 That's my third one, but they've been spread out over 20 years of parties. You always return. You still got your S200? Yes, 2,000. There's this website called Bring the Trailer. It's a car option site. That's our school folks. Yes, 2,000? Yeah, my body's a little nicked up. I look it up on the... Well said. Okay. I'd like to call the Thursday, February 7th meeting of the Capitola Planning Commission to order. We have the roll, please. Commissioner Christensen? Here. Commissioner Newman? Here. Commissioner Roth? Here. Commissioner Welch? Here. And Commissioner Wilk? Here. Our first item of the business is the swearing in of the new planning commissioners. Katie? So I'll be doing that. Courtney, do you want to come first? We'll do it in alphabetical order. Courtney Christensen? Do you solemnly swear? I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California. That I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. Upon which I am about to enter. Congratulations. So you'll just sign this. And then Mr. Ruth? Hi, Michael Ruth? Do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California. That I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. Hi, Peter Wilk? Do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California. That I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. We'll do it now. Okay, and now will everyone please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Our first item of business tonight is the selection of the chair and vice chair. Are there any nominations? I'd like to nominate T.J. Welch as chair. Second. Okay, we have a motion to second. Are there any other nominations? I would like to nominate Ed Newman as vice chair. Second. Why don't you come up for the same one? We should finish this vote first. Yeah, let's do this one first. Okay. All right. So there are no other nominations. Can we have a roll call, please? Yes. Commissioner Christensen? Here. Commissioner Newman? Yes. Commissioner Ruth? Yes. Commissioner Welch? Yes. Commissioner Wilk? Yes. T.J.? All right. Thank you. Well, I guess now we move on to the vice chair and as the chair person, I cannot make a nomination, so. I'd like to nominate Ed Newman as vice chair. I'll second. So we have a first second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. I'm sorry second all those in favor. Hi. Congratulations. You're gonna have a good time in there They're doing some fun stuff in the city. So That's excellent Next on the item is oh, you know, and there should be one more thing. I don't have it to read in front of me But I know this can be viewed This meeting is cable cast live on charter communications cable TV channel 8 and AT&T you verse channel 99 And that is not true. It's not being displayed on AT&T right now Something we need to work on it is being recorded to be replayed on the following Monday and Friday at 1 p.m On Charter channel 71 and Comcast channel 25 Meetings can also be viewed from the city's website at www city of capitol.org Our technician tonight is Lynn Dutton as a reminder Please turn off your cell phones during the meeting and if you do come up to the podium there We ask that you sign the name so we have that for our records Okay So next is our oral communications first. We have any additions or deletions to the agenda There were a few last-minute additional materials that were at your desk this evening regarding item 6a And for anyone that's here for that item. We also had some available at the back of the room It was including a site plan that was submitted by the applicant showing the sidewalks and Additional information regarding parking in the village from staff Okay, and I think those are in front of all of you. So we have those. Thank you Next on agenda is public comments This opportunity is for those of you like to get up and present something to us on an item that is not on tonight's agenda So if you have something you like to come and talk to the commission about on an item Not on tonight's agenda will give you a few minutes and it doesn't look like we have any takers So we'll bring it back and it's time for commission comments It's like to welcome all the new commissioners And old commissioners and old commissioners coming back welcome Yes, this would be a good time. Thank you staff comments I have one comment this evening There was have been several questions of why think why items go on the consent calendar and others on the regular So I just wanted to clarify that when staff receives a project that complies with the zoning ordinance We place it on the consent agenda and we leave it up to the planning commission to pull it off So and when applicants come in we explain that to them as well But so the items that are on consent always comply with they're not asking for a variance or any have any special Circumstances tied to them. So just for a point of clarification of our process Thank you Thank you Now our next item around item for a this is approval of our minutes from our last regular meeting Which was December 6 and on that date the only two commissioners were added myself there so I think we have a clarification from I Guess read our attorney city attorney that Will take away and and make a motion and I guess I'll give to you and see how we approve it And the other three new members would abstain since you were not at that meeting. So do I have a motion? And I guess I will second those in favor hi hi and Abstain abstain from the other three. So I guess that will work for at least the legal part This next item is the consent calendar and as Katie mentioned these items are passed in one vote and We give an opportunity for one of our commissioners or someone from the public that would like to pull one of these items And there's three items 210 Espana 1730 42nd Avenue 607 Oak Drive That are on tonight's consent calendar. So if you would like to pull that off or have a discussion about it This is a time that we would ask that any commissioners Just a point of clarification that commissioner Christensen will have to recuse herself from item 210 Espana So we would suggest taking a separate vote on that You don't have to leave the room if it doesn't get pulled off consent Good very good. Is there anybody that would like to pull an item before discussion anybody from the audience? Okay, so it looks like we're going to have two votes One would be for item a on the consent calendar. So do I have a motion to approve? So moved You're in a second second. All right. So we have first second all those in favor So that passes unanimous Next would be item B and C. Do we have a motion to approve those on the consent calendar? So moved second. So we have a first second all those in favor. Hi So there we pass Our last item here on our public hearings, we're going to move on to item a This item is at 211 Monterey Avenue It's a conceptual review for a proposed design permit to demolish an existing duplex and build a three-story 3720 square foot duplex with a variance on the site park with on-site parking and Open open space requirement located within the central Village Stoney district. So we'll start off with us Good evening commissioners chairperson Welch Okay The applicant is requesting a conceptual review of a proposed design permit to build a new three-story duplex in the central Village Zoning District The applicant is also requesting a variance to the on-site parking and open space requirements The existing duplex at 211 Monterey Avenue is approximately 1419 square feet the applicant is proposing a new three-story 3720 square foot duplex the property is surrounded by mixed use and commercial lots in capitol a village The exterior design of the proposed duplex features stucco throughout the roof when viewed from Monterey Avenue is flat While the roof above unit B on the rear of the building is a standing ridge metal roof The design includes two decks on the second and third stories and a three-car garage which opens onto Monterey Avenue Both units are accessed on the south side of the structure the entryway is set back 28 feet from the front facade of the building The intent of the conceptual review process is to provide the applicant with early feedback on complex projects Staff suggests the Commission focus their comment and direction on the overall project concept and design As a starting point four issues have been identified which the Commission may wish to consider The proposed design includes a sidewalk curb cut to allow for garage access and a second story deck which would extend over the sidewalk There is one single family residence with a curb cut the other curb cuts shown here all lead to public or private parking lots The curb cuts have historically been discouraged in this area due to impacts on traffic circulation and the increase in potential accidents Additionally, the proposed curb cut would result in the loss of one public parking space The zoning code requires parking for new uses in the village to be provided on sites outside the village There is an exception for non-historic structures and residential areas bounding the central commercial district of the village However, the description of residential areas bounding the central commercial district has been unclear Staff identified the same description within the coastal land use plan at a reference to a map identifying the residential boundary This slide is the village residential overlay zones map which was adopted by the city of capitolah in 1987 And is still part of the city of capitolah's land use plan The map states that residential areas one three and four are the only areas that are permitted to have on-site parking The map also shows that 211 Monterey Avenue is not located in one of the three residential areas that are permitted to have on-site parking The property at 211 Monterey Avenue is located in a flood zone Which means if the existing residential is removed from the first story the new structure could not have residential on the first story These homes in the riverview avenue neighborhood provide an example of what homes built to fema flood plain standards look like With a garage on the bottom and living areas above The addition of homes built to flood plain standards with garages on the first story Will impact the aesthetics of the pedestrian experience in the village The existing pedestrian friendly design of the village is defined by the pattern of buildings Built with little or no setbacks right up to the sidewalk picture windows and articulation in the buildings The proposed front facade along the sidewalk does not include an entryway windows or articulation and the front door is So the proposed design would require a curb cut to accommodate the three car garage Which may negatively impact the busy pedestrian route along Monterey Avenue Minimal curb cuts along the block provide a safe multi-modal corridor Within the capitol a general plan mobility element goal four states Provide a roadway system that enhances community aesthetics and promotes a high quality of life Allowing a curb cut like the one proposed by the applicant would conflict with the above policies tied to goal four The applicant is requesting a variance to the parking and open space requirements To grant a variance the planning commission must find that there are special circumstances tied to the lot And that the grant of a variance would not constitute a special privilege Capital and municipal code requires that structures enlarged by more than 10 must provide the minimum parking requirements The existing duplex provides no parking because the proposed design increases the habitable floor area by 100 160 far beyond the 10 maximum parking for the structure must be provided on site Parking has long been a challenge in the village Many structures in the village have had limited additions due to the city's requirement That parking must come into compliance when the habitable habitable floor space of a structure is increased by more than 10 Duplexes require four parking spaces the applicant would be seeking a variance to allow a duplex with three on-site parking spaces within a garage Two recent projects provide examples of instances in which the applicant limited the size of their addition Because they were unable to provide on-site parking at 110 Monterey avenue The applicant wanted to expand the apartment above britannia arms But because they were unable to provide on-site parking they were limited to a maximum addition of habitable floor space of 10 percent Or 93 and a half square feet the project was approved by the planning commission on november 1st 2018 A second example is the foreplex at 212 Monterey On july 20th 2017 the planning commission approved a 304 square foot addition That was limited to 10 of the habitable floor area due to non-conforming parking The concept also lacks the 10 open space requirement a variance to landscaping would be required to build the concept as designed Aspects of the project's design conflict with recommendations found in the central village guidelines These guidelines were adopted by the city of capitol to promote excellence of development and maintain the unique character of capitol village The guidelines discourage flat roofs large garages and parking which requires vehicles to back out onto the street The guidelines also recommend that front yards be landscaped to create a sense of entry to the unit The applicant is seeking direction to the concept presented Staff recommends the planning commission address the new curb cut the deck over the sidewalk variance requests and the overall design Okay, thanks asha. So, um, any questions from the commission to So first question I had is uh procedurally my recollection is when done conceptual reviews That we don't take any boats. We just uh Have the public presentation And the commissioners express their views and that's it. Yep, you're going to give guidance So my second question was do we know what the elevation of a floodplain is at that site? Or maybe the architect does When we get there I would ask the architect Did you have a question On the village overlay and the regulations There's no on-site parking allowed in that area where this proposal is in So why would it need a variance from parking if parking's not allowed? So should Should the commission decide to allow parking on this spot? Then because they're going beyond the maximum of what would be permitted on this, you know Then they would need a variance for that. But yes in this area of the village Parking is not required on the site. It should be off. So it's two variances then right one to allow parking and then one to allow A substandard amount of parking um I would have to digest that further to make sure that read the language of that section of code, but it does state that within The central village for a non-historic building That parking does not have to be because it's not in the residential area. The parking is not required Any other questions for But it's really a variance the variance would be to um exceed the 10 percent So for the existing structure with no parking if you exceed the 10 percent limitation, that's you know a variance To that or the variance for the additional spot as well Right and was it when did we find out about the on-site parking being in question or the was that just recently or was that something that was About the uh, how it was excluded from the on-site parking exemption. Yeah, so um Since this application came in and at the time of the application we've had consistent Guidance to the applicant that on-site parking would not in a curb cut would not be Supported by the public works director and planning due to the Pedestrian friendliness of the village. There is that section of code regarding parking in the village and that There's never been an exhibit tied to that that's stated within the zoning code I recently was reviewing our land use Our land use plan for the coastal updates that we're doing and the same references in the Land use program and for that it references an exhibit b an exhibit b is the residential Identifies where parking is allowed and not allowed within the village within our land use plan which is um part of our Regulations within our within the coastal zone. So, okay, I do have a question. Um, the curb cut If we were to approve that would that be The applicant pay for that or would city works have to Make the curb cut or yeah, they would be responsible for improving the sidewalk and making the So in other words, it wouldn't be a burden to the general fund Correct. It would be Since the floodplain regulations would would not allow residential use on that first floor and the village prohibits parking What do we end up with a building on stilts? Lot of storage Well, you can have commercial on the first floor within the floodplain And under for a residential you're allowed to have a 10 percent addition to the residential that's there. Okay Go ahead. It's before we leave this issue. This is parking not allowed and required. It's a very confusing situation I had the same concern that commissioner ruth did it seems like we're saying both things but the only way I could make sense of it is that You're required to have the Number of parking spaces that the size of the building calls for but they can't be On on the lot they have to be somewhere else Which uh, I mean, I don't know where that somewhere else is, but I think that's what the that's the only intent that I sense I can make of it What are the current requirements today for the duplex? Currently the duplex has an obligation of four parking spaces But there the duplex can remain in place with as it is or have it up to a 10 percent addition without the parking being triggered So but the parking being triggered still requires four, right? It requires four today because it's a duplex exactly and the new Request is We also trigger four But that it also triggers the on-site parking which We're not we don't allow them to have so and he's asking for three All right, and he's asking because of the on-site parking Right got it. Okay Now we'll go ahead if we're done with commissioner questions. We'll open it up to the public would There we go Dennis honorable members of the planning commission staff Thank you for the presentation Sasha very well done This project actually raises a lot of questions Or how we're going to deal with the future of this village with possible sea level rise and the possibility that that with FEMA regulation Someday this whole village is going to be on stilts Um this thing about not being in a parking zone is something really new to me I had I had never heard of this till tonight and I can tell you I did some mapping for you and you're going to see it in a second of all the parking spots Or all the places that have been allowed in the village are all over the place and I'm going to go through a few things and with me I have the owners of the property and who are also the residents they live in this house here and Mayor and Sebastian and Kate are all here in the audience too. They are local residents and they live in that house The parameters that we're just not did dealing with this is the fact that it to do anything over 10 on that property Is a limitation on what they can do now and keep it at that same level If you do more than 50 percent of rebuild on that property, you're required to adhere to FEMA floodplain 50 percent on a remodel like that is not very much much work You you would never be able to really put a second story or anything on that you're really restricted and and in the in the presentation you've seen slides already of How that how that property sits? Um, it's surrounded on three sides with two-story Properties right to their property line The only one that has inset is this house here and it will continue to have that by the way And so and so the two stories surrounding it you're really only side of the house You're ever going to see is the front front elevation the rest of the time. It's up against the house. You'll never see it You may see a little bit of the roof line if you're up on the hill If flat roastered or or discouraged we've done a bad job at that because 50 percent of the village is flat roast today So there's a design consideration there um We'd like to discuss the the following issues The project and get direction from this from this commission and staff on this on this project is is that Um, the the following things I see are really important. Number one is the driveway cut Number two is the visual character of the of the building in proportion to what's out there Um, the village design and livability The front decks open space and second unit. Those are all secondary things. I mean you can give us direction on that we're really open to Morph this project if it's needed Okay, um the theme of floodplain. I think that has to if it's not a discussion here tonight It needs to be discussed and it needs to staff or and you you can recommend to staff They look into what what this village is going to look like in the future because of that And it's going to have to start taking this turn soon Um It's clear in our general plan um and in the village plan that um That the city is to encourage a mixed use of residential And commercial within within the village itself the village proper Okay, and in that um in your design guidelines for buildings in the village It's required that residential be a take the second store. You cannot take a commercial area to the upstairs in this village What this makes is it makes makes good planning It makes it makes a viable community. It makes safe streets any planner will tell you that That makes use of having people actually physically living in the village keeps the village safe We have done everything we can to kill people from the living in the village We we make parking difficult. We make land use difficult We we make the transition is difficult And so what's happened is is that there's there's really very few people live in the village anymore To find people that want to live down there and make that community safe safe Not just during the tourist season, but all year round you need people living down there So you have to accommodate to them somehow in residential areas as to as to being able to live there and and have a family down there Sasha can you can you bring up um The uh the aerial photo that I sent you do you have that I I believe they all have that at their That should have been in the additional materials. Oh, you may have in your folder that their folder. Yeah, okay I did a little write up with it too. I'm going to read that up. But uh, there should be an aerial photo that shows you Um, there's too long. There's a line of demarcation of a residential to commercial on here And also, um, it has dots that show you all of the all of the uh All of the all the properties with with garage cuts street cuts Um, the purple silver line you see is a separation of commercial buildings and residential buildings on Monterey avenue capitol Avenue not it's not zoning zoning goes differently, but this is reality. This is what is out there now And if you see that you'll see that behind every front row commercial building now is a residential structure It only the commercials are only on the first street california street San Jose avenue Monterey all of them are commercial buildings on the first corner and in any place behind that This house like the rest of these is the first house in into residential area This is the demarcation this house the demarcation where residential starts starts on this property It was allowed the gum out building wrapped around the corner and it wrapped around this the superintendent's building But it but it's actually that that is commercial right next door But this is the point where where residential starts in these neighbor into these neighborhoods And that's true. That's true of every one of the streets in the village That's where residential starts and every one of these you can go drive those streets Every one of them has a curb cut in the first lot in just like this one every single one of them There's no exception And and most most of the people in the village do as far as as the village overlay. I mean the parking overlay It doesn't hold true. It's never held true Um There's also there's also a picture in here That that I stand in that shows it's it's taken from up on alcomino media looking down onto it and it shows you Um, I hope you have that in your packet, but it just shows how long you give this one to How low the profile of this house is can compare to send everything around it Along with very few people living in the village today. We also have a situation where where we have We have an enormous amount of failing commercial We have a vacancy rate higher than I've seen since back when we lost the beach I mean, it's this really really vacant down there So having people that live down there is important to that community Not just having them as second homes, but actually have people that live in that live in that lower area um The blue dots indicate on that picture that indicate that the cuts at Monterey Avenue park and San Jose and California street And that's all of them are in line with the property we're talking about There's and there's also seven curb cuts walking from um Our village the parking lot the village parking lot when the railroad tracks down to two Monterey On Monterey on the same side street. There's seven curb cuts there those houses are all backing out onto the street And actually it's more dangerous in the upper end because the fact that cars are moving much much faster than when they get down The bottom here you're almost to a stop sign The Sightline when you're when you're at this property you stand in front of it is actually actually very good looking up the street Coming around the corner. No, I can't say it is coming around off a capital avenue come around the corner that way But you're backing onto the side where it's coming down the hill and you because there's two yellow yellow spaces there That you could your sight line is actually clear up the hill, which is unusual There's very very often most of the time. There's no cars in that in those spots in front It's a yellow curb in front And that's what we're moving is we're moving one of the two yellow curbs to make our curb cut We're really asking for the same rights and privileges have been granted to To every you know every resident in location to the commercial area that's been granted in the past We have a local family this is aren't living the building village land use policy With both FEMA in the city really Deters them from actually making their residents out there What the give up here is is you take one spot away on the street But they're taking it right now They have three spots all the time in the village on the streets because they have a renter and they have two for their own Their own their own use so by taking the one spot away You're taking three cars off of the parking that's in the village So it actually increases the parking in the village by allowing us Good math I think so Um The way this is going to work is we're going to take the existing house And we're actually going to lift this house up and it becomes the second floor And then it'll be stilted in the FEMA floodplain. I think it is at four three and a half feet right there okay, um It's the second story becomes and then it's added to the top It will not be any higher than the gammal building that was built seven years ago next door It's the same height as that and it meets meets the building requirements the reason The reason that we're up to the required for parking spaces is because We're we're required to place parking parking spaces that create parking spaces What makes can I explain that? Is is that if you took the parking square footage out of this thing here You'd only be required two spaces But when you add the parking spaces and you're creating you have an ordinance that that Requires you to have parking spaces for the parking spaces Um, I submit a new site plan. I hope it made a lot clearer as to where the sidewalk is in relation to this building That the the gammal property built next door here as you can see was built Built right up to the property line that was built seven years ago And that's right up at the at the edge of the sidewalk where our proposal is actually back from the sidewalk It's not at the sidewalk. We're pulling it back. It's the same footprint as the building is now um We're we're we're basically a three-story structure in the front And in the back of the the back the back half of the building actually goes to two story And the concern about the people with a back deck that we saw letters from it doesn't interfere with them at all Because the building's pulled back from them If there's is an issue about solar access we can address that and we'll we'll we'll do a solar study if it requires that Make sure that that's not a problem Um, the property is physically blocked in it doesn't fit in the village like it is You know, i'm hoping that you can help us, you know and give me feedback to the design of this house What is acceptable the the alternatives to not giving us a curb cut or this um We allow that little house to stay there and they get a 10 on that and 10 percent of a 3000 square foot house Is completely different than 10 percent of a of a 800 square foot house Not not for real fair, you know, it's not real fair a fair calculation to use So if we have 3000 square foot house and you and you offer a 10 percent We get 300 square feet more and 100 square uh 800 uh thousand square foot house you get But what's that 30 feet? Whatever it is, but portion because this is a small house. It just doesn't make sense And and they'll never be a livable unit for someone to live there. It'll be a rental It could still be a rental. They could move out of town. You lose the local residents You learn someone that they wants to live here by allowing them to have the curb cut And and and pulling out a female floodplain they can go they're gonna they end up going over the 50 percent So it pulls them up out of the female floodplain as a requirement and um It gives them an adequate living space and um If you approve a rental in the back that does that's not a must that's that's a That's a quest for fact that we're providing additional housing there So, um, um, I'm I'm ready to take any feedback that I can get from this commission and from staff on this and and I'll maybe the owner wants to say a word if you're okay. Sorry Dennis real quick before you go and has a question a few questions and they're okay So I want to zero in on this floodplain and for a second because It's important as to what options are available for this site So in the discussion and the staff report There's a lot of talk about the first floor has to be vacant, but You're telling me that the uh elevation the female elevation is three and a half feet So the house only has to you don't have to have a first floor That either is a garage or you could just have the house up three and a half feet And you would comply with the FEMA rules. Is that your understanding? That is correct That's it. That's the floor level. That's all high the floor level would have to be Yes, I just want to make sure that Are misled into thinking you have to have a whole story Below the uh, no, you have to meet it. But what happens is if you want that space usable at all You you need at least get you know, seven and a half feet of ceiling area in that so Okay Clarification so You're saying just if you raise the put basically put on stills three feet, then you're good Yeah, because one of the options that we're going to get into when we start talking and kicking this around is is to do a rebuild of this that doesn't require Additional parking because it's not beyond the 10% and you know, whether that can be done with just the three and a half foot And completely take that house down And rebuild a 15 150 square foot project That's three and a half feet up Okay, any other questions for tennis for you Okay, the applicant mahar you want to come up So Just a couple points. Thank you for letting me state state in my case tonight. Um I have a few things I wanted to say first is um kind of general Uh, we we bought the property in 2014 Place um With three units very run down We had uh in the out of the three units. We had one unit that had a Severely mentally ill woman living there under section 8 housing very nice person But the upkeep was terrible the place was rotting with a terrible smell on the back Unit was a another section 8 housing gentlemen who I know for a fact there were Police was called on on on him multiple times. There were some some rumors that He was acting As a pimp to his girlfriend there. There were complaints from the neighbors It took over the the place we we treated everybody kindly and with respect and After about a year of remodeling. We're able to move in there And in 2016, um, we put in about $150,000 worth of renovations into that first floor where we currently live. It's not big. It's pleasant inside And um, that's where we are now It's a little it's it's small for us. Um and What as you you can see too that it in to my mind, I feel a little bit embarrassed living there I have to say it looks like an eyesore to me These three large buildings around us We are kind of this very low building with these this kind of funny looking roof And um It's what we're trying what we really are here tonight is for guidance from you because Um, we're what we really want is to enlarge the house a little bit. It's not not by a lot not looking for some monstrosity Looking to enlarge it by about 700 square feet 30 square feet add couple rooms in a bathroom and In order for us to do that according to as far as we understand from from the city from staff We need to have parking because it's a be above 10 and that activates that rule that we need to add parking In order for us to add parking we have to have a curb cut There's no other option to this place because it's so tucked into those between those three other structures so Then the city is saying to us, but you can't do a curb cut so That's where we are we We we want to get the building up to date When we want to continue to enjoy living in the in the village our preference would be to have curb cut and have the Which other people have around us and be able to park there that would certainly be our preference Um, but it's not the main thing that's driving this That's the the reason that we're asking for parking and for the variance and to make this available is because we want to be able to bring the building up to date to have a another couple of rooms there and And we can't do that without your guidance because we're stuck and kind of in both ways so, um I'm setting all this also Not only to ask for a guidance but also to for you to understand that we wouldn't be excited But tearing the house down we just finished in 2016 a larger model That's uh, that's nice. We want to we want to figure out a way to preserve that I want to continue living there and enjoying it and And and we just don't know how that could be with these with these convoluted laws we seem like There's no way out for us other than seeking your guidance on this Great, thank you Have you considered commercial for the first floor? You know, we we did consider commercial. I have to say I'm not excited about it at all First I'm not it's not I'm not interested in making my house a business But oh not only that I'm looking around And I see a lot of vacant commercial buildings around me. I don't feel at all optimistic that I'd be able to have a you know Have this place rented out for commercial And you know, I this place was always residential want to keep it residential Again, I don't have to have the parking if you guys If you can give us some variance to have the second story that's above 10 percent But without having parking we'd be great. I like the idea of parking I think we're doing it the city of favor in a way because we're adding two parking spaces We're adding three taking off one so a total of two I think it's safe the way the the views are I think others get it too So that would be my preference but Commercial I don't think really would would would work or be exciting for me to to take on Thank you Anything else? Is anybody else from the public like to exchange more one more thing? I thought that and for commercial back to your questions, sir My understanding was for commercial. We'd have to provide somewhere off Parking or ad parking to that too, but I might I might be mistaken. Yeah, that would be my next question for staff Is that an intensification of use it is? My name is Dave Johnson. I reside at 213 Monterey, which is next door to the proposed project I have some concerns we In capitol here. I've lived there for 10 years We call it the jewel box. We call it the jewel box for a reason. It is a very very special area I commend the board members and so forth for doing What they've done with this city and that is to put the parking Structure at the very top of this hill and try to direct foot flow down this pathway It's probably I want to say it's probably the heaviest traveled foot path To the beach to and from the beach that there is in this city with that said on any given weekend there is an absolute river of 80 year olds down to Eight month olds and strollers and so forth transitioning down this sidewalk If we look at this property, there are no cuts in the sidewalks in that Division right there. So from my house on there are no cuts and that is because this is when Everybody tries to flow into this one little area and take this one sidewalk area I am concerned very very much so about the safety issues and so forth of the individuals trying to get to the beach Also, right in front of this proposed project is the loading zone We try to Keep the commerce trucks and so forth that are bringing in the goods for the storefront owners to stay out of the village They park there. They unload today. I saw a number of them unloading their products and so forth and taking them to the vendors right there I've spoke to a number of the little storefront owners in the area right there They're very concerned about even during the construction phase Where this foot traffic is going to be diverted to Something is going to be that sidewalk will have to be closed during the construction phase And even after that point in time and these individuals are Somewhat pattern driven and so forth and once they stop coming down through that proposed walkway Who knows if they'll ever come back again? We have as we've cited already We do have a problem in the village with keeping the storefronts open and keeping the commerce Flowing we don't want to disrupt that. We love our storefront owners and we want to make those individuals prosper Also, this is right at the very start where this proposed project is going to be this is Where we hold our events. This is at the very crux of where the art and wine festival starts where the hot rod car show starts And numerous other events and so forth. This is where we shut off the streets And this is where the foot traffic is and so forth I don't know how you could use this proposed parking area If that is disrupted and so forth As I say Lastly, I am concerned about my property in particular Along with all the other issues that I've just cited and so forth and that is that They are zero lot lines when the new footings are being proposed and and built for a three-story structure I am concerned about the footings on my property and so forth we Just a few years ago got approval from this board for a solar rooftop installation and so forth That's what our proposal is to put that up there with this Additional 10 wall 10 foot, which is what every story is factored at 10 stories high 10 foot. Excuse me This would add another 10 foot up against my structure, which is going to shade all proposed Solar activity that I could have up there Um Also, when these buildings are so close together my wall is a block wall. This is concrete and it's designed to Introduce water exit water and so forth. It needs breathing room is is the sense and so forth If I've got another three-story structure against my two-story structure with this much room. There is no ventilation Proposed for that for those block walls and so forth as likewise with my neighbor who has a stucco exterior too Those structures they take in water and they need to be able to Get the event of ventilation and be able to exit with those those moisture content. Um, I appreciate Being able to speak with you this evening and so forth. I'm not the individual that says not in my backyard That's I want to be good neighbors with everybody and so forth. I really I do Um, and I mean all about the 10 growth of this structure. I think it needs to have some something done to it I fully agree with that and so forth just not to to the proposed size that they're trying to go from 1500 to 3700 Three-story structure parking underneath. It's just it's an ill-conceived project We all live in different neighborhoods different homes and different things like that Your homes are different than my home and so forth They all have their pluses and their minuses and so forth one of the things about being in their location Is there got any incredible access to the to the ocean one of the downsides is they don't have the parking So it's a given-to-take relationship as with anything in our lives and um, and I think that's what we have to address here Okay, thank you very much, sir. Thank you Do we have anybody else from the public? Go ahead Please I'm I'm here on behalf of barbara ready She wasn't able to come to the meeting tonight. My name is dory arthur I live at 104 cliff avenue And barbara is Property owner at 201 Monterey the heen building And I she sent a letter and it was sent. I didn't know whether everyone got it or not Okay, yeah, she was very concerned about the curb cut if it goes in and she was As her letter stated in 1972 they requested Something of a curb cut and were denied And that's and they have the property and place to park two cars So I think she said If you determine that this is a reasonable request for the property owner Then I would I will be the next in line for the same consideration and I think she definitely means it She has the space. She has the room if you're going to give curb cut for this project She would like to have curb cut for her project and it's right It's much closer. It would add value to her property. It would do the whole thing. So Please look at this you're setting up a precedent If you allow curb cut along there There are other people that will request it barbers one of them Great. Thank you, dory Okay, do we have anybody else who would like to talk if not then If you if you go over to capitol avenue Same type of feed that comes from the upper parking lot there There's a car cut a curb cut about every 50 feet the whole length of that thing It has not affected people walking the village It's this side is no different. This actually has this side I don't think has as much traffic as as the capital evidence My point is is that that people back out on driveways all along that street They're everywhere along there and that's it's just part of living in capitol. It's a slower community and and and so We're not presenting any more danger on Monterey avenue than in capitol avenue. It seems to work fine Just one thing is the gentleman came and spoke I would hope he'd pick up a set of our plans because you can see that In consideration the footprint doesn't changing of this of the project that we have now is exactly the same footprint They were giving as far as airspace and they whatever he wants or the whole village is built back to back That's the way. That's why they have zero. That's why they're they were a lot. They were allowed zero lot lines But in consideration, he should actually look at the plans there What happens in the village during special events is is that they don't let any cars come down into it So you don't have to worry about having parking going underneath the house at that time You won't be able to do that So it doesn't it doesn't change the function or the use of this neighborhood or this or this area at all It actually helps it because we're we're freeing up three spaces Three spaces on the streets that are now are occupied by the people that live there. They're going to be underneath their Underneath their house. Thank you for your time. Dennis. I think we have a while. You're up here Dennis Question this this concern about the ventilation. I'm not a structural engineer, but is that something that The gentleman brought up about the breathing houses and he's going to have moisture problems And the things they're going to ride around in the village because of do you know, is there any Um, I'm not going to argue with him But I'll tell you that that I build we build them all over the village back to back everywhere They're everywhere and they don't have ventilation, but there is a natural set. There's a separation I have a lot of foot on each side of the building which it is now and it's been fine for years We're not changing that so we we do have a separation there As far as him getting behind his building to do any repair It's the same for both buildings. It's just it's this way but but they're built every day in the village Every building almost is built back to back like this But he does if ventilation is concerned he does have that he has that and that's true of the building behind it Now the gummouse side is different because there's actually a walkway that goes through the gummouse didn't allow any walkway going into their property They they built right to the property line The only way they have to get into their building in the back is to walk through the through this this property that we're talking about And we're going to keep it like that We're going to keep it so that that side there and that is really an open space area that wasn't taken into consideration I I know we can make the 10 percent if that's an issue You know the 10 percent as far as open space and landscaping we can landscape the front and so Conditions that were put on us we can make work The thing that the thing that doesn't work and changes the project and all is if we don't have the curb cut It's going to be it's a whole different game. We're talking here. So so my question really was was was like a physics question in terms of Uh This ventilation thing and I'm not exactly sure I understand the the Concern but it sounds like Maybe if you build these houses too close together then then they deteriorate faster Is that it's that's true if they're a wood structure if his is if his block on that side, it doesn't change it It's not about breathing wall. You don't have vents at the bottom or anything So but again, we do have a one foot space there that allows airflow in there So and while you're up there, maybe I can ask a question of staff that the yellow curve that was mentioned And it was also mentioned about the this being a loading zone with a curb cut effectively eliminate a commercial loading zone Thank you Well, we would we can talk about that if you are you doing with this and I was a question No, we can bring back the staff and then we can have that discussion Because we typically don't go back and forth too much Otherwise we're going to end up in a debate all night. I think we have good information. Do you think it's going to be something that's going to That's a disagreement with something that dinner said Right. Oh, we understand. Thank you Great So if I bring it back in because we can start the discussion here would if we can put the list up of the One two five the curb cut would you mind going through? I was just going to point out there are two spaces that are loading In front of the prop the two properties and they're 20 minute spaces And we would during certain hours, right the other one would stay and while we're talking about that real quick Are those after one o'clock parking spots? I don't they are so after one o'clock they are open to the public okay good So could you have a loading zone with a curb cut or would that eliminate? I mean that would eliminate that would eliminate it You wouldn't have a loading zone in front of a driveway You could have I think Their proposal was it would only get rid of one of the loading zones. So it's a big truck You would block the driveway that's that curb cuts for their drive But no, right So would you might go for one item at a time? So we'll start let's just talk about the curb cut and see I'll start I buy the argument first of all, I'd like to thank dr. Katz for Investing his time and money in this community I realize this is frustrating my my heart goes out to you and and I hope we can come up with something That's a win-win there are a lot of rules here however and and study them and trying to figure out something that we can actually Create reasonable variances too and this curb cut it seems to me I buy the argument that That we are in fact Gaining parking and that I've been in enough of these meetings where I know parking is key And if we can add parking spaces to the village that seemed like a win My concern would be um the garage. I also know the garage has sometimes become storage facilities So I would need some sort of assurances making they're making it a carport or something That uh, we really do gain those Um parking spaces with regards to the um Uh pedestrian traffic and the effect of that curb cut I uh, I I'm impressed or I'm pleased that um, he's got to he's keeping the setback So in fact, um We're not losing that sidewalk and we claim that sidewalk all the way to his frontage anyway due to historic usage. So If I'm not mistaken, so there is um, there does seem to be plenty of Clarence more so than the other two properties that go right to their property line. So Other than the notion of not having a Visible carport or a visible garage to where I can assure that the parking truly is gained Um, yeah, I yeah, I'd buy the argument I'm actually I don't I don't feel that the curb cut is so much Um the issue in my mind Maybe the intensification of the property is more the issue that I'm thinking Um, it's a duplex currently Um, you're proposing to do another duplex um The scale of the duplex is larger obviously um, I'm I like the idea of having parking out of capitol and on private land um Maybe the three spots kind of sits a little funny with me. I think is is um, maybe Having two spots per duplex. I mean per unit would be I mean, I feel like I'm swinging the other way, but um Is that kind of makes sense? Yeah, so that that is the requirement is to per and they're asking for variants for that We're gonna just yeah, we're just So, um, are you are you doing about the curb cut? Is that yeah, I just didn't really have too much about the curb cut I think that I think that parking off out of capitol is a great So I guess we'll go down the line here you want to go ahead. Yeah, so I um, I do have an issue with the curb cut I spent a lot of time pondering this and uh I looked at capitol avenue from Stockton to the Where we are right now has a ton of curb cuts and I'm Familiar with the area and I've never seen any real problem caused by those curb cuts. They're all Historically pretty old. There's only one I can think of that is within sort of the modern era here So and I think it's the same on Monterey. There's maybe one or there's a few there But they're all old ones and things have changed the new city parking lot has come in since then We have a lot more activities in the village There's there's been a lot of changes since those curb cuts Were made and I have trouble adding to those at this point in time. I think it's a It's a safety issue. It's an aesthetics an issue about what you want the area close to the core of the village to look like and We'll get to the variance, but I'm not sure It's come out that of the three parking spaces two of them are tandem. What that means is one car parks behind the other so you've got a garage at the bottom of the hill on Monterey avenue with the car that's inside needing to get out And uh, it's just really the wrong place to be doing that kind of automobile shuffling Um So We'll get into some of the other issues, but all in all I mean not Because I don't think we can meet the variance requirements at all anyway, but um, I think that Something needs to be done to remodel that property that does not change the parking situation Well, I would concur with Ed, but I'm going to have some difficulty limiting my comments right now to They kind of get in You know, I think our overriding goal should be to maintain the character in the village. I mean, that's the whole reason We have zoning. That's all reason. We have the general plan We've spent Literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in the last couple years developing it with the zoning ordinance and the update on the general plan And we did that for good reason because we want to develop the community in a way that the people wanted to develop and My own personal feeling is I think variances should only be granted in really exceptional circumstances and and I don't know that there's any anything special or unique about this particular property that requires so many variances Uh If you go to three stories, yeah, but my preference Dennis would be to go to two stories Lift the house up build a story to this so you keep the residential at street level Without the without the parking on site. That's what I'm feeling right now well, um Yeah, the Having the curb cut is is a concern and we actually did approve one recently on Monterey coming down the hill and it was a tough it was a tough one to get past and And I still when I go by there always question how safe it is. I obviously I think it's a little Safer because you're at the bottom of the hill not car speeding down But having said that of the physical altercations I've seen during the summer of parking areas It's always been right in front of your house for some reason. I don't know It's that stop sign making a right turn with all the pedestrians And people trying to get a parking it just seems unlike capitol of which is a little the traffic flows a little better There's more room. It seems like for pedestrians to be on on either side It's just a congested area. And while I know the gentleman says it's the most heavily trafficked with pedestrians I don't know if that's true, but it sure seems like it causes more concern there because of the congestion. So um I also am You know, I have a tough time with variances, but I'm also very much a pro Homeowner to try to help you get what you want as far as the living space. So um, you know, I think that's one of the great things about this conceptual reviews We can have some discussions and and maybe get to that That point. So I would say I have difficulty with the with the curb cut I'm a garage man. Everybody knows me. I'm a garage person and I would love for you to have your own garage I just don't really see how we can Help you out there In lieu of this curb cut in that that Whole situation there So having said that why don't we move on to uh The deck over sidewalk is the next concern And see peter you want to start off again? Okay, um And again, I don't have a problem with that particular Issue Let's see do what the issue I have is that okay, so I'm going to bring up the issue I do have since it's not listed Um, the reason I'm okay with the with the with the deck is Is I looked at the village guidelines and it shows all these decks overhanging the very walkways and It's like, okay, that's what we're looking for in terms of a village um A village personal sized a pedestrian friendly area And the deck that he's proposing doesn't Overhang what we Typically use is the historic use usage boundary. In other words, it doesn't go beyond the edge of the previous or the adjacent two houses so um So to me it's not It's not a problem You know like where he's like Taking advantage of of city right away um But I do have a problem I guess with the um The bulk mass the the flat roof issue. I know that's not here, but um, it's We can talk at the end is a design area so we can okay the design thing I was talking about that's going to be So That's all I have. All right. Hard to make um chairperson mulch could I just Exploit we got a new um Attachment that came in today because the the original plans were not that clear of exactly where the deck is in alignment with the sidewalk So and their property line Okay, I'd love to take you through that so Um So that when you make your comments, you know, that's exactly so the property line for this block Comes along the edge of the building next door and then this is the cat's property once you get to this corner And it continues it it makes a diagonal across From the corner of that building almost out to the edge of curve of the sidewalk um, and then Further along so this is his property Is right here the deck itself what the um designer Colored in the sidewalk area To be a five-foot stretch of sidewalk actually the public works department would Say that the sidewalk has traditionally also extended into this area up to the home It's been utilized by the public for years and has been a public sidewalk But it is on the cat's property So the actually the the proposal for the deck it comes Out off the side of the home And out here comes out and I would say this is over the sidewalk And then jogs back to the corner Um back to the court prior to the corner here about a foot and then comes back to the home So just to be clear the deck is following the property line then it Comes across at a 90 degree or parallel with the front edge of building Hey, how far does it encroach onto the actual sidewalk area there? So from our measurements from the front of the home Out onto the sidewalk was a little over seven feet And that's us considering the property between the front of the home sidewalk Which is on his property This seems to me to be getting way too detailed for a conceptual review What we want to do is find out whether he can build a 3700 square foot property or a 1500 square foot property And a foot or two a deck is really not where we want to kind of focus now Yeah, I think one of the concerns is it is uh While it's within his property line and and Maybe we're Kind of familiar with it because we had the fence issue with you and the fence obviously you weren't able to go out to your property line so The deck or the sidewalk What do you think about he's going to get rid of the fence you're going to get that sidewalk back So conceptually Courtney, what do you think? I know the design is number five, but the design of the the deck The shape of the building itself is Not favorable to me, but that's a personal opinion Um Proportionally, I feel that um looking at the building from the front. It seems very top-heavy um Especially with the garage is a big mass On the bottom and then going up you have these decks that seem to overpower the whole streetscape and Just again a personal opinion, but I think that it it does kind of dominate that Okay I think it's a minor point I think once we get past the conceptual issues here and they come in with a real set of plans This is the kind of thing that we can kick around in an application I think a French balcony would be more appropriate Okay, very good I don't know if this is helping your own dentist, but we'll just keep moving through it So now we're down to talking about the variance and and over the 10 open space requirement And you had mentioned that you think you can get that Through the sidewalk and stuff area. So this again may not be um A big issue and it's something that we've seen in the village over and over again because uh The way the houses are built down there, but So I don't know if you want to say if you want to consider I think there should be An attempt to create some open space in terms of A dirt patch that you could eventually put a flower bed in or something as opposed to just nothing but sidewalk and concrete Again, the idea of being pedestrian friendly and human sized village So I would want at least an attempt to meet that open space requirement I agree with peter Okay acid I think essentially it's new construction. So there's no reason it can't be met Okay, very good For the onsite parking variance And this really kind of ties into the the big picture here, but Yeah, it's the same comment basically. I think you're gaining with the curb cut you're for the uh, exactly onsite parking Yeah, I'm kind of as I said before I think that um having more onsite parking would be Would be what beneficial So I'm back to uh this requires a variance and variances by state law Require that you satisfy to both requirements that there be special circumstances based on the shape or topography etc of a lot And that it not be a special privilege and I don't really see how they can meet the variance requirements with this application I mean this this project So isn't the special circumstances the uh, the floodplain issue so well the whole Village is in the floodplain. So uh, if that were a special circumstance, we just wouldn't have any rules anymore Everyone would qualify for variance everyone would qualify to who was building a new property would have to You know like like it was denise said we're all eventually going to be on stilts at some point So that as the new properties come in you would have to Meet that And the only way to meet it is to raise a house and if you're going to raise it might as well gain the parking Isn't that a special circumstance? Yeah, not to me because It's not it's a circumstance that applies to everyone It's not a special condition of the lot that's different from other lots well, and so As the new people come in with their new applications, they're also going to have the same problem. So we're going to have to Address that for them as well And they would they would want a variance and yeah We're like again eventually the whole village is on stilts As we grant these variances in order to meet the requirements This doesn't really have to do with the floodplain. It has to do with the fact that he's uh rebuilding the property by more and Increasing the size by more than 10 which means he has to meet The parking requirements. It's not an issue of floodplain, but it's an issue of having Four spaces now required If they stay within the 10 percent then they are grandfathered and don't have to Meet the four parking space requirement So if they go beyond the 10 percent and they have to meet the four parking space requirement they have to Satisfy in my opinion the requirements for variance It just seems like it's a it's a catch 22 absolutely is so you know if you if you want a vibrant village You're gonna have to interpret these catch 22s so that People come to the village And build houses and businesses and things It just seems that he's in a box here that we got to find them help them find a way out of Well, the FEMA requirements have been in effect since the early 80s And there hasn't been a problem with people working within those parameters As far as I know So this I was curious about this thing seven years ago that was approved this blue gum thing or whatever was that Do you remember that was that What was it gum out? So do we have a variance there or All right I don't think there was any Intensification of size When that was remodeled it was the same size before And they have on site parking. There's also on site parking that's um that comes off of san joseph Right, yeah Anyway, we're sounds like we have a Yeah, I could support a variance for the offsite parking requirement if The building were to be two stories and one of the things and it's kind of melds right into the design aspect up there And I think court they kind of alluded to this is we've got those bulky buildings on both sides And we'll just fill in that space in the middle You're going to have a solid wall of buildings there without any real variation of height and design And if we could go to two stories, you're going to get a nice variation. I think which lends the character to the village We could grant a variance for for the offsite parking They could expand the size of their house We'd eliminate the curb cut and it would seem to solve all the issues Yeah, I And I guess we're kind of into that whole design Discussion just happens that way and I I think it's this is going to just get more complicated Once the coastal commission, we see what they're Because you have the FEMA floodplain, but the new coastal commission Concern about Sea rise and stuff is just I think Well, we'll see what they have to say you you may already have some insight to it from staff But you know, they're concerned that the city level is going to be Nine feet over the night. That's the last I heard something like that into the village So I think this whole idea of having a first floor With some type of either commercial or parking or storage is going to be something that's going to we're going to see more and more over the years and It comes back to this design thing about the like the garage door And so we know how the how we're going to make that work in the long term It's just something we're going to have to look at and it looks like this applicant's one of the first ones to touch on that so I think Mick did we pretty much know where you stand now Ed you want to The only thing I haven't touched on is the design and I agree with Courtney that This is not ideal at this point and it seems massive and the garage in the front is a negative Which goes along with the other issues that we've talked about and I kind of see where we're going here, which is some Some other kind of redevelopment of this property that is not does not put parking in a curb cut And it's not maybe quite as massive and quite as large but it still gives you an opportunity to redevelop And at that point maybe you know, maybe I'd buy the variance to the parking requirements I don't understand why would why would the mass Change your mind on the parking variance? well, yeah There's no logical connection there, but I'm saying I'm listening to what you're saying and If the price if a and they're just looking for guidance and There's nothing's binding here at this point, but if we got a project that satisfied a lot of these other concerns And didn't involve a curb cut and didn't involve a garage Pacing the street and you know It would be something to look at differently put it that way well, my only comment on the design is and I think that a camel is a horse designed by a committee and I don't want to get on that committee but there is a legitimate Guidance in the in the zoning code about flat roofs and And massing and so I would want to see Maybe just a mansard roof or something that That addresses that as opposed to just saying yeah, here's another flat roof Yeah, and in the new code we I'll purposely change the code to have a plate height difference from the height roof height so we could add some character to it Knowing that this was going to be something that's going to come down the road to us because of this whole flood plain Issue that we're going to put people building right up to the top of the height and And we haven't adopted that code in the coastal area, but I didn't Honestly, I didn't take a look at to see how The plate height would apply to this job and I I don't know if You know, but I would agree that Although I'd love for you to have a garage because like I said, I live in my garage but I think That we could probably make something work with the variants on the parking on the street Given given the not raising it up the full height eliminate some of your Footage of your far floor ratio and maybe having a little reduction there. So I don't know if that gives you a lot of what you were looking for tonight About the conceptual review, but you certainly got a variation of perspective perceptions and views that's for sure No, I think this is good direction and and what we would ask of you is that That to make this project work. Well, let's let's let's drop the parking out Let's just say that there's two options for us one is One is is we as Ed suggested we go and we start the first floor at flood plain height And we build a new house that is two-story Okay The other option is if you'd give us the alternative of keeping the existing house And allow us to go over the 10 requirement In other words, if we can if we can add a reasonable amount of square footage upstairs We could take that existing house We could put a second story on it But the tens what happens is is that when you take the 10 figure You go up a staircase and you got one room. It just doesn't work. It doesn't make the house right So if we can have either of those options Maybe you guys can suggest a little bit, but if you can have that we can make this work without parking grudge below Yeah, and that's really Yeah, I think you have the general direction of where we'd like to see it go Almost like you'd have to go to another conceptual review or something. I guess that There is one thing in that in that idea The FEMA guidelines have exceptions for historic structures to be rebuilt within The floodplain Where this structure they went through the process they haven't quite gone through the process yet But they hired a outside consultant to make findings that the structure was not historic If they did want to keep the structure in the floodplain They could remove that from their application keep it on our historic Inventories they're not running up against FEMA flood floodplain and then work towards a second story But it would have to be in keeping with the Secretary of Interior standards and a new addition which typically is like from half the halfway point of the house back. So just some So how would that happen because if it was historic Leslie would have to write there's a report again, right? So that that would be the challenge. They'd almost have to withdraw their Determination of significance because otherwise you are running into floodplain issues of remodel, but Anyway, um in Do you want a short recap of what staff has heard for? I'm not sure what we heard. So okay, so from for the new curb cut and for For the new curb cut it seemed that there was more of a majority of To redesign it without a curb cut and on-site parking But there may be a Support for a variance to the off-site parking requirement because it within the village it would be required to have an off-site parking so The deck over the sidewalk it seemed like it was The feedback was to pull it if you're going to have an upper-story deck pull it back and not make it so top-heavy and variance to the 10 open space it seemed that between the applicant Stating that they could make that work and they won't need a variance to the 10 open space requirement and there was some comments about possibly adding that towards the Towards the street so it can be enjoyed Variants to on-site parking again it sounded like there was more support for a variance to the off-site parking knowing that there's And then the overall design It sounded like it should be brought back To a more reasonable manner. That's not too overwhelming so on the sidewalk and For the Appearance along the street We're looking at the buildings. Yeah, and I would think there was consensus There's more of a concern about the flat roof or the bulkiness maybe give it some architecture Roof line or something Well, it would the architecture will change if we're going this route, right? This was more to fit in the box Let's turn Anything else we missed that you want to tell staff All right. Well, thank you Dennis and we don't really take any action here You kind of got our perspective and know where to go. So we still have a project here and I appreciate that and We'll be back to you. Thank you. Thank you. Good luck Okay That moves us on to item b 718 capitol avenue Which is a design permit for 120 square foot accessory structure at the rear of existing Commercial structure and this includes a variance for the required side yard setback located in the Automatic review overlay of the commercial neighborhood zone Thank you chairman welch So you're correct. This application is for design permit for 120 square foot accessory structure You can sway tongue down the staff for it and then it'll be a few minutes. We'll get to you That's guy um Let me go back design permit for 120 square foot accessory structure with a variance for the required side yard setback Located in the automatic review overlay and the cn neighborhood commercial zoning district The proposed accessory structure is located at the rear of the existing commercial structure The takaria in the southwest corner of the lot at 718 capitol avenue This application is the result of code enforcement case because the accessory structure was built without planning or building permits The accessory structure was originally included originally included a bread oven as well Which has since been removed So this is the rear side of the existing accessory structure Put the south lot line on the left hand side there This is the north side of the existing accessory structure Between one of the octagonal buildings and the backside of the takaria This is the west or front side of the existing accessory structure underneath the breezeway Between the main building and the accessory structure the image shows the location of the two doors To the accessory structure as well as the separation between the accessory structure and the existing commercial structure And this is just to show you the the spacing on the south side between the Existing accessory structure and the adjacent commercial building So as sasha mentioned the previous presentation To do a project like this requires variance and variance requires two findings One of special circumstances applicable to the property And one that it would not grant a special privilege to this property There are no special circumstances applicable to this property But there are multiple other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification That do enjoy the privilege of having structures with non-conforming side yard setbacks, which i'll show you on the next slide And similarly the grant of variance wouldn't constitute a grant of special privilege because none of the existing commercial structures in the vicinity meet the required setbacks So here we have uh, there are many structures in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification that are non-conforming because they don't meet the Meet the side and or rear setbacks The list includes 716 715 712 and 706 capitol avenue and 700 506 and 504 bay avenue It's also as I mentioned in the ar zone The purpose of the ar zone is to fulfill the general plan in those special cases where no other zoning district could effectively accomplish the same task However, the ar zone is not intended to grant development privileges above and beyond the guidelines of the general plan And in order to so you know in order to establish these zones The planning commission must find that either the current zoning classification for the area is not best suited to fulfill the goals of the general plan Or that due to timing parcel size parcel shape or topography The proposed area is a special case and therefore no other zoning district classification is appropriate Staff reviewed previous general plans and found no reference to why the property at 720 capitol avenues was designated ar However, it may have been designated as an ar parcel due to the unique development on the lot With the three octagonal structures and one garage each located within a corner of the lot and the parking in the middle Uh, all the all the buildings are located within the required setback areas and are existing non conforming in addition, uh Building official robin woodman inspected the property on october 1st 2018 to determine What would be required at the building permit stage to rectify the unpermitted construction if the planning commission were to approve the accessory structure The list includes exposing and inspecting the foundation floor and wall framing Um An electrical and wiring boxes providing earth separation and weatherproofing for the building siding Installing one hour fire rated walls on the west and south sides of the building where it's close to the adjacent properties And removing the gas and water lines and the mechanical system on the roof She also also provided the applicant with that list of requirements on october 2nd If the planning commission approves application 18 0487 each of these items would be required to be resolved within a building permit In addition during the approval of permit 12 dash 160 in 2013 Which was the design permit for an addition and an amendment to the conditionally used permit to allow a full restaurant use here without door seating Public Works director steve jesberg requested that the existing driveway approach along capital avenue be required to be replaced with a standard curb This request was for some reason not included as a condition on permit 12 160 So public works would like to see this requirement For a standard curb as a condition of this permit It's I mean it has been included in condition 15 of the proposed conditions of approval, which Because we were recommending denial those conditions of findings are an attachment to your staff report The public works department also requested that the building plans to the locations of gutters and downspouts and where those downspouts drain Because they're not currently gutters or downspouts on the existing commercial structure or the unpermitted accessory structure This that requirement was included as condition 10 In addition staff also confirmed with santa cruz county environmental health department Representative oga zuniga that the restaurant needs dedicated dry storage space to meet health code requirements And without this accessory structure the restaurant does not meet those requirements So with that staff recommends the planning commission review the application and deny project application 18 0487 as outlined in the findings for denial However, staff recognizes that the project is located in the ar overlay zone that provides A little bit of flexibility in the review So should the planning commission choose to approve the project? We did put those draft conditions of approval and findings in your staff report Very good. Thanks, man Any questions of staff? Everyone are you suggesting in that the cn zone be the applicable Requirements for this ar area. Okay You know I could be wrong, but I think that was zoned ar before any of those structures The decagon type structures were out there I think But i'm not a hundred percent certain There was no record of the permits. Yeah, so Yeah, you know the ar thing took place again in the 80s And specific parcels were picked out for that ar zone for whatever unique characters they had characteristics, but I can't recall why that one was Zero down on So I guess I have a question about the the curb cut since we're on curb cuts this evening So steve suggested that you convert that curb to a standard curb Which would I guess would eliminate the notion of redevelopment that turning into an apartment complex or something with a wide driveway I would imagine that's what it used to be some sort of a living arrangement Um It was three parking spaces that were there So it was parking for the uh, I believe it was an office a real estate office Maybe in that location So it used to be two or three parking spaces for that building Which was then converted to the patio as part of that permit And so usually when things like that take place they they require the removal and replacement of the driveway approach and put standard curb in there. So that's that's why he had recommended that Okay But if it was then to be torn down and rebuilt into some sort of residential thing that needed a curb Would we have a problem with curb cuts? Like we do in the village Not as big a deal Okay Okay, any other questions for staff Then mr. Uh, Majora somebody come want to come Hello everybody Well, I thought I was going to be done with this a long time ago But I guess not um, obviously lack of experience Uh on the beginning because of the health department I needed to have a space for storage And the the guy at the time from planning uh, Ryan That was helping me he reassured me That I was able to To build the storage in there and and basically Uh I did it. I did it at the same time that the rest of the construction Uh I was allowed to I guess for an extra five feet by 20 feet for the 88 bathroom and in the sink room and so I just I just never thought that I was going to get in trouble. I But anyway, so I guess uh What I like to say that I That I have to agree agree with the conditions And I like to make it right I just would like for everybody to kind of be easy on me. This is being I started with this project in agus first 2010 and Knowing what I know now I probably never would have done it But it's too late. I have a lot of money a lot of time and a lot of work So I just like to go forward and just make it right And do whatever this A storage actually was built five six years ago at the same time as the rest of the extension um, I have pictures I got Records I got proof of all these in fact It was marked on the building inspection and it was a Brian and Nelson they actually came over and green me the give me the green light With this storage building was already in existence and I just I just I never thought I was gonna I was doing something wrong. Obviously I've been here three times. This is my fourth time Why will I make everything legal with with permission? And not do that. I mean that just don't make no sense to me. I wanted to do it, right? It's just that he was working with me And I just assumed that he was taking care of everything Um, this is the first time I I ever done these so I don't have a lot of experience Uh, the fact that I have to install Uh, uh pizza oven in there. I did it by a license company. It was done, right? Uh, I I actually hired three different companies to make sure that was drawing. It was done, right? and and so but but anyway, so But at this point in time, I just like to just Do a ride and finish it and just get on with my business. Okay, mr. Monner any questions for the applicant? No, okay. Thank you very much. You can sit down down. We'll discuss it anybody else in the public like to talk I'm manning neighbor two doors down my office is there and Great talk area great talk area He's a real asset to that neighborhood all the all the local businesses and the people in the neighborhood walk there And has a nice outside feel to it and We all want him to survive, you know, he he's he's an asset to our to our community there and uh If any of you have been in the restaurant business, I don't wish that on anybody It's a it's a very very difficult. I think many probably We made that with that. It's it's a very tough business And so, um, if he if he hears to building codes Brings the code and also environmental health department because it seems like I think that you guys should approve this project Thank you. Thanks, Dennis Okay, if no one else from the public wants to speak we'll bring it back to the commission and For discussion and see what you like to do I'm just curious why the recommendation for denial Um, because the strict, um, interpretation of the code for a variance we couldn't find Findings of special circumstance And the applicant talked about that, you know, he worked with brine and went through Inspections and stuff. Do we have records of that? Is that? So that that is correct. We are there there is definitely, um, a portion of this that should have been caught during the building inspections The oven was Was caught and that was eventually brought into compliance, but the change in the square footage for that area Okay, um, was not caught at the time of building. Okay, very good Okay, well go ahead jump in there because uh, i'm using extremely tough on variances. Yes, um And I especially don't like applications that come in through code enforcement Sort of like build it and then beg for forgiveness later, but In this case, uh I think I can support this application and we don't really have a complete Site plan of the parcel here, but the special circumstance i'm seeing is that the Western property line Is um, it's not at a 90 degree angle And that's what's really causing the side-yard setback issue For the new storage and That would I think that the shape of the parcel is really the The reason that he was not able to get this in with the proper side-yard setback Well in the existing restaurant is legal non-conforming though, right? Yeah, so Okay, anybody I'm concerned. What happens to your restaurant without the storage area? I guess um On the worst case I would probably have to Have some kind of a trailer. Okay, you've answered my question And and that might be okay with you guys, but may not be okay with the health department Just like Yeah, we understand. Yeah, well, you know, we've heard tonight about the vacancies in the village and you know You can drive through this number of places down there that are vacant Now I've never seen it this bad and our economy is booming So I'm not quite sure what the problem is, but I could probably support this just to age or business to continue Peter well, so when we say support it that means Bring it up to code and then but not change the envelope basically just fix it Yeah, based on all the conditions they put that the staff is listed. I support that We've got the list right here, so if you're okay with it, we'll discuss it and take a vote and we'll We'll see where it goes Oh, yeah, no that no you can work with staff to to look at how we do that it would go through a little different process, so No, just because we haven't voted yet. You're not there yet You're welcome to leave but you'll go unknowing what we're gonna do so Well, we'll try to if you if you stop we'll get on with our business and then we'll Okay, Courtney, will you have anything you want to add? I think if the neighbors are good with that, I Okay, then I just I guess I'll bring it to the floor for a motion I'd move approval for the storage areas and Conditions that they've brought to code I'll second that so we have a first second all those in favor Wait, that's the condition all the conditions that are in the staff report Yeah, okay, so no discussion. We're done with it. Okay, all those in favor Hi, hi, you're good to go. So you can work with our staff to make sure you get the proper sign-offs this time Thank you, man We didn't hear that we just out of our meeting tonight Okay, so that that brings us to item c of the update of the general plan and land use map, okay I'm glad we had our training earlier the For those of you who miss it no free tacos So this evening I'm returning to you With the general plan cleanup This came before the planning commission in December with three new members on the panel I'm going to go through the The highlights if you have any questions on the specific properties and any modifications to the map I have slides on those. I'm not going to bring those up, but I can I'm prepared to answer any of your individual questions on the maps So the the first big change is to they're all pretty minor changes But to revise the table lu one and figure lu three To update it so that the wristman mansion park is shown on there and to show mcgregor park is completed And also to add the planned wristman park site Another cleanup item was within our multifamily residential density The general plan only established 20 dwelling units per acre Our zoning code has arranged between 10 dwelling units per acre up to 20 when we reviewed the density bonus Application on claire street It became apparent that when a density bonus application comes in the developer can take advantage of Either the zoning ordinance or the general plan whichever is Allows more density and so by our general plan just stating the 20 we wanted to clean that up and specify The 10 15 and 20 dwelling units per acre So that that loophole is closed for future density bonus applications Next is visitor accommodations So within when we updated the zoning map we got rid of the underlying zone of visitor serving And this would get rid of the land use designation of visitor Accommodations and it would align with the new zoning code in which we have a visitor server overlay now with a new base base zone For each parcel and this would have a visitor Accommodation overlay as well. So just bringing both maps into sync Next is for the village hotel Prior we didn't reference this as the former capital of theater site during our last meeting in december There was a request to also add the apns. There's actually multiple apns to the site. So I will do that if So directed tonight Add the apns to this as well But just to bring clarity that it was not the other hotels within the village that this Incentive is only for the capital of theater site Next is the zoning code within the the far allowances For to go beyond the incentives That that area includes all of them all and so this we clean this up when we rewrote when we did the zoning ordinance We really specified where that area is and we mapped it. So this is just cleaning up the language to also Clarify where that boundary is in order to utilize the incentives and the new zoning ordinance So one question that came out of the the last hearing was how Sorry, so during the last hearing there was a question of The the proposed change. There's a proposed edit to clarify there within Residential there's a max density under our general plan of that's established and it ranges between 10 to 20 units per acre There for commercial, there's a max floor area ratio that's Established and that is Along with the development standards. It really creates what's called the building envelope for a development on a site And the question came up. We've had calls within our commercial areas where now we allow Mixed use development. What is the density for mixed use development or you know our future if kings Plaza got redeveloped as mixed use or the mall. What's the maximum density? and in looking back in our past general plans and Zoning ordinances. We've never established a density within the community commercial zoning district or the mixed use zoning district And we created in our last zoning update the new regional commercial district. It was part of the cc So the the question of how how are we going to calculate that in the future? The initial reaction was we well, we haven't regulated it in the past So it would be the outcome of floor area ratio and the development standards But in looking at our new zoning code that we recently updated We actually we did establish a minimum of 20 units per acre within our commercial so within the cc and the the community commercial and the regional commercial so That would require that within those areas They'd be looking at floor area ratio and development standards of that building envelope But within that envelope you couldn't go beyond the 20 units per acre So The methodology of what's there works if we want to establish a density We can just clarify in the general plan that density Residential density in commercial areas Is a maximum of 20 units per acre or we can Remove that reference and it'll just be it'll fall back to the way It's always been a floor area ratio and development standards And then the question came in From the planning commission of well, how does it impact if we remove the density Of 20 units per acre. How does that impact us if we were to get a A density bonus application So with the density bonus application under state law the developer has to give something in order to get the density bonus So typically it's affordable housing projects and depending on the level of affordability the more affordable They make it and that's the sale price or the rental price the more units they get And within the density bonus regulations you can get up to a 35 percent density bonus And Under that scenario what you'd be providing quite a few I think it's 35 percent of the project would be affordable to very low income residents So How would this work if we remove the density? First I'll go through how it works if you keep the density so at 20 units per acre You could get a developer if they give a benefit can get up to 27 units per acre If in the commercial area, we did not have a density limit A developer Would be able to take that building envelope and put 20 units per acre in there put 30 units per acre in there As long as it's within the height and the setbacks and the parking standard So in looking at this and I've leaned on a few Um People that have worked with the density bonus law Frequently and an attorney that works with it frequently And they said most likely you'll never see an application for a density bonus if you don't have an established density Because they have to show a cost savings if they're going to ask for more density And there's a real hard argument to be made if if it's endless density So by removing the density what happens is you can get a lot more smaller units essentially The other can I get a clarification because we talked about about this and I thought the net net was With or without the 20 units density description It was a it was a zero sum in terms of the the increased number of units in other words if you wanted If you are a pro development person you wanted an increased density and more affordable housing It wouldn't matter it wouldn't affect this decision in other words if I was to say okay I want a lot of affordable housing therefore i'm going to put in the 20 units or leave the 20 units per acre in there So that they can get to 27 As opposed to leaving it out In which case you said they could maybe get 30 So so is that so is the The 20 is more restrictive So in fact, it's not a zero sum. It's it's with that with removing it We could conceivably someone could come in and say I want a lot of affordable housing High density 30 units and we wouldn't have that restriction So if somebody were to come in under the if we had 20 units per acre there's They would have to provide affordable housing in order to get up to the 27 But a a commercial developer could come in And say i'm going to build 30 market rate units and they're not affordable their market rate at that point One out of every seven units has to be deed restricted per the city standards But you're not going to get as many affordable units out of our project as you would out of a density bonus project But you could have more density Regardless, you can have more density and the higher the density goes the more affordable Units you'll get because one for every seven units has to be deed restricted in the city of capitol Thank you Okay, so the other reason that I think this is highly Unlikely on some of our larger parcels in the incentivized area of capitol Is that within the cc zone and the cr zone this is around the mall and the 41st intersection with capitol a road There's incentives for community benefits, which include You know improving Sidewalks and providing public art and creating jobs and there's a lot that can be It's not just tied to affordable housing And those incentives increase the floor area um In the cc zone from one to two And in the cr zone from 1.5 to two So it's quite a Large incentive and it gives them a lot more flexibility in what they want to bring to the table in terms of The gifts to the community in order to get these higher numbers. So I For those areas just along 41st. I don't see it as a as an issue, but I think it's it's Highly unlikely that we would see a density bonus application if we remove the density This change intended to encourage affordable housing Is that the idea, you know, it's just to be consistent with the way the General plan has been It was really to clean up the question when we get the phone calls of how do you calculate because I I think the floor area ratio is a better metric For this kind of an area and the problem I have is that you could have one condominium with four bedrooms or two condominiums with two bedrooms each and I mean, what's the difference? That's why I'd rather look at it from the standpoint of the floor area ratio than units It's not a good metric. Well, it seems to me we have a little more control than the state pushing that density bonus on us as well, so I would agree Which one works best to facilitate the mall redevelopment So I would say So it to facilitate redevelopment, I would say removing the density does but honestly if I were A developer it may it may give them more security in there If they see it that there's 20 units per acre and that's what they can develop up to it's more of a defined number Then no number at all, you know, so It's hard but to facilitate and have the most Flexibility in a development. It would really be to remove that Standard of 20 that's one unit for every 2,000 square feet roughly. Mm-hmm. Exactly And I'm just wondering is that a feasible restriction To allow them to develop them all to include housing and become financially feasible to do that Or do they need a higher density? You know one time we had rm 1000 which was which was one unit for every 1000 square feet Yeah um, I have sent staff reports and I've sent I've let The mall developer with the recent acquisition let them know that we were looking at this And they haven't said that either way as a problem. So Okay Is that That's it. So basically it was an either or Decision this evening. So with that our recommendation is that the planning commission discuss the general plan amendments and Provide direction and a positive recommendation to the city council So any questions I do have a question a lot of catch up here for Those of you new on the Yeah, so the the one about the The far hotel floor area ratio for just the capitol Hope theater site could you maybe some of you guys have been here a while tell me why that's Just that site Why why couldn't someone build a hotel in the mercantile and have that same floor area ratio relaxation Why are we why is it specific to that site? Yeah, I don't I don't know if I I don't really have maybe key as into I don't know I think initially we weren't going to discuss the theater site. We kind of left it as its own Thing and then we get caught up in the do you remember how it came to that? There's other restrictions about that site. I think is the height and stuff that kind of I I believe it was The outcome of a very long process with the general plan update plan focused quite a bit on the theater site We actually had to spend a whole day doing a mock design and so forth. So that that site has been treated As a special standable site and I mean you make a good point. There may be other sites somewhere someday that Yeah, so why goes the trouble of specifying This theater site only and just leave it the way it is across that bridge when we come to it So I will say that I think the intent during the general plan right The writing of the general plan was I think the focus was on that theater site. So this would be reflecting all the The meetings that occurred and the conversations that happened but If you think it should be broadened then that would be an amendment to the general plan and something that Can be discussed if it should be applied to other sites other than Like a special privilege to one particular plot of land. Well, it's good to get fresh eyes on this because you know someone that's sort of like, you know, oh, yeah good point You know, we get so focused on that site. We did I think it's because peter I think it's because it's really the vacant lot and you're right the mercantile in fact the mercantile has come to us Yeah, recently and with some concept. So I think it's just because it was vacant and there's a lot of discussion about what's going to happen a lot of concern from the community what was going to happen there realistically it probably is unique and that There isn't anything that comes close to that potential for development. They were talking like 50 units A pretty large project there. I don't know where else we could really do that Anyway, I don't like the apn's very much for as a I don't know where that came from but apns aren't really a good way to designate Properties in a document like a general plan or a zoning code because they change So, well, let me clarify what what you're asking in this and that is Currently it's not specific But the verbiage is not specific to that site and you want to say oh, I understand the City Council or rather the planning commission wanted to be specific to that site So let's add those added words to that and I'm suggesting Well, I don't add them. I mean, yeah, well the the capital Uh, the hotel is in there. I guess yeah, I guess they're trying to make it more specific so I mean that's our our role here is to make a recommendation to Accept it give a direction go to the city council. So, you know, that's that's our choice here is to decide whether we want to include or not include it What is the well, I think uh Although I think peter makes some good Points, I think we shouldn't at this point rock that boat and Really kind of read but you want to Not include the apn's just have it named the Yeah, that's a minor thing that I I don't know where that came from, but I don't think that I think we just called the capital at the inner site and We all know what this well, but rocking the boat would be to add those words in there They're currently not there. So you're you're trying you're creating a special special case. Just leave them not there That's not rocking the boat. That's leaving the way it is I think what they're trying to do is conform to what had really been the intent That was intent of the general plan is what they're trying to tie back clamp that general plan. I did that's what the meetings were about. So You know, I've always thought the the far was an end run around all the zoning requirements that we've established For the hotel for everything for any place it applies Well, I'd like to make a motion to Agree with the general plan cleanup with the exception of this particular item I'll second that So It's not necessarily a motion right we're just you're just looking for direction We're gonna what the motion is going to be to accept your your presentation with the direction of Peter as we have a first and second I guess agreement to move towards not including the wording and I'd add that wording. Yeah, it would be a yeah, so a positive recommendation, but to not include that wording Yeah, what about that other the one other issue that we talked about? Yeah, there was a density. Yeah The density we need to make use without any specific Unit density. I'm I'm totally on board with that myself. So Yeah, that's what they have in here. I agree with it Is that good enough? Yep. So remove so I'll make a motion that well if we have a motion Well, I guess you'd have to amend your motion to accept the report with the direction of Not having the density component and not adding this other wording. Is that right? Well, the report doesn't have the density in it. So that's accepting the report This is the only exception we take to the report. Okay. Are you are we clear on that? Is it do we all agree on that or was a motion in a second, but I don't know if everybody I'm sure on how they were presenting that issue. Okay, so I'm clear that that The record would be a positive recommendation to accept not not to accept this change that's the red line shown in the slide So not to add the words at the former capital of theater site And in terms of density that will clarify as the as is redlined that density in a mixed use or a commercial setting will be Regulated through far rather than the dwelling in its per acre And I will be coming back with a zoning code moment for that Okay, is everyone good with that? I'd like to strike the whole thing Start over let's do another general plan. So we still we have we have a motion. So all those in favor Hi So now we're down to uh directors report Okay, I have just one item. Well, I guess two items I haven't seen you all since december and the big update is that merlone guy or bought them all or bought the sears site So that was withdrawn. The appeal was officially withdrawn at the last meeting And so I'll be keeping you in the loop. I've invited them to attend a planning commission in the near future I want them to provide you with an update. So we're looking at scheduling that now so that we'll know Did we have some role in uh making that happen by Do you think the way their application was handled? By sears with with uh, yeah seratage, you know, I I believe that they have been hoping that this would Occur for quite some time. They've been pursuing that And it's more of what was going on between Them talking with the new york office versus what was happening in our area. So a big disconnect Um, so hopefully they'll be coming too soon. And then the other thing is we've got a special meeting in two weeks for the um Changes to the coastal or to our zoning for the updated lcp Um, I did ask the coastal commission if they had a couple staff members That would be willing to attend so that they could explain some of their changes that they're requesting And they've accepted and I wanted to check in with our planning commission um If if that seems Like a good route to to have them here so they can go over any questions you may have um And i'm seeing kind of nodding of heads Having the coastal commission having the coastal commission present for that means we need a sergeant of arms our chairman wants to Read him out. I'll be I'll be Okay, so and And by wednesday of next week, you'll have new and for some of you you're first Binder of the zoning code changes So There'll be red lines of all the coastal commission's changes and the first page will be a key That will I'll highlight the ones that I think are Should be adopted and aren't controversial and I'll kind of I'll have a key that kind of highlights which items I think we need a lot of discussion on and so I've been bringing that forward at this point. I do not have um The geological hazard sections a red line from the coastal commission and they provided me one copy of Non conforming and they were pretty drastic and the impact to the capitol residents would be Very severe in terms of what they were proposing and once I um Brought that up at one of our meetings of like how Just how impactful this would be to the residents they said at this time We'd suggest we move forward with the zoning code as it is without Going into the non conforming at this point so that um If the planning commission would prefer that that document if we continue to work on things with them when they're here and say No, we want to get geological hazards Figured out at this juncture and non conforming and not submit to the coastal commission until we have the whole document updated I think it will it'll it'll make it a longer process in front of the coastal commission rather than having 90 percent of the document adopted and holding back off Holding back on two chapters, but as you're reviewing just keep that in mind because i'm going to be looking for feedback Um on how you think I should proceed with this if it should be a one package and we keep working out the details or get the 90 done and let's deal with Geological hazards and non conforming later because they will have bigger impacts So with that that concludes my director's report and and if I could what about the orchard supply? I haven't been is there something new on the No updates at this point on orchard supply. I keep seeing speculation about home goods Well, they were an applicant for the sears building so I could see how that could happen. That would be a nice That's smart We just to be have concern about their signs um any other questions for staff and uh commission communications Well, I welcome welcome back mick and corny and peter. It's nice having you here And uh, so with that, I guess we'll adjourn to february 21st. Is that the correct date? 7 p.m. On february 21st Thank you very much 6 p.m I'm sorry. What's that at 6 p.m. At 6 p.m. Special meeting will start early. Okay, 6 p.m. On february 21st Yes, thank you