18 foot 6 inches the difficulty comes to me and this really for me comes down to consistency with the way we look at variances and we've had a couple of issues recently where that deck space the floria ratio even though it's so small and almost insignificant we've denied projects and because of that I think I would have difficulty passing the 85 square foot variance for the third parking spot although I think there are some alternatives that are open to them to get by that but I would agree with the two parking spots reducing the size I could approve that variance I don't think at this point I could allow the third variance with the 85 square feet okay so the other variance is for the open space and you know I am and I'll be honest Commissioner Smith I had the same feeling that you had and then I walked down Riverview Avenue this afternoon and looked at it one more time and you know the little bit of landscaping that's there and I don't mean to offend anyone who lives there is always a pair partly because it's so narrow so constrained you know people break off their plants the cars back into them it's a difficult place and I kept looking at it trying to figure out what would be you know sort of a viable open space landscaping that would contribute to the street and I didn't come up with anything you know I'm open to suggestions or ideas that that you might have and I did the same thing I walked the neighborhood and I've looked at some of the other projects that we've approved that we've required some kind of planter boxes or something like that in the front and I agree with you that a lot of them are not kept I mean do we want to do something like you know ask them to you know put planter boxes on the front of the building put planter I mean can you go back to the elevation sketch that shows the three there you go before we get too far down the path I'm going to go back to consistency because it wasn't too long ago this commission approved a project about four or five houses down and actually Mr. Norton did a great job of designing that house a little more room to work with but we actually not only gave him a variance to not have that planning there but we also approved the neighbor whose trees were leaning over into that project to cut them down so on that same street a few houses down we approved the variance for not having these type of plantings and I think Commissioner Westman makes a great point that this area just doesn't allow that although it does allow for plants maybe on deck space or open space above that that street and God bless Lars he left already awesome guy if you have a man taking you surfing you're doing great because he's a good man I don't even know him till tonight but I was walking down there today and doing 30 miles an hour down that street which if anybody knows me in my neighborhood I yell at people for speeding and it's probably four times as wide as your street so that street is so narrow I think putting anything in the street is an obstacle has potential for damage and so for me I would be open to letting the applicant figure out planting and plants and I don't even know that Derek has a knack for doing some of those type of planting so I am open to the variance of approving that variance of the open space myself when you look at the three right next to each other they all have the same issue and I don't see and I couldn't come up with a place to put it either so I would reluctantly have to agree with that variance simply because I don't think it's like you can't put two cars, two parking spaces or you really can't put any open space in the front so I know that our planning department does require that there be some sort of logistical plan as far as which is part of the building permit and it will regard the parking of the construction vehicles where they're going to be you know how those deliveries are going to be made and I know the building department is very efficient about dealing with demolition and whether or not there are any kind of hazardous materials and they bring in special people to take care of those issues so if they do find anything like asbestos in the building you know that demolition will be managed quite closely and not under city regulations but under state and federal regulations the one issue and I wanted if the commission agrees to ask Mr. Van Allstein to come back to the podium was that the neighbors next door requested that the wall that is going to be built you know if that could be modified and be a wood faced wall or if it could you know be painted to go into a match there and I'm assuming that's acceptable to the applicant to work with the neighbors and the planning staff on the materials of that wall that will be facing them upstairs just briefly just briefly yeah I think my client would be more than amenable to working with neighbors on both sides with hours and reducing noise and dust whatever we can do and the other thing is that I think that the way that this is proceeding right now the we're not even looking at doing anything during the summer period it would you know we're looking at doing something much later on so that we're not impacting the neighborhood you have to get in and get out the heavy stuff done during the winter so while there's and I do think we would add a condition to it that you're required to notify the neighbors when you're going to start construction so they're aware of when the demolition is going to take place we'd be glad to do that thank you I know that the city has hours we regulate the hours of construction and if memory serves me correctly and staff can correct me if I'm wrong I believe that the construction hours that we have are from 8 a.m. in the morning until 6 at night is that correct? No so construction hours are Monday through Friday 7 30 a.m. to 9 p.m. and Saturday 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and here is the standard of the code so Monday through Friday 7 30 a.m. to 9 and Saturday 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. no hours on site and the way that it's written noise is prohibited between 9 p.m. and 7 30 a.m. and so construction runs between 7 30 and 9 so I'm wondering if the applicant could agree to perhaps having the construction end at 6 o'clock at night rather than so there is no you know going into the night time with construction they would be amenable to us adding that condition to help out the neighborhood because this is a neighborhood where people are living very closely together and so I think that makes that that would be reasonable um Commissioner Westman I almost would ask maybe the applicant work with Mr. and Mrs. Vineyard on what would help in the process and you know in saying that first I'm very empathetic to the situation and my hopes are that you get many surfing days out there with Laura so enjoy as much as you can I also believe homeowners have certain rights and you had rights to raise your house up and do your house and I think this applicant has the same type of rights but given the situation and we've done some interesting things on this commission if we remember Ike Street that we gave some we just made some different conditions based on individuals in our community and I would ask that maybe the applicant work we do have hours are designated but maybe above and beyond what we're putting in our conditions if you work with Mr. and Mrs. Vineyard on trying to work out something that allows you to do your job and build a house um but at the same time maybe works with them in the process so that's just a request not a no I think that's an excellent request um and I could just throw out there I know that my husband and I did construction on a couple of houses and we had some neighbors that we worked with and if the contractors willing to work with the crew you know you don't come in at 7 30 in the morning and kick on the radio and you know be yelling back and forth those kinds of things make a huge difference to the neighbors and it just takes communication with the contractor and an agreement with the contractor to manage the crew to be a little bit more considerate so the only limitation we're going to put is a six that they six o'clock at night and then we're going to to ask the the applicant and the owner to work with the neighbors to try and lessen the impacts as much as is reasonably feasible to do um okay I think the only last issue I'm certain as far as uh you know things being watertight again that will be taken care of under the normal construction um requirements is there anything else that we're missing? well we still have to address the 85 square for the third parking variance oh okay well personally I'm not in favor of the 85 square feet I thought we sort of addressed that okay as long as we're on it I didn't know if we had a consensus but I'm on the same page yeah okay uh alright so it looks like we are ready for a motion if one of you wants to do that well I would move that we approve this um project uh 18-0-0-4-5 on riverview at 318 we approve the variance for the uh reduced parking for the two spots that we approve the variance for the open space we are not approving the variance for the third parking spot uh reduction and that we add in the conditions that we stop the work hours at 6 o'clock and that the applicant will work with uh the neighbors to um try to be reasonable in how they take care of both the work hours and logistics and am I missing anything and they will work with the neighbors regarding the uh new wall as far as the materials on the new wall were you able to get that Matt did you hit the uh condition of the garage only views for parking yes we approve the variance for that but not the third parking spot so I just want to clarify my understanding is correct what we're approving is a square foot maximum size with two sub-standard width parking spaces correct and would you like the final design to come back to planning commission or be approved at the staff level I don't I think staff could approve the final design I'm okay with that okay so that was a motion are we okay we need a second I'll second it all in favor aye motion carries unanimously thank you all and I just like for the minutes to reflect the representatives agreement with the discussion about working with the neighbors on the noise it was a long one yeah good job so we'll move on to the next item on the agenda which is item C concerning 2205 Warth Road this is a minor land division to create two lots of record design permit for a new single family residence for the property located at 2205 Warth Road can we start with the staff report please yes thank you chair story and good evening commissioners before you this evening is a minor land division for a new single family home on a separate parcel and this is located at 2205 Warth Road in the multifamily low density so this application came before you last year and it was approved in a different form they've redesigned the tentative map so that the two lots will now be oriented towards Soquel it's still a shared driveway access that comes off of off of Warth Road and modifications to the subdivision design also to note is that earlier this year the city council adopted new design standards for subdivisions so and we have a new zoning code which also applies to this so many of the standards that we saw in the last go around have changed so there are new things to pay attention to this design and it is a whole new application the previous one was withdrawn so within this application the parcel in the back is parcel A and it's 14,000 and 6 square feet and parcel B is 5,847 square feet and as I mentioned they both have frontage off of Warth Road and here's the building footprint of the new single family home that was proposed in terms of the updated code there's no minimum lot size requirements no minimum lot width or minimum lot depth requirements within the RMLM zone so it gives a lot of flexibility to the design standards when you're designing multifamily the one standard that does need to be met is that within the RMLM you have to have a minimum of 4,400 square feet per dwelling unit so the lot in the back is a triplex and that is in compliance with the 13,200 square foot minimum and then the lot in the front has a minimum square footage requirement of 4,400 and it goes beyond that at within the new lot size in your staff report I had listed all the new design standards the one standard that I will point out applies with but so far as possible it's the side lot lines so far as possible shall be at right angles to the street which the lot faces or approximate radial of the lot street if the lot street is curved so this is a unique lot design in that it's a panhandled shape it has frontage at right angles to Warf Road but the actual side lot lines are oriented towards the shared driveway and then something new within the design standards is standard H which allows the planning commission to grant an exception to one or more the design standards and that didn't previously exist and really the way our zoning code is set up you can make variants findings within the zoning code because this is in the subdivision ordinance we added a new standard for exceptions because there are unique circumstances that are appropriate so a new tool for the planning commission to support projects that need a small exception when appropriate this image is an image of the lot so the triplex you can see the front of the triplex the fir tree to the right will be removed within this project they are keeping the large I think it's a redwood I'm not sure in the back there and they've kind of designed the home for that tree and keep privacy between the triplex and the new single family home and you can see the steep approach that comes into this property to the right you can see how it goes down to Warf Road all the setbacks requirements are met within the design permit so their front yard setback of 15 feet and the 20 foot setback for the second story is met the rear yard is met with a 20% regulation and then the side yards are also in compliance and parking is also met within this application with a two car parking garage and an exterior space as well with that I'll go over the design with you and the design has not changed since the first application so on the south side this is the side that will be oriented towards the shared driveway there's four inch window and corner trim there's a 12 inch belly band around the building and the siding will be shingle this is the elevation to the east that will face Warf Road this is the north and this is the west elevation which is on the rear and that cut out in the middle there is the area in which the tree is oriented and there'll be a nice patio in the backyard here's an image an aerial image of Warf Road you can see how it curves as it's coming down and then 2205 Warf Road in the latest application the applicant submitted a site visibility study as well as looking at the turning in and out of the driveway because of concerns that were brought up previously so as you can see when a resident leaves this property the left hand turn on to Warf Road it's pretty smooth you can get out there the visibility is challenging but if you're patient look both ways and see an opening you can make it and here that's showing that same left hand turn taking a right hand turn out of this driveway is dangerous and in the recommendations when this was looked at by their traffic engineer they take a look at their traffic study and validate it they agreed with the recommendations so the right hand turn is challenging since this application came in and the recommendations came in the recommendation was to put up a sign that says no right hand turns out of the driveway so the two recommendations was to eliminate right hand turns out of the driveway through installing a no right hand turn sign on the driveway and then to replace the existing two foot diameter convex mirror with a three foot so you can see here as you're leaving the driveway and before you get to the neighbors the access area that crosses over the neighboring property the owner has put in a stop sign they have the mirror which will be enlarged and they've put a no right hand turn it's not quite at the point where you're down exiting the driveway so I think that was probably done out of respect for the neighbor I'm thinking to not limit their turns but that could be moved if you desired and also on this project because it's a new subdivision and I'd like to add one more CEQA exemption and the CEQA exemption is 15183 that the project is consistent with the community plan the general plan and zoning and that's just stating that it is located in a multifamily zone it was recognized that this parcel could be subdivided in the future and that no new or more severe cumulative impacts nor were there any new substantial information which was unknown at the time of the general plan that the project was certified so just to add the other CEQA exemption was for subdivisions but I thought it was appropriate where this is new development to add a second so with that staff is recommending that the planning commission approve this application based on the findings of fact conditions of approval and with the added CEQA exemption the questions about parking is that I would have to defer to the applicant on that one but it is located on the parcel that will be owned by the triplex so I would assume it's parking for the triplex this isn't sort of a question but the tentative map doesn't really very clearly tell us what easements exist the parking being a good example of exactly what easements are going to result from the subdivision of the property because that may be for example the parking may be an easement for the triplex or may not so that parking is on the triplex's property right here's the new it's on the triplex so it is on their mostly when we hear from the applicant we'll clear that up for us any other questions any other commissioners have questions no I'd like to thank Katie for reminding us that this zoning code area is approved it's outside the coastal commission so I think this is probably our first project with the new zoning code right thanks for the reminder Katie I did have a question about the location of the stop sign it might turn could you it was not put down at the intersection because of the adjacent I'll allow the owner to speak to that but when I went out to the site a couple days ago I took these images was happy to see the no right hand sign up but in the recommendation by the traffic engineer it said to place it in the driveway it didn't specify exactly where I believe the owner placed it here so his tenants would follow the rules of no taking right hand turn when Kimley Horn reviewed this they said that the suggestions within the report were good suggestions they said the no right hand turn will be a hard one for them to enforce because it's really up to the property right well maybe the applicant could address that question when they come up and seeing no more questions commissioners on the staff report I will open it up the public hearing for presentation hi Dennis good evening honorable planning commissioners I'm Dennis Snort and I'm representing Chris Wright and you've seen this project before the same house basically the same position I want you to note that the house is designed around the redwood tree to save that tree it's gorgeous tree and our intent is to save that the process has been deep in this we've gone through every type of study imaginable to do this project it conforms to every one of your zoning and land use laws in the city of capitol everyone and I commend the staffer doing an excellent job on the staff report on this well said well taken care of and with me I have the owner and Miles Cochran Chris Reider here and if you have any questions maybe they can answer that the parking issue I know that there is deeded easements from one lot to the other and the other so they're both deeded back and forth so that's all I have to say thank you good evening Christopher Wright I own the property we just first want to thank the planning department for the work they've done to help us design it to meet the requirements and as far as the two questions that came up we did design it with two covered parking spaces and one uncovered that are shown on the plan per the requirements as given us by the planning department as far as the signs the stop sign is placed at the property line so that people would stop when they entered an area that intersects with the neighbor's driveway area and the right turn sign is placed there because that's where the pole is to move it any farther forward I would be on their property if they don't mind I'm certainly happy to do that if there's any questions I'll answer them but that is the basic answer to that as far as the easements we have drawn up easements on property A over property B and my attorney is here if you have any questions for him about those easements thank you I just want to clarify Chris before you sit down lot B has three parking places on lot B so that additional parking that Commissioner Newman was referring to is actually part of lot A I'm not sure which additional parking you're referring to the driveway comes up and there's two parking spaces over here is there any way to put that up there is a parking pad at the front of B's lot that is actually on A's property there is an easement written to give B right to use it because parking there's already seven parking spaces for property A the triplex in the back so when property A was remodeled we met the requirements for covered and uncovered parking for it that's the space we were talking about that area you're circling right there is a cement parking pad and there's an easement for B to use it should they wish to even though it's within A's property line so either A or B could use it thank you any other questions good evening my name is Miles Dahlinger I'm an attorney for Chris Wright I just wanted a comment on this parking on this parking pad the way that we have drawn it up is for it to be an exclusive use exclusive parking easement for parcel B so but if if any of you have an issue with that we're open to another suggestion but as Mr. Wright said we thought it made more sense to designate that area for extra parking for guests for parcel B thank you Miles and I can clarify that the triplex there's a requirement for two spaces per unit and there are ten spaces total so by having eight there they'd be fine lots of parking any other members of the public wish to address the commission on this item yes sir come on up good morning I'm interested good evening my name is Peter Taylor I live at 2225 Wolf Road which is the neighboring property that 2205 uses my driveway to access 2205 so I'm the next door neighbor that was involved in the last go round and was ready to go to court about this until you change the rules to give yourselves the right to do what you're doing I'm here today to talk about safety it has been my primary concern from the very beginning as you've just noted there are ten parking spots at the end of this between these two lots servicing four residents the triplex and the house and then you've got us, my house so you're going to have twelve cars jousting on a one lane road this is not two lanes this is one lane when I was here before one of the arguments given to support this project was that you had to give this landowner the same rights you've given other landowners on the road and there are two other cases on the road very nearby where people do share driveway access what was not mentioned is both of those are twenty feet wide and they offer two-way traffic my driveway allows for one lane traffic if anybody is even parking down at the mailbox to get their mail or clean the brush away from the mailbox it's forget about you're not getting up in the driveway you've got to go around the block and park and wait until they get out of the way so and as the traffic study said if you read that traffic study again there are a lot of qualifications in that as you all know Warf Road is a dangerous road people drive over the speed limit I can't tell you how many nemesis there being it's not a question of if there's going to be an accident there is going to be an accident the question is just when and how tragic is it going to be this is not the only option Mr. Wright has he could have put in a two lane driveway it would have been right in the middle of the sea if you look at the turn the curve in Warf Road and you have perfect visibility in both directions as it is where the driveway is right now you can see pretty good down to where the freeway is but the library forget about it and anybody trying to make that turn as you've been talking about that right turn out of there if they came down nose first is a tragedy waiting to happen both for the person coming the other way tries to do it because there's no way they're going to do it they're going to go over the yellow line I definitely want to say one thing I appreciate the fact that Mr. Wright put up the stop sign I appreciate that he put up a no right turn sign but people don't listen they blow right through it there's nothing up there to say what is the safe speed on which to exit Warf Road onto the property if you go and look at that somebody coming from the freeway coming down Warf Road the speed limit on Warf Road is 25 people are usually going faster somebody could turn take this access they got a straight away for over 120 feet before they're going to have to make a turn they don't necessarily slow down they come right through there I've already lost one pet run over by somebody going in next door so it really is inherently dangerous I challenge any of you that if it was your driveway and every day you were running the gauntlet because that's what we feel like it is we get in our car we're listening, is somebody starting a car next door we don't just back down our driveway we don't have any stop sign but we always stop and look because we just don't trust them and we're going to get hurt so the guy had an option you could have made him put in a driveway like anybody else two lanes up along the Woolsey circle fence orientation the right way to the road everything per your old code although now you've changed the code you can do what you're doing but that would have been safe two lanes in and out and great visibility in both directions you got 10 cars there my daughter's at our house a lot of the time so there's three cars at our place 13 cars with one lane access it's just not dangerous so the question I've got for you is in the city of Capitola when would you say it was unsafe how many residences can share a one lane driveway before you say time out no dangerous you can't do it I would posit to you that it's at least something seven or over because if you go look at what you forced them to do at Woolsey circle it's a two lane road it's even got the sidewalk with the lights and everything else so they can cross the road safely but that's two lanes and that's seven residences Mr. Wright's putting in four if you count the triplex in his house and it's all being a one lane road my family's if somebody's going to get hit it's most probably going to be us if they're coming home they've got perfect visibility they're coming out to have perfect visibility the people who have no visibility are us and it's our driveway and we've had no input in this at all so I beg you please don't do this somebody's going to get hurt the main reason I'm down here today is I really don't think you're going to listen to me at all you didn't listen to me the last time and I have law on my side then is I want it on the record I've done everything I can to stop this and make it safe and I'm going to fail but at least it's going to be on the record that I did everything I could to get somebody to listen this is not safe do the right thing go there look at yourself go try it yourself I'm dealing with this every day and on top of it if you look at that drawing that Katie had up there about how if you don't make the right turn you've got to make the left turn good luck doing that at least four of the hours of every day there's no way you're going to be sitting there sometimes five ten minutes waiting to get that break in action in both directions that's safe for you to cross the road you know to cut across get in that lane without somebody coming down from the library at a high rate of speed around that corner I appreciate the signage I appreciate the positive intent I'm not against Mr. Wright developing this property but you know there were other choices here he could have put in his own driveway initially when this first came up the reason it was given that excessive gravy give me a break you can go around this town and you can see way more challenging retaining more of what would be required here so you have the right to make this decision go right ahead but appreciate one day and it may not be that far in the future the ship's going to hit the fan when somebody gets killed or hurt out there because and then the people say oh this is unsafe and you have done this so it's interesting I've asked many people this question and I've never gotten an answer there is nowhere in your regulation that defines what's unsafe in terms of a one lane daisy cane driveway however you would like to characterize this and I would say to you you gotta believe that at some level it is unsafe you sure as hell couldn't have the rib of your apartments and you didn't allow it in Woolsey Circle and there are seven residents here but five residents seems to be okay and I would say that that is foolishness it's not doing the right thing the main purpose I would say of you people is to make sure that the city has regulations that make for a safe environment for all of us I'll give you one more minute Peter to wrap up I'm done thank you thank you can I ask you a question oh yeah if you're willing Peter Commissioner Newman has a question this is not about the safety I was just curious when you leave your house and get to the road and you want to go to the village how do you do it you mean if I want to come down tonight normally what I'll do because I used to work in at Seabright and I'd leave at 6.30 in the morning at that time I would back down my driveway to where you know it goes through to go to the next door stop listen windows down look nothing coming and I back down my driveway there is enough space there without running into the mailboxes or being in the bike lane where you can actually back down get there safe and sometimes that's the only way we can leave the property at 3.30 in the afternoon there's no way you're getting two ways clear to be safe to get out it's just not it's not happening so at certain times of the day if you want to leave the only safe way to do it from our house is to back down and if I ever have any guests at my house I back their car down my driveway I never let them get out the first question is which way are you going if it's at the time of day where it's really dangerous I don't even ask the question I just tell them I'm not letting you try and clear two lanes of traffic to get out of here I'm going to back the car down you're going to walk down the driveway you're going to get you in the car and you're going to drive straight out towards the library and I'll tell you this when I get time to sell my house you bet your life the big disclaimer everywhere in selling my property is how dangerous Wolf Road is thank you do you have a safety issue I would like to I'll give you two minutes just a few points then I think although there might be 12 parking spaces on the two properties combined that certainly doesn't mean there's going to be 12 cars there at any one time and certainly there's not going to be 12 cars moving in and out at the same time another point is that there's two safety issues one is the safety of traffic coming out and one is the safety of cars going up and down the driveway the safety issue on Wolf Road I think is a legitimate one raised by planning staff which is why they asked Mr. right to have this traffic study done which he did and the traffic consultant concluded that the conditions going on and off Wolf Road are acceptable as long as people don't make a right turn so I think that issue has been addressed to up and down the driveway between the residents on the subject property I think that's an issue between them and they're going to be going slow and it's I don't think that's that should be a concern of the commission it's between the residents of the property also Mr. Taylor claims that there were was an alternative to build a new driveway up the right side of the property which really isn't true in addition to grading being an issue and a sewer line in that area that made it not feasible to build the new driveway alright thank you mouse anyone else wish to address the commission on this item seeing none I'm going to close the public hearing I'll bring it to commissioner and I'd like to maybe begin by asking staff do we have any record of the history of accidents either on that driveway or along that section of Warf Road I recall that the last time this proposal was reviewed that there was no record of accidents right off of this driveway that that's I believe what I recall from then and from staff's awareness what is the jurisdiction of this commission to deal with questions of safety as long as a project otherwise meets our zoning code and ordinances so when this project came in it was also the perspective of our public works department that it would be safer to have one entrance here that is shared rather than put another entrance along this curved portion of Warf Road so we really lean on technical experts for the safety of information regarding access and that is why we had the study done and reviewed but really it's the information that we provide you but the criteria that you're looking at within a subdivision ordinance and with the design permit tonight we should consider all facts that are in front of us but we understand that you're not the expert and we are the experts report all right thank you commissioners wish to begin discussion on this yes as far as the safety goes you know in the traffic report you know they indicate that the driveway onto Warf Road is already deficient but that is unrelated to the addition of traffic from one new single family house which is what we're looking at is one house not adding six or seven houses on the driveway so it's how much of an impact that one additional house would have on it and as the traffic engineer says that traffic is not going to reach any deficiencies that already exist there so for me you know this is a project that we've looked at before I think got approved before and you know I agree it's not an ideal situation I don't pretend to be a traffic engineer and try and solve traffic problems or questions about how many houses can be on one lane driveway at this point in time we've gotten information from them that if they put up the signage and they don't allow the right hand turn then it would be an adequate situation so I'm inclined to support the project thank you Susan any other commissioners wish to weigh in well since you're looking my direction I guess I'll jump in here I actually had some hardburn with this last time I think Mr. Wright's done his due diligence and putting up the sign and taking a look at it I don't think you have to be a traffic engineer to tell the I assume you like I did have been to that property many times now to see that's an unsafe exit and entrance into those houses it's it doesn't require much thinking in the process it's unsafe that's the bottom line however looking at what's before us today that's not part of our purview to have that discussion really that decision so based on what we're looking at I'm in agreement that I would support this proposal anyone else I'm just going to thank Peter for coming down and making you know raising the awareness of the dangers of Warf Road and it's not limited to Warf Road as the community gets more crowded and has more traffic people need to slow down on Warf Road I live in a similar situation where people come off of of what is I guess Warf Road on to Prospect Avenue and kind of a why and they do it at high speeds and some of them go around my corner on two wheels and I want to go out and put speed bumps in except I'm afraid they'd launch the cars but I think that the property owner has done due diligence on doing the best job with the property that he can to develop it in a responsible way if he were here before us asking for seven houses I think we'd be saying no but the addition of a single family dwelling on that property I think is a good use of the land and that's what we paid traffic engineers for to tell us what is safe and what is not safe what is adequate and what is not adequate and in this case I have to yield to the experts right Ed this project has been a long long long time it's development here and I think they've put a great effort into trying to solve all the problems that they had to deal with along the way this being the second application or at least the second application the only issue there is that I can see is traffic entrance on to Warf Road and we all agree it's not ideal the problem is that the traffic behavior on Warf Road is not ideal and we have a library going in there so we need to look at other approaches to making that safer because when we have a new library we're going to just increase traffic it needs to be addressed in a way other than not allowing otherwise an application that otherwise satisfies all the requirements I was curious about with the no right hand turn how that's going to work because when you turn left then where do you go I mean if you want to go to Capitola Village it's a long way around or you find some place to turn around so I'm not sure where we're it still may be faster I was thinking it wasn't that bad because you just go down turn on Warf you turn back on Bay Avenue and come back in and sometimes that's a lot easier than actually trying to drive through yeah that's one way to do it and it also really backs up on that little street here that goes turning left and then turning around somewhere I don't know where I don't know where they're going to turn around yeah I know people are creative anyway again I have the reservations that all the commissioners have that it would be great if Warf Road weren't what it is in terms of a curvy road that people drive too fast on but that's not a reason for designing this application given the traffic study yeah and I'm going to concur with those statements I really don't think development standards of decision should be based upon other persons violating the law speeding on Warf Road with that said I know that that is a consistent and perennial issue but to me that's an issue of enforcement and maybe the city needs to do a better job of doing enforcement doing design and engineering on Warf Road to fix that condition and I don't think that we should transfer those responsibilities to private property owners by denying or imposing upon them the duties to you know basically address other individuals violation of the laws the speeding laws on Warf Road we know that it's not ideal but everyone knows what they're getting into and we have ministries where you have to navigate one way traffic and we learn to do it we learn how to be safe we learn to coexist in a small community and as much as I appreciate Peter coming down and expressing his views and making us aware that I don't think it's sufficient for us to deny an otherwise compliant project so with that I'll entertain a motion I'll move approval of the project 18-0108 based on the findings and conditions stated in the staff report in plus the additional CEQA exemption is there a second I'll second there's a motion in second all in favor motion passes unanimously which takes us to item 6 on tonight's agenda which is director's report on retail marijuana sales and regional commercial zoning district and this is concerning a future amendment to the capitol zoning code to allow retail cannabis sales within the regional commercial zoning district with a conditional use permit you want to fill this in Katie? Yes thank you first I just want to say it's really good to be here and be sitting in this seat before you this evening and giving you a director's report so thank you for being so welcoming over the past couple weeks with Rich's departure we're already missing him but it feels really good to be here and in this role so appreciate the opportunity to continue serving you so before you this evening I'm going to give you an overview this was provided to city council a few weeks back and just a real overview of what we're anticipating for the marijuana ordinance and the timing and essentially this will be going to the public vote so it will be up to the residents of capitol whether or not marijuana will become available as a retail sale within the city so quick overview 1996 Prop 215 medical marijuana was approved in 2014 the city and for commercial and cultivation process took place 2016 Prop 64 the voters approved recreational marijuana in the state of california in 2017 we updated our ordinance to be specific that commercial marijuana uses were still banned with the exception of laboratories there used to be a laboratory in our industrial zone that we had a laboratory work on looking at marijuana and then in 2018 the council asked staff to consider retail sales within the regional commercial zone so where this will be looked at is within the new regional commercial zone north of capitol a road so anticipated regulatory process this is it's going to affect different parts of the municipal code so that's what we needed first chapter 9.61 for marijuana sales process and cultivation the change would be to allow sales as allowing retail sales where right now it's prohibited they'll be included in that chapter 9.61 a new marijuana licensing ordinance so that would be at the purview of the police department as well as the city council and then amending the code to allow marijuana sales as a conditional use permit within the regional commercial zone and a new marijuana tax ordinance within chapter 3 under for revenues and finance and also amending the fee schedule so like I stated previously this would be up to the voters all the changes would be contingent on the tax measure passing within the November election so because of that we're on a really tight times frame so we've got an August deadline for the ballot measure so at our next meeting I'll be coming back to you with proposed zoning ordinance change so this slide here kind of shows the different parts of the municipal code that will be affected the portion that will come to use the zoning so limited to the regional commercial it'll be a conditional use permit so members of the public can come in and comment before any conditional use permit is is issued or approved by the planning commission and it'll be tied to conditions and findings the retail permit will be the retail cannabis permit this is where we're really going to rely on our police heavily to maintain these retailing permits so rather than us revoking the permit which can be a challenge if there's an issue with a marijuana retailer the police will have the ability within their retailing permit to revoke a permit which is much easier much more easily done than a planning permit so within that permit will utilize best practices it'll the owner the permit will be tied to the owner and not the actual property owner but the owner of the business or both if they own the building but and then it'll be revocable and suspendable by the police department and then of course the tax measure which will be on the November ballot so here is an outline of the process and we were directed by the council to proceed with the ballot initiative next meeting in front of the planning commission I'll have a draft zoning code for you zoning ordinance changed to our new zoning ordinance this is outside of the coastal zone so it's a change to the new the new code city council in June will hold their first reading of the draft ordinance on June 28th and then in July the city council will hold the second reading we'll have a work session just a week following our June 7th meeting we'll have a work session with the city council to review the drafts to all the different sections of the municipal code and they'll hear your recommendation at that point the ballot measure deadline is August 10th so we would like to make sure we get that second reading done in July and then voters will consider the ballot in November and then if the voters pass the tax initiative then the new retail sales ordinance will come into effect in January and at that point we'd be accepting applications for the retail permit a couple like bigger picture items of the taxes the current marijuana taxes at the state level there's a standard tax of 9% plus a 15% marijuana sales tax which results in a 24% tax at the state level before it even comes to the local level in putting this on the ballot the research that's been done most cities and counties charge between a 5% and a 10% local tax there's an estimate of 200,000 to 300,000 annually in tax revenues that would come in per business our proposed tax measure that will go before city council and then out to the voters would be a not to exceed tax of 10% on the November ballot and the actual amount will be set by the city council this is how both the county and the city have operated they've done a not to exceed 10% currently the city of Santa Cruz is at 8% and the county taxes at 7% so it just gives us some flexibility in where to put the taxing amount and then the revenue could be used in part to offset of course any impacts or service demands from the new retail sales and then ultimately as I said it's up to the capitol of voters whether or not retail sales would occur within the city so zoning amendments we I've looked at quite a few different jurisdictions and in discussing this with the police chief as well a couple of the art suggestions would be to limit the use to the regional commercial zone require a 1,000 foot path of travel buffer between schools and churches under California state law there's a 600 foot buffer then also include 500 foot buffer between retailers this was really something that the chief of police requested in order to kind of distribute these and not have an area of high concentration of retail cannabis establishments and then another rule is that each location would have to have an independent exterior access point so we couldn't have a retailer that came into the mall and we wouldn't have to worry about say a shared access where there's cannabis and then like a children's toy store or something where the mixes just really don't line up so making sure they have an independent access and you see that in a lot of the codes that have been written and then of course requiring a conditional use permit and a retail marijuana license from locally and then they must comply with all the state and all the state requirements as well and so the retail cannabis permit this is what would be adopted by the city council and enforced by the police department the permits would be issued by the police we they're going to consider allowing a maximum of anywhere between one and three businesses that will be established by the city council as determined by the city council and then permits would run with the business not with the property and permits would be issued on a competitive merit based system so legal retail experience civil and criminal records would be looked at operations and security plans residency so for local residents would have preference also security measures there'd be security best practices which would be conditions of a permit of a retailing permit so that as we learn the as we learn more about what the challenges are with a retail establishment these can change over time and the police chief can put in new measures as needed so this would take a look at alarm systems have required cameras and remote monitoring required security personnel being on site perimeter lighting for after hours harden point of sale with security and bulletproof glass live scan background checks for all employees premises subject to law enforcement inspections no products that are attractive to children no products that are resealable they have to be child resistant tamper evident and labeled appropriately and then minors under 21 would not be allowed on the premise of state law and also requiring incorporation of best practices for physical security measurements best practices to restrict the sales of items are labeling attractive children they can staff may revoke or suspend a cannabis permit for cause so this is why we'll put that language in the cannabis retailing permit and then the business is subject to a periodic review by the police department community development department and then of course compliance with the CUP standards so with that that completes my presentation and any discussion you'd like to have about the standards that we're proposing within the zoning code or any concerns or anything you'd like me to come back with when the draft is in front of you I have a question that City Council is going to establish a maximum quantity of businesses in Capitola and one to three is that's good did you calculate how many businesses would be would fit in the zone at 500 feet apart I haven't done so but I know from Capitola Road to like Autoplaza Drive is over 2000 feet so and also Claire Streets included and Autoplaza Drive in the regional commercial so I think there's quite a you could easily have three with the 500 foot buffer and they can't have a shared access so using the example of them all we've had you know the Sears Building come in and talk about splitting it up and having two tenants that have exterior entries would they be allowed to be in that kind of a location based on what you're talking about? We could draft it if we didn't want any of the mall properties to be allowed to have it we could draft it that way but no under that scenario where the within the Sears proposal there's no internal connection between the buildings they would be able to if we simply said that you just need to have a separate access it would have access into the mall and an exterior independent access so in that in that case we would not allow it they had also talked about putting some pads up toward 41st Avenue toward Capitola Road it would seem like to me that those pads would be permissible for a marijuana dispensary that would be or the Takara restaurant similarly right that would be permissible because it's one entrance very prominent very one of the first things somebody may see going down 41st Avenue but I assume the city council will be grappling with some of those kind of aesthetic issues. There's been concern for signage that's been voiced at the city council about whether or not to allow the green crosses and it's not a requirement by the state that they have a green cross so you know there is flexibility in that but then we also have to think about First Amendment rights and freedom of speech so of what they're allowed but there we can have sign standards for these and we can talk about whether or not we allow logos and that type of thing. In discussions with this if we were not to allow the green crosses what you have to think of what would come in if the green cross wasn't allowed so what do we really want to regulate in that aspect so will there be any design review aspect of this like with a normal business I mean one of my concerns would be that we don't want to have buildings that you know have bars all across the windows and you know look like it's some sort of vault I mean normally we do have a design review process so I'm assuming if people were going to do exterior changes like that to a building they would still have to get a design review permit. If they were going to add bars to the windows and make significant changes like that yes they would need a design permit we can clarify that within the way it's drafted and you might wind up with somebody who wants to you know come in and build a building on a pad around the mall and build it for that purpose so there should be a design review for you know there's so many of these in Santa Cruz and in the county now somehow this seems like overkill to me but it's okay I mean in the part that I really don't like is this child proof packaging when an adult can't get in it's very humiliating you know they used to make the lid so you could eliminate that holding turn it upside down not to give you a child proof lid that's a minor point so if it were a new building on a new pad it would definitely require a design permit thank you thank you well thank you for that and we'll stay tuned very good which brings us to commissioner communications any communications I was just going to welcome Katie she's already jumped on that but it's good to have you stay here thank you congratulations on your first meeting thank you and applying our new zoning code so with that that brings us to adjournment and I'll adjourn this meeting to the next meeting in June of the planning commission thank you everyone