 Okay, welcome to City of Capitola Planning Commission meeting. This meeting is open to the public with both in-person attendance at the City of Capitola Council Chambers at 420 Capitola Avenue and remote assistance or attendance as possible, excuse me. Planning Commission and staff are attending in-person and remotely via Zoom. There are several ways for the public to watch and participate. Information on how to join the meeting via Zoom and make public comment during the meeting is available on our website, cityofcapitola.org on the meeting agenda. The public can also livestream the meeting on City's website or on YouTube. As always, this meeting is cablecast live on Spectrum Communications, cable TV channel eight and 18TU versus channel 99 and is being recorded to be broadcast on the following Mondays and Fridays at 1 p.m. on Spectrum channel 71 and Spectrum channel 25. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the city's website after the meeting. Our technician tonight is Walter. As a reminder, please turn off your cell phones during the meeting. All right, so that brings us to our first item is roll call and Pledge of Allegiance. Here. Mr. Estee. Here. Mr. Jepsen. Here. Vice Chair, Mr. Jepsen. Here. For the leaders to apply for the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Moving on to oral communications, additions and deletions to the agenda. Yeah, we have for item 3B, the Esplanade, we have two additions to the agenda. One email was received with some comments from member of the public, and then the applicant provided some floor plans of the entry proposed at the front of Pete's My Heart. And those are at you in front of you at the dais and also at the back table. Thank you. As we're moving down to item B is public comment. Please review the notice, remote access for instructions, short communications from the public concerning matters, not on the agenda. All speakers are required to print their name on the sign and sheet located at the podium so that their name may be accurately recorded in the minutes. Members of the public may speak up for three minutes unless otherwise specified by the chair. Individuals may not speak for more than once during the oral communications. All speakers must address the entire legislative body and will not be permitted to engage in dialogue. Any commission comment? I just had one. Sure. I was wondering, in the future meetings can be up, it may be like under directors report. Brian, if tonight or maybe in the future, Katie, if we could kind of share what the forecast of like agenda might be looking like for some of the projects coming up. You know, there's, looks like we have full agenda for next couple of meetings or if there's larger projects that's coming in and then maybe also a little bit under maybe public noticing if, as commissioners may, we could receive some of those. I know it gets in out from a 10 day standpoint. So might not be prepared for tonight, but maybe in the future meetings if we could kind of have a snapshot outlook in the future. Yeah, I think there's a couple of things we can definitely do there. We can include a little bit more detail as to an upcoming items on your agenda. So we do, as a staff, we do a three month look ahead so we can share that with the commission. And then when we also send public noticing, we can inform the commission as well. So you don't have to wait until the actual formal agenda comes out. Those are things that we can do pretty easily. All right, great. Do be helpful. Thank you. And we briefly went over public comments, but was there any general public comments? Nothing, seeing none. Okay. Staff comments. Item D. You guys have anything? Yeah, we have no comments this evening. Thank you. Okay, so we're moving on to the public hearing as item three. Public hearings are intended to provide an opportunity for public discussion of each item listed as a public hearing. First item on the agenda is 520 Riverview Drive. Permit number is 22056. It's a design permit to remodel a two-story residence with variance requests for the required minimum setbacks and minimum floor area ratio. The project is located within the R1 single family residential zoning district. This project is in the coastal zone, but does not require a coastal development permit. There we go. Thank you and good evening commissioners and vice chair Christensen. The application before you today is a design permit and variance. And this is located at 520 Riverview Drive. The variance requests include the minimum setbacks as well as the maximum floor area ratio in order to remodel and construct additions. This is located in the Riverview Terrace neighborhood in the R1 zoning district. This is the existing house as it appears today. And this is the proposed site plan. The additions would increase the existing dwelling by about 115 square feet. Currently the site does not have any onsite parking because the additions do not exceed 10% of the existing floor area ratio. It would not be required to provide the current requirement of two parking spaces. However, the applicant is still proposing a substandard parking space on the northern side of the home there. I'm just gonna go through the floor plans and elevations quickly here. These are the proposed first and second story floor plans. These are the existing elevations. And these are the proposed elevations. The project, as I mentioned before includes several variance requests. I've summarized those in a table shown above, namely the first and second story side setback or the northern property line there. That is for the requirements are for seven feet and 10 feet. This would enable them to build up to four feet on the ground floor and nine feet, nine inches on the second story. The rear yard to the right there would also likewise be able to be constructed up to four feet from the property line. And lastly, there is a request for the maximum floor area ratio to go up by about 1.3% or 30 square feet from 58% to 59.3%. As described in the report, there are unique circumstances applicable to the subject property as well as the project itself. The property is a triangular lot with its front side being the widest property line. Strict application of setbacks on a triangular lot imposes disproportionately limiting setbacks with a low efficiency building envelope. A lot is also small by capital standards. It's about 2,241 square feet, whereas the smallest standard R1 lot is typically a 40 by 70 lot or 2,800 square feet. So this is the equivalent about 80% of that. The variance enables a modest expansion to the existing residents, both in terms of the setbacks as well as the floor area ratio. All additions would maintain a minimum setback from any property line of four feet. Additionally, the home would be modified by removing several sections of the structure that are closer than four feet to the existing property line. So they would be cut back to four feet as well. And that staff is recommending approval of the project based on the conditions and findings of approval. If anyone would like to have any questions about the material covered in their product. Questions? I'm sorry, I had one question. I saw the first time it came in it had a potential ADU and then that's been removed in this latest scheme. Is there history behind the ADU being removed or is it just that applicant decided to remove it? Yeah, it's my understanding that the owner was looking to construct an ADU as just a possible advantage as well as to take advantage of the development standards that are more relaxed with certain types of ADUs. We, because of the uniqueness of the site, we were able to be supportive of variance findings which sort of negated some of those benefits if the planning commission concurs with our findings. So I believe it was the decision of the owner. The owner and architect are both in the meeting. So if they would like to add to that, they're available. Just looking for numbers. Yeah, thank you. Any other questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come up and say? Good evening, my name is Martha Mattsen and I'm the architect for the project. I'm here with Tara Gundersen. It's also her Gunders guard, excuse me. It's her residence, obviously. And I just wanna say briefly I want to thank staff, planning staff as well as Public Works for working with us on this project. It's been, it's a complicated site. And just to quickly answer your question, I do wanna say that situations, it's been, this has been a long couple of years and situation has changed for our client. She's had two children, so twin girls. So that's sort of changed some of our thinking as to what would work best for the house as well as working with planning staff to give us some of the variances. I'm available for questions and so is Tara, so thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anybody here to speak to the project? None. I wanna bring it back to the commission. Does anybody have anything, any questions? None. I'll move approval of staff recommendation. I'll second that. I have a first and a second. I have a roll call. Aye. Mr. Astley. Aye. Mr. Adjutant. Aye. Vice Chair Krishnamurti. Aye. Okay, you're approved. Thank you. Moving on to item B, I have to step out. Commissioner Wilk will step in to operate the rest of the meeting. Thank you. I'll wait for your gentle exit. Okay, item B is 207, 209, 209, 209A and 211S Phonod. This is the historic alteration permit and do we have a staff presentation? Yeah, thank you, Commissioner Wilk and good evening commissioners. Picking this item up for Director Hurley, he was not able to make the meeting, but you did as a body review this last month at the March meeting. And so this is coming back with the response to some of the suggestions heard at that meeting and just got the photo up here. This is for tenant spaces 207 through 211S Phonod. So just a brief background, it won't take too long here as there was some storm damage. There has been some ongoing emergency and in-kind replacements that are underway currently. Along with that, the owner is seeking to also modify and repair some portions of the facade, which is what is before you this evening and the commission's primary feedback was relative to the character and the pattern and differentiation between the different tenants, the four different tenants, and to encourage the applicant to use some more colorant materials to make distinctions between the tenant spaces. So top left here, this is the pre-storm street view, the upper right just to jog your memory. This is what was presented last time you saw the project. There was a lot more of kind of a unified use of stucco. There was some individual character with the various door drops, but with the proposal before you tonight, there's a lot of vertical articulation in terms of defining each of the individual spaces, which is sort of brought back from what was existing in the pre-storm condition and that's on the bottom. So each of these spaces has kind of its own shoulder-to-shoulder space along the street frontage and I'm gonna get into each of these individual details and the use of the various materials that are being proposed. So for reference, the existing condition at sandbar on the upper left and then the lower right with the various material call outs is what's being proposed. So the one unifying feature I'll point out in this first slide is this canopy with the corbel supports below. This does carry through end to end, but the rest of the tenant frontages are basically unique compositions of materials and colors. And so with this at sandbar, the proposal is to use a ribbed tile surround at the three-pane window to also use a different dark Western red cedar along the parapet and at the door drop. And then at the far right, this is actually just an electrical closet and portion of the parapet that serves as sort of a bookend and this is a smooth stucco with a white dye. Moving to the left, this is pizza my heart, so this would be the same smooth stucco at the top at the parapet with the white dye color. You can see the corbel and awning carrying through and with this proposal, there's actually a change to the customer circulation pattern. So if you are familiar with the property or you can look at the upper left-hand photo, there's a single entry and exit with a large alcove space and with customers queuing, if they have a busy lunch or weekend crowd, the doorway can become a bit of a bottleneck. So the idea is to take this opportunity and introduce a new door and then move the orientation of the window toward the center of that space. So two new alcoves and it would allow entry and exit one-way direction. And so applicant is provided a bit more detail just because this does involve circulation and a bit of the interior space. So they're demonstrating to us here how the ADA and various clearance requirements would work as well as door swings and the entry and exit. And you can also see that the window opening itself is cut down a bit about just under three feet. We do have an added condition here just because of the door swings do project beyond the front facade of the building just as kind of a footnote. I'll get into that in a few slides, but basically the Public Works Department is not supportive of any further obstruction. So this design would need to be refined a bit, but in concept. Moving on to the Bay Bar. This is also a proposed stucco, but this is a modeled green finish. And again, would be a mix-in stucco color. So it's not an applied paint. It works more like a dye mixed into the stucco mixture. And the same awning carrying through. And then Mai Tai Beach is back to the white, smooth stucco finish. The windows at Mai Tai Beach are an existing vinyl window and the city's architectural consultant wanted one of the applicant to consider trying to enhance those windows a bit. And so the applicant is proposing a frame around them to match the awning in a western red cedar. So big picture view. This is the zoom out of the entire end-to-end length of all the tenant units. And then this is looking from the other direction. And then now we'll move around to the backside. So what you saw a month ago was the option on the upper right again. And then what is being proposed now is down below. So not much of a change here. The one thing being introduced is, or I should just call out that the stucco is really end-to-end. So it's from the end here at the beach access all the way through carrying all the way through the four tenant spaces. And then the same kind of window framing but it's a different material that's being introduced at this rear elevation. It's called a ceramic neolith and it's meant to riff off of a quartz and steel type of applied material. And then there's also a sliding shutter being introduced in this. That would be inoperable. It'll add an ability to shade those windows if they're getting direct sun. And this is at the back of my type beach or they could be just kind of an architectural feature but are an operable shutter. And so getting into these added conditions. So number 18 is relative to the door swing. So door swings out into the sidewalk. It's public right of way. It's typically not something that the city is wanting to perpetuate. I think there are a few doors that do swing maybe a few inches into the right of way if you walk down and look. But being that we are looking at a new application here we need to make sure that we move forward in the correct direction and not have private improvements swinging into the sidewalk. So simply adding a condition that this design be refined to do that. And then number 19 is just a statement of the essentially for the record commenting that the individual identity and the design of the tenant spaces is to be maintained and reflect the historic pattern and character of the village. So with that we are recommending approval of this this evening. I think we can manage the door swing issue through a building permit. And with that I'm happy to take any questions. Questions of staff? Yeah, so I have about six or so here. So just confirming the stucco is gonna be a color coat stucco. Is that correct? Yeah, that's right. And then I guess the question is I was reading the staff report talked about the windows that were existing that they were damaged during the storm and replaced. That's not for the windows in the front. That's only the windows are in the rear of the project. That's right. The windows at the rear of Mitah Beach were damaged. So the ones that I just think the consultant was RRM had just concerns about those windows but they're existing now. And so they were replaced previously under a building permit or an improvement and they're vinyl at the time and they're remaining, right? That's correct. Yeah, we were able to find some records that those windows were existing at least back from 2012. And the new windows that were put in the back were vinyl and that's because they were replaced like kind. Correct. And that's just, and they were, they're allowed to be replaced like kind because of storm damage from the emergencies. And they've, they have been replaced. One of the photos that I showed does show that they were a like kind replacement. All right. I don't know if we have the photo but some of the comments I've gotten about about the building from the historical part before the building now doesn't have the soft if we want to call it running all the way through, right? It stops and doesn't go across Mitah, correct? That's correct. But now it's being proposed it's going to. Yes. And going back and looking at the history, wasn't there a photo that we saw on the March meeting that showed it at one time that continued all the way across? That's right. There was a prior tenant that had. So historically it did go across and it was cut back at some time. We don't know when. And now we're looking at proposing to put it back to us. And what do you think was that in like the fifties? I have, I have some of those slides if you want. I can scroll through here and see. There you go. Yeah, there's one of them. So if you see on the, this arrow to the left is pointing at a, what was the canopy? Right. It's a canopy ran across and then for some reason. Yeah. They took it out. There it is again. So that's a Pelican cafe as well, what is Mitah now? Okay. And so we probably think the original construction probably had it continuous, right? That's right. Yes. Yes. And then my next question is around the corbels. I think at our last meeting we talked, there's some sense to be around like the historical features of some of the building with the corbels. And I saw on the plans that the new corbels were called out to be steel. How is that going to be addressed to be changed so aesthetically? They look like these corbels in time or what's the corbel? I didn't see the exact corbel detail obviously yet, but is that being like something that's being highlighted? So the historical feature stays kind of the way it is. Yeah, I understand from the applicant and they are here. The architect can probably comment with more specificity, but I understand it's supposed to essentially be the same presence in terms of its dimension and its radius and its location and rhythm along the underside of the awning. So I understand it to be, it's new material and it's replacement, but it's supposed to represent the same. Perfect. Thank you. I think those are all my questions. Thank you. Yeah, so Scott Martin had, he sent you a memo with his conclusions, but he had some potential clarification of improvements. Are we gonna talk about those tonight? Is the applicant gonna, are you gonna discuss any of that stuff? I have it here. I can walk through those. One thing I will say that in just in the sequencing of his final comments were actually, for the most part, addressed in what was presented this evening because it was kind of happening in real time and we had a conference call and then the applicant had already made a revision and then we got his final comments. So most of it was picked up actually in what is being presented tonight. Okay, there were some material suggestions that he had. I don't know if we may change it based on that, but we're looking at more input. I'm not seeing that I have it here. I can get to it though. Oh, are there any other questions? No, just that he's got, I don't know, eight things at the bottom, potential clarification or improvements, including the discussion about ADA clearances and things like that. I was curious where we are. The biggest concern that they had was the vinyl windows, but the status of those being existing and replacing kind eventually kind of backed off of the comment. Okay, and I would agree with that. Okay, thanks. Question about your condition on the doors. The issue of course is you don't want the doors in a public walkway. I'm just wondering how flexible you'll be. Maybe there's accordion doors or there's something that where when they're open, they might temporarily be in the public walkway, but when you collapse them and you fix them there, so you'll be appreciative of any clever solutions they have to the public walkway, right? I mean, we're mostly just concerned that when they're in business and the doors are open, the walkway is clear. I mean, they can come up with a creative solution that solves that. We're good. Yeah, I think. Okay, I'm sorry, I do have one follow-up question. With the new window replacement that's going to go in a piece of my heart, will that be a window like time then? So that will not be a vinyl window? I understand there's, the applicant is ready to comment a little bit about that window because of the nature of kind of designing and having some real site conditions. I think there's a structural component they wanted to speak to tonight, but I understand that window to be a wood frame window. Okay, perfect. All right then, let's move on to public comment. If the applicant would like to begin, that's okay. If you'd like to wait till the end, that's okay, but we're ready to hear any public comment on this item. If you could sign in or let us know who you are so that we have your name for the record, that'd be appreciated. Good evening, commissioners and staff. Thanks for considering this option and the second round of this tonight has been fantastic. Our first one is thanks, staff. Brian and Katie have been just incredible working with us and the owners on this project and thank you for your comments from the previous meeting and we've tried to do our best to address them. My name is Dan Townsend. I'm with Fuse Architects. Last time was my business partner here. Dan Gomez was presenting. I can answer any questions you have. I know you have specific questions and I have some comments that I'd like to make that would be added to the record from discoveries that we found today as well. But do you have specific questions? The questions you listed before, would you like to ask those? I just had a question in detail, just if the new window going up piece of my heart since there's some sensitivity around vinyl windows, is that window gonna be wood window then to stay in the character whether it is now or? Yeah, yeah, thank you for asking that question. So the windows that are a Mai Tai beach are the only ones that are vinyl that will stay vinyl. Those ones were replaced in kind as we had mentioned and the consultant architect had made a comment about all of the windows and we came to an agreement to just leave the Mai Tai ones alone. The other windows and the other tenant spaces are going to match the wood color that they're associated with. So the piece of my heart window is actually a woodclad window and the two entrances that we're discussing, there's a couple of clarifications I'd like to make on some discoveries today. There's a brick facade at Mai Tai and at the adjacent tenant space that comes to about 42 inches or maybe 36 inches that sticks out of the wall about eight inches. We do intend to stucco over that brick material. The original plan was to remove the brick but it looked waterproofing wise and structure wise. It looked better. I think it's going to be better if we stucco over that brick which makes it so the doors that come out of Pete's Bay heart don't won't actually protrude into the public right away. We were intending to remove the brick than they would but the doors will come just about to where that big brick facade is and where the new stucco line will be. So they won't be protruding into the public right away as shown in the plans quite as much. So question to staff, does that mean that there are bricks currently protruding in the public right away? Yeah, let's look at a photo here because the bricks are not carrying through on Bay Bar. They aren't. They go through Mai Tai Beach. The previous photograph actually showed it up on the upper left. Upper, there it is there on the upper left. Do you see the brick below the windows? If you can see that there, that's the brick that we intended to remove around the side down the alley to the beach as well. And today looking at the construction of the wall looks better to, I think it's better for us to leave that brick there and stuck over the top of it. But that does have, we're not cleaning enough quite like that where it shows in the bottom right photo. There's brick there that protrudes out. I don't know if that line of brick is at the public right away or not, but the doors won't come as far out as the plans show by leaving that brick. The window at Peter, my heart that's center window. Business kind of uses it for a pass through of stuff. Is that gonna open up like the existing or the old one did? At Peter, my heart? Yeah. Yeah, that's another thing that we wanted to bring up tonight. This is just based on observations today. We had the structural engineer was out of the site today and has a history with the building. If you flip, Brian, if you could flip to the shot of Peter, my heart. Yeah, where the window that we're showing or the upper left photograph where you see that existing window, that's a wood frame window that rolls up like a garage door. Yep. We had proposed in the bottom right photo to move that window over to help with the new entrance on the right. That right below that corbel that's there is a pretty major six by six structural column that we don't wanna remove. It's connected into the beach wall below under the sidewalk surface. So the engineer was hesitant in having us pull that column out. So the owners of Pizza, my heart and the building owners were there this morning and we decided to leave that column there and have two of those doors, just smaller on both sides of that major structural element. Two windows? Two roll-up doors just like this. Yeah, they roll up like a garage door. They're gonna pull that window, that we'll call it a door because it's like a garage door. We're gonna pull that one out and move it over to the adjacent space. It fits kind of, it'll actually remove two of the vinyl windows that the consultant architect didn't like and we're gonna put this window in that space or door. And my understanding was you're gonna be completely demoing all the stucco off the building, is that true? Demo the stucco off the building, likely not. It's so we're gonna go over the top of the stucco that's there. I thought there was a note in there about the waterproofing and all that and the stucco was gonna be removed with that. So it's just gonna be a new skim coat over top of the existing. More than a skim coat, it'll be glued on, it'll have a thickness to it like a typical stucco does. Some parts of the stucco will need to come off just for roof to wall flashing for the canopy there and some other waterproof connections but the entirety of the stucco will likely not come off. So in addition to the eight inches that may already encroach into the public sidewalk, you're gonna put stucco on top of that which is gonna add perhaps another half inch. Yeah, it's hard to say how thick it will be. It'll be something like that. That's at the Mai Tai location and the bay bar next to it has kind of a wood facade that somebody placed over the brick. That wood facade will be removed and stucco will be in its place which will occupy slightly less space than the existing wood facade over the brick if that makes sense. It doesn't make sense. So I'm looking at the Mai Tai beach and the picture showed the brick. Yes. So you're going to take the brick and stucco over it. Yes. And so I missed the issue about the wood. The bay bar next to it, somebody in the past has applied wood over the brick and that has an inch and a half of thickness. You can see it's like a blue, kind of a dark blue. Okay, but that's not impinging into the public right. I'm not sure where the public right away line is where the actual line is but that wood is coming off and stucco is going on which will take up a little bit less space than the wood did at that location. Thank you. Each location has kind of its own facade and we're trying to tie them back together but give them their own unique look. Any other questions or any other comments you'd like to make about your proposal? There is a question about the corbels. Those, the corbels are proposed to be steel. The existing canopy is covered in stucco. It's heavy, we're trying to lighten it up. Part of one of the corbels was demolished, the stucco was removed and it was a wood, just simple wood two by four structure at a 45 degree and then they've stuccoed to make that arc. So we're proposing steel corbels that will follow the original arch and then cedar underneath the canopy to kind of lighten that whole thing up. It's a little too heavy for what's behind it. That's all I have. And the height of the parapet, that's all been worked out. There was some question about that. There was some question about that. We do intend to, there was a proposal to raise it 18 inches at one time and the commission and the consulting architect had a comment about that. So that's been lowered. Okay, great, thanks. So that each facade goes up to the top of the parapet now. Okay, great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Townsend. You're welcome. Are there any other members of the comment who wish to discuss this item? Any on Zoom? Okay, with that then, we'll bring it back to council for deliberation. Anybody want to jump in on this? The only comment I had is just that I appreciate that from our last comments that the project has now taken on, I think more of an appearance of the four. And I just hope that we, that that will stay in the future, as the project or a tennis change that we're sensitive to, that the appearance and the history of the building looks like it was four buildings and that I think we've kind of achieved that or they've achieved that at this round. And I appreciate that effort and hopefully that stays with us as tennis change or things change down there. Yeah, there was a public comment about this looks too much strip-molish, but my opinion is that they've done a good job of answering our request for differentiating the storefronts. I don't think it really looks like mostly Southern California strip-molish. More of a Northern California strip-molish. No, it's not exactly the historical thing like the 1958 picture, but it's certainly differentiated better than what we saw before. Well, I like you guys' opinion on this encroachment. So they put in kind of a last-minute condition about the doors not encroaching into the walkway. If I look at it, it looks like, okay, that's a six-inch encroachment on the public walkway. Public work says, no, no, no, we've got to start being better about that. It's already a crowded sidewalk. Then the applicant just pointed out, well, there's already eight inches of brick that poke into that walkway. We think, although perhaps the sidewalk swings out further, and maybe that isn't the public walkway. So it seems to me that my issue is, oh, and then he's gonna stucco on top of that. So my issue would be that I would like to make sure that we gain some of our sidewalk back as part of this retrofit. Agree, disagree? I mean, if he was gonna take the bricks off and we're gonna need six inches back and then say, okay, you can't have the doorway swing into that six inches. Okay, well, that's six inches of shoulder room that the pedestrians now have. Unless, of course, that isn't public right away, which I don't have, and I don't know whether that's true or not, but I think the condition that you put in there, which is the doorway shouldn't swing in there, should extend to neither shall the bricks. But the bricks already exist. So it's gonna be hard to say, well, we made a mistake 15, whatever, out of the years ago. That's a good point. It's a good point, although they were being taken off as part of the retrofit, so clearly they're not structural. I didn't know that at the beginning, but I do agree with staff that the door, that's pretty crowded. I mean, if you go along during the weekends, that sidewalk is a bit of a nightmare, right? It is. So that door should definitely not protrude the way it does, you know, this plan. I agree with that. Well, but that plan, apparently that drawing is inaccurate because it doesn't show the bricks there. That's an acting chair. I mean, do you mind if we ask the applicant again about what is the difficulties with removing the brick? I don't know if that was- If he's willing to come back up and talk about this, I'd love to hear from him. If that's okay with you. That's great. No, we want to get the right answer. Well, we don't know where. Hi, my name's Chuck Hammers. I'm the owner of the building and also owner of Pizza My Heart. Originally, we talked about removing the bricks. What we're finding on this building is if you remove anything, you uncover lots more problems on this building. So one of my fears is we pull the bricks and that wall is compromised and my ties probably seven to 10 days from opening. And if we have to redo the structural on the entire end of that building, it will mess them up. So those bricks, I've been building owner for 25 such years. The bricks go down, they got covered on Bay Bar. They're also, if you look all the way down at Paradise on the next building, they're also there and they've stuck it over them. So it was a common theme on both buildings. I think it just got removed from Sand Bar at some point. But it is on the other ones. I don't know if you have any other questions. The biggest concern is about the unforeseen condition that you possibly could run into. Yes, and it would end up delaying. And these tenants, they've been through a lot and we're trying to get them open as quick as possible. And I appreciate so much on how much the staff's working with us and getting us some of these guys back open, which hopefully will be soon. So do you foresee the way you've got this two door system now at Pizza My Heart, that traffic flow will be better than it used to be, you know, because people line up for quite a ways on that sidewalk. Yeah, I mean, the real problem is people walk in and they've got their kids, they've got little kids, they're carrying pizzas and then they gotta back right back through the line and it just, that's what backs up a lot of it. So, you know, I am really hoping that we don't impact, you know, Dominic at My Tie has been so nice about it that the line often goes right in front of his door and you know, we are popular and I feel bad about it, but I would like to fix it for him. Okay, thank you. I guess, okay, so what I'm thinking about in terms of the stuck going over the brick, it's an implicit approval that we're okay with the encroachment, we're not just letting it be in grandfathered in, we're saying, okay, you can encroach, we're okay with that eight inches of encroachment and you can go a little bit more because we're okay with that design. No, he's not exactly, he's taking the wood facade off the Bay Bar. Now just worry about me, just worry about My Tie. Oh, My Tie. So, My Tie Beach is where the door swing, unless I'm wrong, the door swing open and he's saying, okay, that when they swing open, according to the original plan, it's a little stick out six inches. Oh, but that's not true because of the brick facade on My Tie Beach, post out another eight. The one he's talking about is a Bay Bar, it's the adjacent building. The adjacent, My Tie is two over Bay Bar and then pizza, can we bring up the page right now? Bring up the page 36, you can see them all. I'm sorry. So in the Bay Bar, where those garbage cans are? Oh, so okay. Right above those things. Oh, I get it. Are bricks covered by wood for some crazy reason and then painted, presumably, I guess, right? So, okay, so the bricks on the Bay Bar are being left alone already just painted and it's the My Tie Beach that they're stuccoing over. No, he's taking, whatever that wood is, I don't know if it's a one inch or half inch or whatever, they're gonna take that off and they're gonna put stucco on. So effectively, you get the same effect, more or less the same dimensions as what you see in that picture right there. Okay. Which is roughly eight inches off of the building core, it sounds like. The door's open, they will poke out an initial six inches. I don't know, it's hard to say on this picture. Just drawing. All right, so basically, after all of my confusion, the answer should be we should accept the condition as staff recommended, which is don't allow the doors to poke into this right away. That's what I'm thinking. Unless I got it wrong. I always had it so hard for me, okay. And then just that, it is the same condition at the sand bar. Yeah, the bricks are painted at what, at Paradise? I mean, I'm just trying to look for that same condition somewhere else that's stuck it over. Yeah, at Paradise, at Paradise Grill, there were bricks there that have been stuck it over and they have a little slope below the window and that's just the deep, deep. The existing brick is there stuck it over. Yeah, so it appears that there was brick along from Paradise Grill all the way down to Mai Tai Beach. Some of the stores in the past have removed the bricks and one of the stores Bay Bar has covered over them with wood. So the doors that are encroaching into the bulk of right away that we're talking about are only at Pizza My Heart. It's not all the doors and all of the locations, just the Pizza My Heart doors. And my point about leaving the brick there is that if the brick is left there at Mai Tai, that if you drew a line of the thickness of that brick all the way across, the doors at Pizza My Heart aren't going to stick much past, the existing brick is in the right way. So it's not a detriment in my opinion to have those doors stick out because the brick's already occupying that space. We've already kind of given that space to the brick. But there's no brick there. No brick there. So it kind of goes back to the condition that staff has been asking for would not be addressed because the doors will be into the area but your comment is but 25 feet down, the brick's there and that's- They're in that space. So a path of travel would be like that? Correct. Not be dramatic. If we had removed all the brick, like then the proposal all the way around the building, the doors would appear to stick out into the right of way but now that we're not, it doesn't seem to impact that. And as an architect, is there another way to address, let's say that was a condition that we can accept, is there another way to address the condition the staff was asking about to get the door so they didn't encroach? We get to swing the doors in but the owners are worried that that may cause a problem with people in, you know, as the doors swing in, you lose that space on the inside to stand the swing of the door. It's a bit of a safety issue too, isn't it? It is, yeah, it's, they can swing in but it's better if they swing out for safety, yes. And you can't move that, well, let me hold it up for you to see. You can't move that wall in because of the ADA clearance. Correct, yeah. We're trying to accommodate as many ADA rules as we can in this modification. That's what the dash lines are and are the clearances needed for opening doors for ADA. So basically we're saying that the width of the sidewalk varies depending on the facade of the building. Correct. The narrowest it is currently is probably at Mai Tai Beach because the brick is still there and it's wider at Bay Bar and Grill because the brick has been removed and the doors would swing back out into that encroachment that, like you say, the door is aligned from Mai Tai Beach all the way across. So if there was a cart that was exactly the width of the curb to the bricks on Mai Tai Beach and you were rolling down the sidewalk, the doors, the opening, the open doors would not interfere with it because the line of sight is consistent. Yeah, I can say that it would be exactly down to the inch that way, but yes, I understand your cart example, yes. The narrowest portion may not be at Mai Tai even with the bricks, the narrowest portion is probably at Paradise because they've stuck it over the brick. So on this view here, the right hand picture, that wall that you're showing to the lower left of the door, that's hard for me to use an arrow here, but that's just the studs, that's the wall of the building itself. On top of that is another six inches to the lower part of the page of brick. You're not showing those bricks. The bricks are not showing them out, John cracked. Get it, Peter? Those bricks on top of that. So that door. So it's right, right, right, right. That, yeah. But they're not gone, but they are on the further dead gone. No, they're there. They're still there. And they're covered with a wood paneling. I thought you said it, but you're going to take it all that off. That was the original proposal. That's why I wanted clarification today as we were going to remove the bricks. Now, after observation today, it appears that it's better to leave the bricks, which kind of negates this door into the right way. It keeps going back to Mai Tai Beach. Okay. Understood. It happens with all of us. Okay. There's a lot of different. I didn't get a chance to go down. Look at the place properly. Okay. Okay. I get it. I get it. It's hypothetically the door now will stick to about three or four inches past the brick. You think? Well, it looks like without the brick, it's four inches. So with the brick there, it's maybe an inch. Okay. Anybody want to propose something? I would move that we accept the staff recommendation with the 18 and 19 added. I don't think they're in the package right now. No, they're just here on the slideshow, but they were 18 and 19. So just to make sure that door does not, in case these drawings aren't active, make sure that the door does not impede people on the sidewalk. That's all. Anyway, that's my motion. Clarification that would, because a staff comment was that the door wasn't gonna impede anybody on the walkway plus or minus. I mean, trying to get clarification. Right now we're thinking because the brick's gonna stay, the door will not be into the walkway. Right. And we, I guess you could reword 18 to say that instead of using the public right over, or the right away, since we don't seem to know where that is and we don't know what the impacts of the bricks are on that. You could add a language of and or project beyond the. Existing facade. Building line or something like that, yeah. So build a stuck well for it. Yeah, you could use that styrofoam stuff. So you are, so again, for clarification, you're saying that basically the door that they have, which they almost, because you'd question the ADA clearance knowledge, can't move the wall back. They're pretty much stuck with that door. They open it up and as long as that swing doesn't encroach into. On the existing. Yeah, the existing, not, yeah, the existing sidewalk, not the official public right away, which may be more. There's probably been, yeah. Who knows what that is. So the existing brick with the, with the wood. With the stucco, with the stucco coating on it. Right. At the door one for truth, I think. That's right. That's what I proposed. I could second that. Any further discussion? Let's have a vote. Yes. Sorry. Aye. Aye. Aye. Well, very good. Thank you. Good luck, gentlemen. Before you guys leave, is there an update on when you guys think all the places will be open? Just are you guys publicly making comments about those? Great, good. Mike, I should be with Craig Evans and police officer. Yeah. We can't wait to see it all open. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. Item four is the director's report. Do we have anything? Yeah. So just been kind of brainstorming here. I'll give you a bit more, just upcoming items that you'll see next month. So the color and materials board discussion is on our list. And then we have a second story ADU, pretty standard project, but because it's a second story ADU over a garage, it's gotta come before you. And then just a couple of updates on items that are either going back or to the council. So the commission heard 401 Capitol Avenue, the Capitol Taphouse that was appealed, and the council gave direction for staff to come back with recommendation for approval and findings. So that was an interesting project. And then nobody ended up appealing 4401 Capitola Road, which was the affordable housing project, all sorts of interests, but nobody ended up appealing. And then other big, big project that we had conceptual review for the assisted living and memory care at 3720 Capitola Road. That applicant had a pretty rough go before the planning commission, a lot of neighborhood opposition. And so they've kind of taken all that in and are making a second run to present their conceptual plan to the council with taking a lot of the neighborhood input into the design. Right, was that the project that they were annexing? Correct. Yeah, I think it was back in October or something. So it's sort of back gaining momentum again to go like they kind of took a time out to reassess the design after the comments they got. So is that the only large project? If we want to call it large on what you guys referred to as, but large project that we see coming in at this time? I'm sorry? Is that the only larger size project we see coming in at this time? Yeah, so that one, if given the go ahead by council, that would be then probably the next biggest thing I would see coming back to planning commission. The determination the council needs to make though is whether it's a public benefit or not. And so I had a tough to know how that's gonna go. Sure. Okay, commission communications, anybody got anything? Yeah, I got one thing. So commissioner Jensen and I attended the planning commissioner's academy last week down in Garden Grove. My, I think our collective observations was, it was very good and very helpful for us. Pretty well attended in a very, I mean I've been to a lot of conferences over the years, it's mostly engineering stuff so that they're kind of calmed down, but these people were really energized. I mean it was very impressive. Every single planning commission, at least the ones I talked to, and they're up and down the state have the same sort of concerned problems, issues to deal with that we haven't, especially the ones on the coast, which basically have no land to build housing on, right? And so they have this housing element and each one of their communities were given these outrageous numbers and they're trying to figure out what the heck to do. So one of the workshops I went to was trying to deal with that issue and what's the strategy for doing that? And the number one suggestion from people that have been through this was to really engage the community a lot. You can't over engage the community. And a lot of them have held workshops similar to what we had a couple of weeks ago, but then they, in more depth in discussing a lot of subjects, like for example, some of the topics I was thinking of, state bill nine, which I call the subdivision bill, right? It allows you to divide up your land and then develop it. AB 686, which is the AFFH affirmative, affirmatively furthering fair housing past a couple of years ago. And how does that, it has a lot of requests, not requests, a lot of things you need to do in your housing element going forward that haven't been requested before. And we keep getting these emails about how every city in the state is getting sued if they don't do this, right? So I don't know if any of that suit stuff is true or not, I'd like to have a workshop to find out from somebody who knows like, what are the impacts if you don't do this, right? Which I know the biggest one I would be worried about is the state funding and some of the aspects, some of the money we get from the state could be cut off. Anyway, I would just like us to talk about, should we have more of these community outreach type events like we had a couple of weeks ago? The one person who was leading this said it, they're not subject to what's the act. No, the Brown Act. You don't have to conduct them in the same way with as formally as we do these meetings because they're just in information sessions, we're not making a decision. So you don't really have to do it as formally, although it's probably safe just to do it the way we are doing it, like we did last time. But any comments to this notion? I think that would be a fair question to ask Katie and the attorney, right? Wouldn't that be good for just for Brown Act if we wanted to hold community meetings? I share the same feedback from the conference. That's what a lot of people are talking about is community outreach, community outreach, community outreach. I think this might maybe Paul come into play when the map gets a little more finalized, that I would think when that map comes up, all we have to do is plan or make recommendations for planning on how that lands, but I think to reach out to that community and say, just so you know, city council took action, the plan was approved, whatever, but to tell people in time what this could look like, and I think it should be a gamut, not creating hysteria, but it could be, like we all talked about the project, what do you call it, 4-0, what's the number? 4-0-1? The 4-0-1, it has 36 parking spots. It could have had zero. If they built it to our standard, it would have had whatever, 79, but so everybody knows that going into this and maybe there might be less hysteria around these issues. On that, if we talked about them, people can make plans or understand what that impact is coming and stuff. Also, I would hope maybe from that too, I always say 1,336, well, I guess we only need 1,300 units now, but we put in 1,300 ADUs we would have to talk about, right? That's why I was trying to get one out of this person's head, but I think community outreach and talk about things like that might downplay some of the exposure that we have and just educate, I know it was education to myself and then just going to the conference educate, but trying to get out to our community. But I share that, that's a lot of people we're talking about down there. Was there a part of that, was there a presentation like from the state, like a film strip or a presentation that says, okay, here's how we got here. Going back to population growth in California and this and that and then all the various experts saying, here's how you deal with density and this is how we came about. So there was like an overview that says, okay, here it's not us versus the state. It's like, here's what, was there any kind of a presentation? No, the HCD person, Housing and Community Development person for the state actually got sick or had some issues so she didn't actually show up and they didn't have a, I'm sure there is a presentation somewhere that we can dig up. There is a lot of information out there that if you search around to find, look for it, it does exist. Yeah, I would think that would be a, in terms of public education, say, well, you know, where did this come from? Where, you know, why do we feel we're against the state and we have elected state representatives? You know, how are we working together? Where did this come from? Well, the one thing I do remember, the one statistic they had, and it was the, we have to, by 2035, you have to add 3.5 million housing units in the state and that's based off of, you know, some analysis of the population growth and population changes in it, you know, people coming and going from California and the demographics are changing over time, of course, right? So they factored, they did talk about how they factor all that stuff together but they never showed the actual, you know, formulaic development of these requirements that they flow down to the nine different, you know, government organizations that then split them up into these cities. Yeah, that's where I think I would, I would personally get the most out of this. I've done a little bit of digging along the same lines, like, well, where did this come from? Where did our, why are our arena numbers, what they are, blah, blah, blah? And to have some sort of formal presentation where it's clear and here's where it, here's where it all came from and here's how we participated and here, you know, it would be like, okay, now we're all on the same page. I mean, we're not the only ones with sort of what you might think are extreme numbers. Our 1336 is kind of on average with what the people I talk to, even out in Manteca, you think Manteca, okay, it's got lots of room, right? They don't have a lot of room and they've got a requirement that they are struggling to try to figure out. So the interesting thing was the closing speaker and he was talking about how they're planning for everything and then they're talking about, Newsom might be putting out a housing bill bond measured maybe for $5 billion. And he said, if you just take the number that we need and if the average house for affordable housing is $500,000 to build, we need $500 billion. So what's $5 billion gonna do in a bond measure? You know, like there's this, sure we're all planning for it, but the whole thing no one's planning for is, how's it ever gonna be funded? You know, you know, because it doesn't, even though you plan for it, ask it built because there's a need. So it's interesting to see those numbers kind of put back, you know, how's it gonna get to that point? I do have another question. I've just been, I saw it was in the sent milk today. I think I'm talking about Santa Cruz is turning in their housing plan. And I think there's lots of them might have been. Where are we on our timeline? I just, I think everybody's nervous about it, but like other cities in our local area, are they like a little bit ahead of us on that? Just an update. I thought we were submitting in May. I think that's our schedule. I have a couple of other notes here for Katie and based on your discussion as well. So she may follow up with you with the schedule. It seems like you probably want a program or a schedule of our community outreach. I mean, it seems like that was, that was something I was gonna suggest when I debrief with Katie about the meeting tonight. We can follow up with the whole commission on. I think these are all just very positive, but it just seems like when I got a lot of the planning commissioners I talked to were like, I tried to find something that were like me, 10 weeks old. And then some of that were 10 years, 15 years in their role. And they also shared the same thing about how they're trying to get some headway in the community by having over-communicating about this stuff and trying to make it not be like that your city is doing this and not putting it on the state, but like this is a mandate and this is what we're doing the best job we all can. Yeah, I think Peter's right if we can give rational for the numbers that would help a lot. But we also have to explain to people that we do need affordable housing, right? I mean, the number of units of affordable housing we're gonna need is pretty high. And people need to understand that this 4401 Capitol Road is not the last one, don't you think? Yeah. So I don't know how we get that message out there. But I'm happy to work with you and staff and Katie and if we wanna, let's take a look at what is already planned and if we wanna add more, maybe we consider doing that. There's a schedule. Yeah. We can share that with the commission. I mean, it's not. Okay. Is that all everybody has? Okay. All right, so item six, adjournment. I don't like using the gas pedal, it makes me nervous. Thank you, Peter. Okay. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you.