 Good morning, Andy. Should we check your sound? Are you there, Andy? Can you hear me? I'm muting. There we are. Can you hear me? Yep, I hear you. I was a little worried for a second because it had so much back and forth. I thought I might have messed up my headphones. Doing fine. Doing fine. It's been actually a relatively quiet week. Holiday weekend coming up. Nothing better than that. Yeah, a lot of people taking off. I hate having my live screen. On another, my live Zoom screen on a window. Live Zoom window on a screen other than the screen that has my camera on it. Yeah, because then it looks like... Yeah, it looks like I've never paid attention, right? So let's see here. Can you do this? Why can't I just drag it over? There we go. Perfect. I've got my agenda printed. I've got my action minutes downloaded in an editable PDF file. So I can do that as we're talking. Thank you for uploading those two items on the agenda. Two teams. Oh yeah, you're welcome. I've been archiving all the videos from last year too. That's one thing I've been doing. Do you have any plans for the July weekend? A little bit here and there, but not... One of the things I'm planning to do is do my best to keep my poor doggies from being so upset. Oh, well there should be. Well, there's always rogue fireworks and bangs and booms. Oh yeah. Yeah, it's a trying time here. I'll lose you there. This headset creates kind of a disembodied voice. I mean, can you speak again please? Yep, I'm here. Okay. So other than keeping giving your dog some doggie downers, no other big plans? Nah, nothing big. I'll watch you. Well, we have some sort of family friends, college friends, joining us in truckie for the weekend. That'll be fun. We haven't seen... We haven't done any socializing. Right. Yeah, this will be probably one of the first times. A few times. Which will be nice. It's the best. Old friends are the best. All right, I think I'm going to go ahead and get our agenda up. We'll move down to our last few minutes here. Is that showing up for you okay? Yes. So it looks like we have some attendees arriving. If any of our attendees are a member of an applicant team and you'd like to do a sound check, please raise your hand in the zoom. And we can go ahead and get a sound check for you. Good morning, Chris. Today we want a sound check. Good morning, Kimberly. Sounds good. Thanks. Good morning. This is Andy Gustafsend. I am the zoning administrator presiding over this meeting of the zoning administrator, July 1st, 2021. Thank you all for attending this meeting. And before we commence with our scheduled items, I just want to run a do a couple of things regarding the conduct of the meeting. So we are hosting this meeting online due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders in 25-20 and 29-20, which suspend certain requirements of the Brown Act. The zoning administrator will be conducting this meeting or is allowed to conduct this a meeting via this Zoom webinar. The members of the public will be able to participate in the meeting in the same manner as if we were to be face to face. The only difference is that when we call upon you to speak, if you wish to comment, you will need to, if you're attending on the video or the Zoom website, you need to press the raise your hand icon and you'll be recognized after you unmute yourself. And those of you, and I don't see any, might be attending by telephone, you'll have to press star nine and you'll be recognized. This meeting will be live stream or is being live streamed and recorded. So if you wish to review the meeting after today, you can do so by going to HTTPS, www.youtube.com, backslash city of Santa Rosa. That information will be, is posted on the agenda. And that'd be really a good thing for us to put on the chat actually, that'd be pretty convenient if we could do that. So maybe if everything's running smoothly this morning, we can have the recording secretary put that YouTube link in the chat section for your reference. So that concludes with the preliminaries. I'd like to now offer opportunity for any member of the public who wishes to comment on a matter that's in the, within this only administrator jurisdiction or review authority, but not agentized. If we have any such matter you wish to raise, please raise your hand or press star nine. You'll be recognized at three minutes. And I do have a hand raise. Mr. Donnie Hugh, do you have a matter of concern you wish to address to the administrator that's not on the agenda? I don't know because I can't see the whole agenda and I can't find it on your website. Can you scroll down? Okay, I don't have any general comment. Thank you. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. So if there's anyone else who wishes to comment, then please raise your hand or press star nine. Now let's go on to our regular agenda that's scheduled items. We have two items today that we'll be discussing. The first item 3.1 is a landmark alteration at 729 Wheeler Street. And the project planner is Adam Ross. Adam, would you please make your presentation? But before you do, I want to let everyone know that any decision or outcome of today's meeting or final action, I should say a denial or approval can be appealed or may be appealed. And we have a 10 day appeal period. And today being July 1st, the 10 day appeal period ends on Monday, July 12 at the end of the day. So if any decision taken today is something you wish to appeal, please contact the project planner and learn how to do that. So all right. Thank you, Adam. Please, please give your presentation on that. Great. Thank you, Mr. zoning administrator. I'm going to go ahead and share my screen. Thank you. And just let me know when you see the PDF that's open. Do you see that? Sorry, you're muted. Were you saying you can't see it or? I can see it, Adam. You might want to I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Adam. Yeah, you're good. Go. Okay. I think I'll just do it like this, I think, because it's pretty quick. The item is 729 Wheeler Street. It's a minor, sorry, it's a the project name is the same as the address 729 Wheeler Street located in the Burbank Gardens Preservation District. It is a minor landmark alteration permit file number LMA 20-002. I am the project planner for the site for the project. The permit before you is to replace a previous accessory structure that was destroyed by a falling oak tree. I believe it fell from the neighbor's yard or from the adjacent neighbor's yard. The replacement structure will be in the same location as it relates to setbacks, the same height, and it's relatively the same size as it is not including a portion on the one that was the structure that was destroyed had an unpermitted kind of a back porch section that is not included in the rebuild of this. So it's slightly smaller than what was there before. So here's an aerial view of the project location. The next one will show a little bit closer of an image, but it's in the back of the property. The zoning is R16H so that single-family residential within an historic preservation district. It's low-desert, it runs eventual, and again it's in the Burbank Gardens preservation district, which is why a landmark alteration permit is required for projects such as this. So a bit of the zoning code analysis here is that section 20-61.030 typically prohibits non-conforming structures to be rebuilt when more than 50% damage occurs, and by non-conforming that has to do with setbacks and also the size of the of the of the project or of the accessory structure in that garages garages have to have a certain internal width and length of an unobstructed space of nine feet by 19, nine and a half by 19 feet. In this case, it's less than that. However, the use itself is by rebuilding it, you're not expanding the legal non-conforming severity of this legal non-conforming structure. In addition to that, zoning code section 20-61.050B2 it exempts single-family dwellings from including accessory structures from complying with setback standards or in preservation districts, and then when it's a destroyed structure to be rebuilt. And then zoning code section 20-61.050B3 exempts single-family homes that is non-conforming due to parking to not have to comply with that parking standard. So a bit of the back and forth on this with the applicant and planning staff was, as well as building engineering, was that if you were to build a new garage today, the size would have to be have that 19-foot depth. They meet it in width, not a problem, but the 19-foot in depth. However, because it is rebuilding in a historic district, which allows reduced setbacks, there's also this code cited that allows additional, you know, to rebuild those non-conforming structures as they were before and not having to have a single-family dwelling comply with that parking requirement, as well as a history of this structure never actually being used as a garage. It's more of a, it's always been more of just an accessory storage, maybe even a just an extra outside room, whatever that may be. It's never, it's never been that staff has determined that the rebuild as proposed is allowable within the zoning code as cited and explained here. And so this is a bit jumbled. So if you have any questions, I'm sure, you know, I'll be able to answer any of those. But here's the previous structure. Here's one of the, where one of the branches fell from this neighboring tree. This structure has since been removed due to its safety hazard by the chief building official, allowed that removal of that structure. And then as well, these are some images of the neighborhood not really having one, a garage and also that garage in the back, not really being a size to actually accommodate a modern car. So these are just some examples provided by the applicant. And then this is the project plan. So it'll look, the structure itself will look just like the previous one, which is very common for this design in this area. It'll match the style of the existing single family home as well. And the CEQA is exempt under a class two and three exemption, categorical exemption, because it involves a negligible addition of an accessory, of an accessory structure app, pertinent to an existing single family residence. And with that, the planning and economic development department recommends that the zoning administrator by resolution approve a minor landmark alteration permit for the property located at 729 Wheeler Street. And that concludes my presentation. I know the applicants in the meeting, if you have any questions for her as well. Thank you, Adam. And maybe you can answer this question, maybe the applicant may need to, but those doors I didn't see on the plan, are those like street facing, I would assume? And are they glass? Are they metal? Or what are they? Those double doors? To my knowledge, they're wood. They do face the street. It says front elevation, but it's south elevation. It faces directly on to Wheeler Street, but from the far back where it was before. And they're wood carriage style doors. But just to, I'll let the applicant also just kind of verify that as well. Okay. But, and I'll ask the question in a moment with the applicant, but with regard to the replacement of the nonconforming structure, it's with respect to the setbacks, am I correct? I'm sorry to say that one more time. The nonconformity of the structure that was damaged or destroyed is related to the setback from the side yard property line. Correct. Okay. And that your determination is that this replacement will not intensify that nonconformity, which is permissible, but this only could. Excellent. Okay. So now it's time for the applicant if they wish to comment. I do have that, I guess, confirming question about the doors. If you wish to comment, please raise your hand and you'll be recognized. Thank you. Hello. Hello. Okay. Good morning. The doors are wood doors and there is, it is facing the street, but there is an intervening wood fence where you can really only see the top of the doors and the gable roof from the street. That's good to know. Thank you. Appreciate that. Is there anything else you wish to add out of presentation or description of the project? No, it's essentially correct and I have nothing further to add. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any member of the public and president that wishes to comment on this project? So please raise your hand or press star nine and you'll be recognized. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and so and then take action now. So I reviewed the resolution and its findings are appropriate and correct and Adam, thank you for confirming the nature of the nonconformity. That's important here and I do agree, particularly with that new information to me about the intervening fence, screening, the replacement structure, that this replacement as designed would not have an adverse effect on the historic character of the property or the surrounding area. So based on the findings presented and the application materials provided, please to approve the LMA LNP, let me get the permit number, LMA 21-002. Thank you. All right, let's go on to item 3.2. This is a conditional use permit for a small lot subdivision located at 613 Olive Street and Mr. Miss Tumins is the project planner. Thank you, Mr. Gustafson. This project is Olive Commons and it's a minor use permit for a small lot subdivision located at 613 Olive Street. So the reason why the applicant is requesting the minor use permit for a small lot subdivision, it would allow the division of one lot into two lots and a remainder in order to develop two senior family attached units. This is the project cited zone R318, medium density residential and it's located in the Roseland specific plan. And as you can see, there's a hodgepodge of different housing types in this particular area. This exhibit shows the Roseland specific plan area and this project is within it. Per section 20-16060 C13, which is the resilient city measures, development measures, a small lot residential project is permitted with approval of a minor use permit within multi-family residential district. And so that's why this project is coming before you and not the planning commission. This is the site plan depicting what the end result would be once this project goes to the subdivision committee and is recorded. You have the remainder in the front, which would be the common area. There's a covered parking for each unit and a tandem parking for guests. And there's one single-family residence existing towards the front of the lot. My understanding is it will remain and they will construct an attached unit to the rear of the existing residence. Here's a proposed tentative map, as you can see, the lot sizes. The project will maintain compatibility in that the existing residence would remain. And it would be hard to tell that there's a unit in the back. The project is exempt from SIKWA, pursuant to 15332 Urban andville, and 15182 because it's consistent with the rosin-specific plan. And I just wanted to point out that we had two neighbors submit written comments that included the attachments for public correspondence. One was the neighbor to the rear was concerned with a house being built adjacent to her rear fence. And she had questions about stormwater issues. And another neighbor had concerns about grading and stormwater issues. And those are addressed with the exhibit A and with a grading permit that the applicant would be required to obtain once they submit for construction for the additional single-family home. With that, the Planning and Economic Development Department recommends that the zoning administrator approve minor use permit for the small lot subdivision proposed at 613 Olive Street. The applicant's engineer is available as well as the applicant. And I believe there's one member of the public wishing to speak on this item. Thank you for your presentation. Can you clarify for me, I think we have two small lots that are being created with this use permit, but you said that there was an independent single-family dwelling. I don't readily see that. How does that relate to the site plan before us? Let me pull up the exhibit. And that is a remainder, correct, not subject to the requirements of a subdivision. The remainder is the common area for the parking, the shared parking area towards the front of the lot. Okay. And the existing dwelling would be on a lot, I believe it's shown as a lot too. And the applicant can also clarify, but I believe that single-family home will remain and a new unit will be built. The code requires them to be attached in some fashion, so they'll be attached to the existing residence. Oh, I see so. The final development or improvements on the lot will modify or expand that existing dwelling online. I'll ask the project engineer about that. I was just curious about that. There's no design review application yet. That would be required once they have some plans developed, but it could be attached by a wall or a roof structure or a trellis or something. It really depends on the designer. Right. Yes, and I also noted that what is proposed are two one-story structures on these lots, but that again would come with the design review, which is not. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And I don't have any other questions about that. So the applicant and the applicant's team or engineer, you're welcome to comment or add to the presentation. Here's your answer, Ann, like Robert said. Thank you, Andy. Are you able to hear me okay? Perfect. Great. Just a clarification on the remainder comment versus the common area comment. It's not a remainder parcel in this sense that it would be future subdividable as some subdivisions use the term remainder. It literally is a common area that's shared for the parking and access and fire and utilities. So a clarification on that. Secondly, the parcel is vacant currently. There is not an existing structure on the parcel. These would be two new structures anticipating probably three bedrooms and a couple of baths all in a one-story situation. I know that there was some communication from Mr. Matt Donahue who owns the parcel behind this one. And I emailed some communication with Matt. He's an engineer as well and is concerned about the drainage and why were we showing some elevations of the rims and inverts of the storm drain pipe that was proposed to drain the area behind the house. And this is really a tentative map. We communicated with him that we would be happy with his permission to get on his lot following the zoning approval here by the administrator to do the field survey on the lot and know the elevations to make sure that we weren't ponding water on their lot or the adjoining property. We did a survey of the property already, but because of the fences couldn't get on to the neighboring properties or adjoining properties, and he commented just to let him know that when we're ready to do that. Let's see. I think unless there's other questions I'm available, but I don't have any other comments at this time. Thank you, Mike. I do have a couple questions. So thank you for clarifying that remainder and the status or development status of the site. It's essentially vacant. I do have a question about the common area. It's to serve both properties for parking. Is there, will there be a maintenance agreement to help to ensure both parties share equally and responsibly in the maintenance of that area? Yes, there will be an agreement and that'll be part of that subdivision and the record nation. Those will be documents that will be recorded, reviewed by the city engineer and recorded. So that is part of the maintenance obligation. I might add that the city also wanted to have an offer, a dedication for public utilities to be within the property that would be part of the future subdividing land as well, a parallel to the frontage of the land and the width to be determined at the future by engineering and utilities. There's part of the parcel A obviously also provides an access pathway to get past the first house to get access to the second house. And so there would be an easement, an access easement that would extend down the side of lot two to get access to the doorways of lot one. And again, that would be non vehicular, it would be pedestrian. Yeah, okay. All right. That was that answer my questions and thank you. Is there any member of the public or I should, I should ask, does the applicant wish to comment at this point? Miss Milks, please. I have nothing to add to what Mike Robertson has provided, unless there are questions. Though I think he would know the answer better than I. Okay. Thank you. All right. So now it's time for the public who wish to comment. Anyone in attendance who wishes to do so raise your hand and you'll be recognized in turn. And if you would, could you please state your name? We have it here, I think, on our list of attendees. So the first one, Matthew Donahue. Yeah, hi. Matt Donahue here. Can you hear me? Yes, thank you. I'm the owner at 554 Boyd Street, which is the lot behind the subject property. And I'm very excited and supportive of this project. I'm happy to see it go in. I did talk with, we did, me and Mike did have an email exchange about the drainage specifications. And he correctly pointed out this is a tentative map. So I think that those specifications are tentative, but they are on the plan. And this is a CAD plan. And you know, the thing about CAD is, unless it gets changed, those specs are going to stay there. So I guess what I'd like to ask is there, could there be a way to get put on a distribution list to get a copy of the grading application that I can look at to see if these specifications get, get, you know, if the calculations are actually done and these specifications get altered, can I look at that? It's a great question. You are an interested party. I don't have an answer for you. I certainly invite Mr. Robertson to inform you of the application. He might know what the practice of the city is in terms of interested party review of a final map. Do you have anything? Can I add something? We do have a website at srcity.org where you can review permit activity on any property. You can just register for notifications by that property address and any additional applications, any additional permitting. All of those records will go through that and you can sign up for those notifications. Can I comment on that? Matt Donahue here. I've been doing that for months. I've been doing that for months on this project and I've never found it on that website. I'll be happy to work with you on that and make sure you have those resources. I do want to underscore here that the process on a final map is really the sort of final documentation exhibiting compliance with the tentative map conditions. To your point, Mr. Donahue, regarding grading and such, things can change, factual, final field measurements or information. And I understand your concern about a substantial change as a result of the final engineering. I think here Mr. Robertson would agree to inform you as kind of a good neighbor policy that that might be one way for you to get noticed if the city's project website or notification process doesn't perform. So the recording secretary has offered to provide a link that might exist to allow a neighbor to track a final map or even a building permit on a project. That would be something that would be useful resource. I might add here this project will not go full. Well, I guess the site improvements could occur prior to the final approval, design review approval of the two residential structures. So to the point of understanding what the site development improvements will be in the final map, let's see if we can make sure you have access to that record so you can confirm that the tentative map conditions are being implemented in that final map. And then Mr. Robertson, if you're willing, could you inform Mr. Donahue of your final map application? Am I on? I can't tell. Yes, you are. I'm sorry. Yes, Eddie, sure. I certainly will send Matt Donahue the information when we file that. But in addition, what I'll do is I'll send him the key email addresses in the city engineer's office that will be doing the review of the drainage calculations and the design of the drainage. So he'll have the city points of contact responsible for the approvals, and they'll also have it directly from me. Excellent. Thank you. All right. Hopefully, Mr. Donahue, you had a response here that gives you some assurance you'll be able to track this site development as it goes forward. Yes. Do you have any other comments? No, thank you very much. I have no more comments. Is there any other member of the public who wishes to comment at this point? Please raise your hand. All right. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing on this matter. And so I read through the resolution prepared by a project planner and found the appropriate findings were complete and provided the basic or I should say the essential facts related to this particular project to support the findings. And also the conditions of approval, including exhibit A, which is a core stone of this minor use permit for small subdivision. So with the resolution and the supporting conditions of approval, including exhibit A, I approve the project as proposed. And here, too, the appeal period will include what I stated is July 12th at 5 p.m. And this project is approved. And with that, we've completed the second and last item on our scheduled agenda. So it's my pleasure at this point at 11.05 a.m. to adjourn this meeting of the zoning administrator on July 1st, 2021. And I wish you all a safe and sane July 4th weekend. And thank you for attending. Have a great day.