widened and straightened it out and on our side of the road, on the west side, it grew even more because they pushed the road further east to try and straighten that out because there's wrecks there and there's still wrecks there.  That's just been put in there or two putts and grannies. I respect you for that that you and my dad had talked about and this thing grew but this is what we talked about. So, like I said, when I first approached you and you said, well I don't have time for that right now. I don't have a gavel so I'll go ahead and just be loud. Good evening everyone. I'd like to call to order the meeting of the City of Santa Rosa Design Review Board December 19th, 2019. Thank you all for being here. Patty, may I have a roll call please? Let the record reflect that all board members are present except for Board Member Goldschlack. Thank you, Patty. Okay, on to item number two, Approval of the Minutes. We'll take these one at a time. Item 2.1 is Minutes from October 16th, 2019, Joint Cultural Heritage Board and Design Review Board Meeting. Anybody have any changes they need to address? Seeing none, we'll put those into the record. Item 2.2, Minutes from November 21st, 2019, Regular Meeting. Any Minutes from November 21st, 2019, Regular Meeting. Any changes? Noting none, we'll go ahead and put those into the record. And item number 2.3, December 5th, 2019, Regular Meeting Minutes. Any comments or changes needed there? Adam? Sorry. I had just a clarification for Condition 7, which was the use of the split face concrete. The split face concrete block wall that it should include the, using the split face block wall but trailing vegetation, so including the vegetation into that as well. That's all. For the record, we corrected it since this came out and that's in there, so we're good. On item 10, I recall that being a shall. And we switched that to shall as well. So I'll just kind of go through real quickly. We switched to shall. It says number 3, it says consider additional windows and all residential building and walls on four plans that can accept windows in order to better animate and activate these elevations. We changed that to a shall. And we said shall use split face block. And if you use split face block, you will soften it with landscaping. That gives them the ability to do it from the bottom up on some that are... That's perfect. And then we said shall modify color and materials board with particular attention to window trim and building trim colors, including horizontal band between floors 1 and 2 so that the roof siding and colors blend in with the natural palette of the surrounding site. We did that a shall as well. And then we did shall incorporate coastal live oak, valley oak, black oak, all of them bay tree species in the required 2, 240 tree mitigation. Any other? Yeah, one clarification on number 6. It was the banding from the second and third levels. Not from the ground level to the change in material. Okay. Patty, did you get that? Okay. And with that conversation, seeing no other items needing to be addressed, item 2.3 is in the record. Item number 3, board business. So this is where we differentiate ourselves from other boards and commissions in the city of Santa Rosa. So I'll go ahead and read our purview. Purview is project review. The review authority shall consider the location, design, site plan configuration, overall effect of the proposed project upon surrounding properties and the city in general. Review shall be conducted by comparing the proposed project to the general plan, any applicable, specific plan, applicable zoning code standards and requirements, consistency of the project within the city's design guidelines, architectural criteria for special areas and other applicable city requirements, i.e. policy statements and development plans. So that's this board's purview. Also, just a couple of administrative items for tonight's meeting. We have six items on the agenda. It should be a rather long meeting. So the way that we're going to handle breaks is as long as we have a quorum at the dais, we can take individual breaks for restroom and eating. There is food up in the mayor's conference room. The warm stuff is in the oven, staying warm. And the cold stuff Patty will put out here in a little while. So another passes over to the left of Patty there to get into the mayor's conference room. So that's how we're going to play it and try it out to see if we can keep things rolling here at the dais and keep the meeting efficient. So, and I'll just remind everybody that we can also be succinct with our comments. So that's board business. At this time, I'd like to go to item number four, public comment. This would be public comment within the board's purview for items that are not on the agenda tonight. Each item on the agenda will have its own public comment period. Are there any members of the public wishing to provide comment to the board? Seeing no one approach the microphones, I will go ahead and close public comment. Statements of abstentions by board members. I know that we have some tonight. So, Drew, you have no abstentions tonight? I have no abstentions tonight. Henry. I need to abstain from item 6.2. Oren. Chairman Kinkate, I have to abstain from item 6.1. I have a text prompting to Patty for the remaining 6.5 and 6.6. With enough prompting, I will be here to assist with those projects. Super. I appreciate you being available for those. Otherwise, we would lose quorum for those, I believe. Yes. Okay. Adam, any abstentions? No abstentions. Great. Brett, abstentions? Yes. I have to abstain from 6.5 and 6.6. Okay. So, you see we're juggling the quorum tonight. So, thank you for that, everybody, and for being available for the items that you can participate in. Okay. Moving on to scheduled items. We are on to schedule items 6.1. This is modification to final items. We are on to schedule items 6.1. This is modification to final design review. Marlowe Commons at 2199 Marlowe Road, 2199 and 2039 Marlowe and 2041 Marlowe Road, 2045 Grenville Road. This is file number dr19-082. And I will turn it over to planner Susie Murray. Good evening, Chair Kinkate, and remaining members of the design review board. The project before you this evening is the Marlowe Commons project. It has been before the board before, and it's back for some modifications to the final design review. The approved project was to subdivide a 4.84 acre area into 44 individual parcels and develop 64 attached dwelling units. So some parcels will have a single family residential unit, and I believe 20 of them will be developed with duplexes. There are no changes in that plan. The design review, which was before the board on June 21, 2018, when it gets into the details of the changes in the plans, I'm going to hand that off. So I'm just giving you an overview from here. The site is in the northwest quadrant of Santa Rosa. Where are we? Santa Rosa on just north of the intersection of Grenville Road and Marlowe Road. There's an aerial view. The general plan land use designation is medium density residential, and it's within the R318 zoning district, which is consistent with the general plan land use designation. And there's the site. The modifications being requested are really triggered by changes in the floor plans, which changes the exterior elevations, and then they're also making some changes to the exterior finishing materials. Here's an example of one of the side-by-sides. Again, you're going to see a lot more of this in the next presentation. The top is the approved plan, and the lower one is the proposed, and this is for plan one. Here's the approved site plan. Again, there aren't any changes really to the approved site plan. There are still the same units and same lot configuration. The project was found in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. It qualified for an infill exemption. The proposed changes fall within the scope of the original review. There were a couple of public comments. One on the top is an aerial view of the site, and the arrow points to a driveway that goes to a parcel to the north. One of the conditions of approval on the original plan required a new curb cut. What it didn't specify in that condition is that there would also be a driveway that connected that home to the curb cut at the street. So the applicant and the property owner at 2299 Marlowe have been in discussion. I think they've come to a resolution. They've worked with the city and will handle it through the encroachment permit process. The second public comment that we received had to do with the property where that arrow was pointing, and I apologize for not putting the address up there. It's 2043 Gernville Road, and it's a senior board and care facility, and the property owner there contacted me. I put him in contact with the applicant. His concern was how high the fence would be because he doesn't want his seniors on that side of the home being disturbed by traffic, and I don't see that as being a problem. I think it was considered during the original project, but I don't know what their discussions were. So with that, it's recommended by the Planning and Economic Development Department that the Design Review Board grant final design review for the Marlowe Commons, a 44 lot, 64 unit attached residential development located at 2199 Marlowe Road and 2039, 2041, and 2045 Gernville Road. And that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer questions, and I'm going to go ahead and set up the applicant's presentation. I think we'll go ahead and hear from the applicant and then hit them both list questions. So welcome, and if you can introduce yourself and your relation to the project, that would be excellent. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Adam Gardner with William Hesmohaltz Architects, WHA. I'll go through a little more detail than Susie had done, but I've got some overview shots and slides as well. Again, we're here for some minor floor plan and elevation modifications, as well as some color and material changes. Overview site plan, a little close-up for context. And then the approved site plan, it's color coded by plan type, so you can see there's a variety. There's actually six floor plans, five of them are used multiple times and one's used once. As Susie mentioned, 44 lots are units, and 20 of those have duplex units that are on the second floor over the garages. The proposed site plan is essentially the same. The only real difference is we kind of switch plan one and two a little bit. We modified the floor plan layout a little bit, so the nomenclature of plan one and two are kind of switched. So we have the exact same number of units on plan three, four, and five, and six. In plan one and two, there's a little change in the distribution of the number of units. So in overview, again, really nothing's changed in terms of the overall project. It's really just the design modifications, and I can go into why those occurred. We were brought on by the property owner, Dan Morgan, as architect to complete the design. Another architect, of course, was the original designer. As we were brought on, so we had some fresh ideas and some ways to maybe refine and update the four plans. So it's typical, the plans were kind of in a schematic design stage at the end of design review. Usually when we go into construction documents, we take a fresh look and try and look at the floor plan layouts, clean up some of the little intricacies that might occur during that schematic design that may not have been fully refined. So as a result of that, we're able to open up some of the four plans a little more. The kitchen's a little more wide open on a few. Great rooms kind of relate a little better. So these floor plans with their updates required a few exterior changes. We maintained the flat roofs and the simple massing, the perforated metal awnings. The windows are asymmetrically placed with modern window patterns. The window colors remain as black. We have metal and glass garage doors, corrugated metal and stucco siding, which was the two materials that were previously proposed. And then we also have a modern horizontal fence. So in terms of the actual changes that we're asking for, it's just about three or four. Approving the floor plan changes resulted in some exterior door, wall and window placement changes. The footprints are essentially the same. They're not really any deeper or wider or taller. So the massing maintained itself. There was a cantilevered balcony, which I'll show you some images of at the fronts of three or four of the plans that was in a secondary bedroom and it had a French door. So the only way to get natural ventilation in that room was to actually open a French door so there was no window. So we had a little concern about that as well as privacy and security issues, as well as maintenance. It was cantilevered about five feet. We usually try to keep cantilevers to about two feet or so, just for structural concerns. There was this z-shaped fin detail that we felt was a little out of place with the rest of the design. So I'll show you a picture of that and how we've changed it. We've also added two exterior materials. Instead of just stucco and a corrugated metal, we've now included a cementitious board and batten siding as well as a cementitious vertical siding. And then we've also added, for more variety, one more body color and four accent colors. And the accent colors are used universally, either as a front door or as a body style. This is an image of plan one, the proposed. And you can see this is a side-by-side attached unit. These are both single-family homes without the second units. And you can see the variety of materials, the board and batten, the corrugated metal and the stucco, and then the variety of colors. This slide is the one on the left there, plan one. That's the flat image of the previous image they just showed you. And then on the right was the approved. The naming of the plans is a little different. So we just went one through six. Previously they were kind of more descriptive. So you can see that on the left, we've a little more variety in color, a few more materials, but overall the massing and the level of detail has been maintained. The cantilevered balcony on the right-hand side, you can see it, that it's kind of right above the garage doors. That's the element that we are proposing removing and replacing with a fixed window with a horizontal slider and then the awning. This is a second plan. I'll just kind of go through the next plans relatively quickly. This is plan two. This is a side-by-side comparison. This is plan three. Now this is the duplex with the second unit above. So it's a little wider and that shared stairway is actually leading up to those second units. This is plan three with the second access. Plan four. Plan five. This plan is interestingly built as a single-family standalone unit as well as an attached. So the previous submittal had the approved elevation shown singly, so we've done the same. That's why it's just not as a paired. But you can see the massing is essentially the same. The details are very similar, but we've just kind of updated them to match the floor plans. And then lastly, plan six, which is only used once on lot 21. It's a wide shallow house. You can see that we have movement, color, materials, creating a pretty varied elevation, very similar to what was approved. But in our mind, we wanted to add a little more color, a little more variety to the materials. On the left are the proposed colors. Again, I mentioned we had one additional body color for a total of five. There were four previously. And we also added four accent colors, a greater selection of body and accent colors creates more variety and adds pop of colors to bring a more modern feel to the palette. So that concludes my presentation. I have just a series of slides of the floor plans of your interest. I could go through each one in detail, but for purposes of time, I'll just answer questions if you have any. Great. Thank you for the presentation. Much appreciated. At this time, I'm going to go ahead and open up for public comment. In that way, we can address the questions and comments with the applicant and staff from the public. So at this time, I have one card. Gary Barsuglia. Barsuglia. Yes. Thank you. I'm Gary Barsuglia, representing the property at 2299 Marlowe Road, the driveway issue. It was condition 32 of the DAC report back in June of 18 when I spoke to you. It came up. Some of you are familiar with the lot. This has been our access to the property for over 100 years, as the property's been in the family for well over 100 years now. I'd like to thank Ms. Murray and Mr. Morgan for working with me on this issue. It's always been the issue, number one issue for us as a family to retain our access to our property for obvious reasons. I'm told it's resolved. Mr. Morgan's agreed to pay the cost to pay that. Mr. Morgan's agreed to pay the cost to pay that. Mr. Morgan's agreed to pay the cost to pay that. Somehow that was left out of the DAC report because the DAC report, item 32 was put in at the last minute. So I think it was just one of those issues. But I do have a question about the DAC item 32 report. When it was inserted, it called for temporary access. Now I understand the city's desire to eliminate a temporary access to our property. So I think that's one of the issues there. So my only question would be is why would it be temporary? I understand the frontage along cross-point would enter on to cross-point. That's not the issue. But the issue is for this one house there, it might be problematic. But other than that, I would support Mr. Morgan's changes. He's been excellent to work with. Ms. Murray has been excellent to work with. I'm glad to hear that people were willing to work together. So that's great. And we'll have Ms. Murray address the question. The temporary driveway had to do with future construction of the site, if any. It's a public right-of-way piece of land, kind of a surplus piece of land. And the only thing temporary is the word temporary in the DAC condition. It will be constructed as a regular driveway cut with the sidewalk and everything there. So it will meet city standards temporary and that it can be replaced at a future date. Temporary like every driveway is probably temporary in some aspect of the word. So I think that temporary word was probably just put in there like the driveway was left out. It will be resolved. I've spoken to engineering and we'll be able to get that new driveway across the city parcel to replace the one that's there now where it's further away from the Marlowe Commons development project and provide access to 2299 Marlowe. Great. Thank you. And any other members of the public wishing to speak on item 6.1? Go ahead and close public comment. And we'll bring it back to the board for questions. Go ahead and address questions to staff or the applicant. Drew, no questions. Henry? You have a physical color board? Or we're going to rely on the digital color board? I do not have one. Adam, questions? No questions. Brett, questions? No questions. Great. And I have no questions either. At this time, I would look for a motion and the second to get us started on discussion. You shall have one. I move to approve modification to final design review. Marlowe Commons, 2199 Marlowe Road, file number DR-19082, wave reading of the text. Would like to second that. Okay, so we've got a motion and a second to approve the modifications. Comments? Drew? Good job. Looks better than the original one. I like the colors. And get your point about the cantilever French door. So I think this is a nice change. It's modern. It's cool. The only thing that I kind of was scratching my head on was the garage door. But it just seems a little dark compared to everything else. But that's about my only comment. Good job. Thanks for a great package. That's it. Thanks. Thank you, Drew. Henry. Can I echo those same comments? I think it's a great job. I looked at the new color palette. I was hoping to see it live just because sometimes I know from my experience, the digital stuff doesn't always translate to what the actual colors are. But if it's close to what the digital palette is, I think it's going to be a very successful project. And look forward to seeing it, Bill. Thank you, Henry. Adam. I also appreciate the updates and a great presentation to run through all of the modifications and your design rationale as well. Thank you for that. That's good. And no issues with what you've come up with. Same with Drew. The only quibble was with the dark garage door. It did seem kind of like these big voids. It's a big, sort of very dark panel that could be lightened up somehow or modified, but not a deal breaker. Thank you. Thank you, Adam. Brett. No comments. And I have no comments. And I hear a potential lighter color for the garage door. And we might as well put it in as a consider just so that it's in the record. And that was our only comment. It's not a shall. It's just a consider. So does somebody want to make that friendly amendment? Consider a lighter color for the garage door? Sure, I'll do that. The applicant shall consider. How about just consider? Yeah, we'll just consider. The applicant, please consider a lighter treatment for the garage door. Does the motioner accept that friendly amendment? I accept the friendly amendment. Does the second accept the friendly amendment? I accept as well. Super. Okay. Patty, you may have a roll call, please. Corden Brock. Aye. Weigl. Aye. Sharon. Aye. Wicks. Aye. Kincaid. Aye. Congratulations. Motion's approved. Thank you very much. Go ahead and take a moment to change up the planners and let Board Member Wicks head for the door for a moment. Okay. We're clear.  This is a concept design review for Santa Rosa Avenue Apartments at 2905 Santa Rosa Avenue file number DR19-085. And we'll take a moment to move on to item 6.2. We have staff 085 and we have Planner Andrew Trimble to give us a staff presentation. It's all yours, Andrew, when you're ready. Thank you, Chair Kincaid. Good afternoon, members of the Design Review Board. The project before you for concept design review today is Santa Rosa Avenue Apartments at 2905 Santa Rosa Avenue. This project would provide 154 low income units with a total of 3.84 acres. As I mentioned, there would be 140, 154 units proposed. The building would be a five storey building approximately 53 feet in height. There's some elevators, shafts that would have a total of 154 units proposed. The building would be a five storey building approximately 53 feet in height. There's some elevators, shafts that would have a total of 154 units proposed. There's some elevators, shafts that would exceed that 53 feet. There will be indoor and outdoor community amenities proposed and the applicant will describe those in greater detail as well as 248 parking spaces consisting of covered parking and uncovered parking. The covered parking would be designed to host solar panels and I think as the applicant will describe the goal of this project is to be net zero in the city. The project location is at 2905 Santa Rosa Avenue. It's on the southern part of Santa Rosa Avenue within the city limits. We can see within a quarter mile distance, we're near to the south of the Santa Rosa Avenue Plaza shopping center immediately adjacent to Highway 101 and then across the street from a variety of residential developments. We can see a lot of traffic on the south side of the city. We're positioned within the city on the southern south side of the city in close proximity to retail goods and services employment opportunities as well as some light industrial employment opportunities as well and then also benefits from access to 101 via Yolanda Avenue, so here we can see that the project site is within the general plan retail and business services land use designation and is owned general commercial and it's also within the Santa Rosa Avenue corridor priority development area that's established due to its proximity to 101. As a result of that, the land use analysis and entitlements do include the for the land use multifamily use that is a permitted use in general commercial zoning districts pursuant to the resilient city measures that allow for a reduction in the use requirements as well as design review approval is delegated to the zoning administrator through minor design review, concept design review before the design review board is required. The project is seeking CalHFA planning and so planning staff completed land use analysis in advance of both their pre-application development review and today's review as well. We did issue zoning clearance for the land use component on November 19 because it is a permitted use. Going forward the project will need to submit formal application for minor design review as well as for density bonus in order to provide the project to the zoning administrator. The project is limited to 24 units because the project is 100% affordable then the density bonus eligibility when reviewed and confirmed would allow for three incentives or concessions as well as unlimited waivers. The applicant is here to provide the project details. We do have a view here of that. Start up. Fantastic. Thank you for having me here tonight. I appreciate it. My name is Jake Lingo. I'm here on behalf of integrated community development and I will be presenting two projects to you tonight. I've had this one and the next one on the agenda. I thought I would mention that now so I don't repeat a bunch of information going forward. I'd like to thank Andrew Tripple who has done a fantastic job of helping us through the process so I commend you and I thank you for that. I'd also like to thank you the DRB board. Having us here tonight I like to engage in the public process. I do want to understand what the needs, what the concerns are of the neighborhood of locals and take that input and try to work with you to find positive solutions so thank you for this opportunity. Also, I want to thank everyone who has been here tonight. I'm with the community and we are a fully integrated real estate development firm. We specialize in all aspects of real estate development primarily focused on affordable housing. We focus on creating environments that uplift communities by being sustainable, socially responsible and also economically viable. Our strategic nonprofit in the affordable housing industry for over 25 years. Together, we've created or developed and constructed 75 developments, we're totally close to 5,000 units throughout the state of California. We've secured $2 billion worth of public and private financing owner to construct those developments. I think it's noteworthy as well, we've never sold the development. When we come to a community, we aim to be a part of that community, foster a relationship and hopefully do more than one development. And that leads us to kind of the next thing I was gonna say, it's really a hallmark of our business is the amount of repeat business that we do do. If you were to look at a list of our portfolio, you'll see that we'll do a lot of development in one area. And I think that stands a testament to who we are. We stand behind our product. If we come in and we tell you it's gonna look or be managed a certain way, we've gotta deliver upon that. And so we take a lot of pride in that. And so I think I'll reiterate, I hope that we can do a lot here in Santa Rosa. It's a fantastic community. Although we don't own anything in Santa Rosa, we do have assets in Calistoga and Cloverdale. We've got a significant part of our portfolio in Northern California and the East Bay. So we've got strong regional management in this area. Santa Rosa is a beautiful town. It's got tremendous opportunity. And you've got a dire need for new housing units. And so the city leadership is really, as we've seen, take tremendous efforts in trying to encourage this development. We're now trying to bring our resources and bring some of these state resources to the city to start to help alleviate this. And we know it's been exacerbated by the wildfires. So all of these things coming together, we're hoping to, with this development, at least bring 154 units of affordable housing to help alleviate this crisis. One of the first steps we took when we arrived in Santa Rosa, we reached out to Hedgebeth Architects. That's the reason Warren isn't sitting there tonight, because we had worked with him in Cloverdale. He reached out to me. I'm working on a 28-acre master plan community in Cloverdale. It's our second development we'll be doing in Cloverdale. And he had a real passion. It came across right away. But he also had a really strong understanding of Sonoma County. And he started to help me understand some of the other opportunities that were here. And so although this development is designed by YM Architects, it's an architecture firm we have worked with for over 20 years. We have a very long-standing relationship with them. We thought it made a lot of sense to bring the Hedgebeth team on as part of our development team so that we could understand what those local needs were and try to understand some of the architectural nuance. And so that is a reason they're actually, they are the lead architect on the Coana Springs development, which you guys will be seeing next up. By bringing YM together with Hedgebeth, we were able to incorporate high-density urban development techniques with thoughtful local knowledge in hopes of delivering a first-class apartment development to enrich the lives of Santa Rosa residents. We all know that Santa Rosa has a housing crisis. We have, the city's taken these tremendous steps by creating these priority development areas and trying to provide incentives to developers. And we're here trying to take advantage of that but help to impact this crisis and deliver new units. Also, the state under its new leadership with Governor Newsom has taken tremendous strides in actually trying to finance new housing. One of the things that Andrew pointed out is this isn't maybe a typical affordable housing deal structure, this is aimed at 50 to 80%. And this is what Governor Newsom calls his missing middle. It's the fact that we've had a lot of investment in very low-income units but not a lot in this income strata. To give you an idea, an individual that would apply for an apartment unit here would earn somewhere between $38,000 to $60,000 per year. A family of four would be targeting, their income would be between $54,000 and $86,000 a year. So this is really working-class families. These are working professionals. And in my opinion, these are the type of people we wanna keep in our communities. These combining factors have allowed us to present what we think is a first-class, amenity-rich affordable housing development which we are presenting to you right here. That brings us to the project before you. Andrew did a good job of pointing out its location. I won't try to copy too much but it's basically, it's a mixed-use neighborhood. We're located just off the 101 on Santa Rosa Avenue. It's across from a mobile home park. It's near a shopping center but it is within walking distance to a lot of amenities as well as public transportation. But what that also is, we're surrounded by a lot of different architectural styles and scales. There's no predominant type that is in that neighborhood. We're really kind of one of the first to do a new high-density residential right in this immediate neighborhood. So we're kind of defining some of the character of the neighborhood by, at the same time, trying to fit in. And then what I also, I don't know if you had an opportunity. I asked YM Architects to put together a project description and what their, some of their design inspiration was.  I hope you had a chance to check it out. But I will pull out just a couple of the key parts of that so that the people in the audience can understand what some of the idea behind the design was. I thought I was getting the hang of this. Go back to this picture, there you go. Thank you. Ryan Yanagita of YM Architects provided this design narrative. What he said was the design of the project is inspired by the rich architectural history of Santa Rosa while also looking towards the future of this rapidly changing and increasingly influential city in the North Bay. The design incorporates building materials and massing reminiscent of historic downtown Santa Rosa architecture. The use of a wash brick veneer and the overall scale of these naturally fortifying elements is inspired by the most significant historical buildings of Santa Rosa's past and in contrast through the use of modern minimalistic and contemporary design treatments. The exterior facade is firmly planted in the 21st century high density multi-family design vernacular. So is really his inspiration looking to the downtown, some of the brick buildings and historical references. But the use of modern insulated windows, repetition of contemporary and rectilinear design elements as well as the use of scale and repetition to break up the overall massing conveys the design language that incorporates symbolistic materials, massing in forms of the past but applies them to embrace a more current and uplifting contemporary modern design aesthetic. I appreciate Andrew's help. Thank you. So the architectural design in the layout here, it's a five-story elevator building. It should provide 154 units with units along both sides of the exit corridor. The building footprint is broken into two main L-shaped buildings. This breaks down the bulk, the mass and the scale of the structure. And it further defines the really the two outdoor recreational spaces, which we want to be a focal point of this development. It's a mini package I would say would compete with and perhaps surpass any new market rate development within the city. And that is what we wanted to do is really provide an enriched living experience for the residents here. It includes landscape courtyards. It has barbecue areas. It has fire pits. It has this immense 5,000 square foot pool and spa deck area that will include a pool house. We've also got play structures and fire pits with seating throughout. The indoor community space, we also wanted to make again a market rate development. One of the terms we've been using is a mixed income development with market rate amenities. The front portion of the building along Santa Rosa Avenue, this community space is going to include a business center. It's a lounge area. It has recreational room. It has indoor bicycle storage facilities. It's also going to have a fitness center that's located on the second floor, which will overlook Santa Rosa Avenue through ceiling to glass moment frame windows. I think it's going to be a really cool place to be able to work out and look at a really cool landscape. Our overall goal is to keep residents entertained on site, keep them the ability to be entertained, have this great living environment on site and to create a real sense of community. If you could just go to the keep the site plan up, is fine, or the landscape plan either one. Yeah, that's good and great. Okay, circulation is provided from two points of Ingress and Egress on Santa Rosa Avenue. We've had early meetings with engineering and fire to look at these Ingress and Egress. One of the asks from traffic was if we could install a traffic signal there at the entrance on the northern portion entrance. That is a shared entryway with the shopping center to the north. What they would like to see is a new traffic light with sidewalks to ensure safe and predictable traffic patterns for cars, pedestrians and cyclists. And we've agreed to do that. We are doing a traffic study to make sure that all of those are adequate and that will be completed in short order as well. The landscaping plan, it really provides what we're trying to create is a great streetscape with these Chinese pistachio along Santa Rosa Avenue. And then we thoughtfully planned out the open area recreation spaces to provide a sense of nature and warmth, but also in this high density, amenity rich development. This is a good time, Andrew touched on this, that this development has a goal to be net zero energy. So that means that we would be offsetting our entire electrical demand by the solar array on site. Now, one of the trade-offs there is we cannot plant as many shade trees because we need the carports in order to provide the space for the solar array. So you can imagine this is a pretty massive solar array in order to create net zero energy. But in our opinion, it's worth the trade-off because what a worthy goal in order to try to reduce that carbon footprint is, create this net zero environment but also passing that along to the residents. So hopefully that's a worthy trade-off. And we just, in closing, we believe that this opportunity before us, we can have a real positive impact on the residents of Santa Rosa. The Santa Rosa Avenue Apartments will connect jobs, housing and services while improving mobility options that reduce air pollution, encourage increased transit ridership. This is a true infill development. It provides opportunities for housing in an urban environment. And so our goal is to build a development that'll be attractive, sustainable and support modern family lifestyles while contributing to the housing shortage, alleviating the housing shortage here in Santa Rosa. So thank you for that time. I'm now here to answer any questions that you might have. Great, thank you for the presentation. Before we get into questions, I'm gonna go ahead and open it up for public comment. I have one speaker card, but that doesn't mean that more people can't speak. So we'll start off with Chris Grable. Chris, you got three minutes at the mic. Hi. Good evening. Yeah, I just, I wanted to speak, just in favor of these two projects, but specifically this project, I know I gotta speak to the one that you are, that you're currently addressing. I do have to pick up my daughter soon, so I hope that my comments can be extrapolated to be relevant to the next presentation as well. But as an affordable housing advocate, and then also in my work with what's called the Sonoma County Employers Housing Council, with some of the largest employers, including the major universities, colleges, hospitals, health providers, and schools, these projects, and this project, the income bracket that it serves, and the volume of folks that could be served by it, it's just really exciting to see projects of this scale come to Santa Rosa, especially since the city's been really trying to attract them. Really heartening to see success in intention and outcome there. What I would say is that, not only projects seem to be really well-designed, and obviously that is your wheelhouse, not mine. I'm the advocate for the housing. You guys are the architects and designers. But what I would say is that in my experience, and especially recently, the threshold for feasibility on these projects is directly related to timelines and how quickly you can move on them. The state funding, the public financing, all of those sources, along with your own development timelines and private financing, I would just encourage folks to keep in mind that what seems to be the make or break for a lot of these projects is the timelines and how quickly you can break ground and mobilize those resources, and especially the state resources that are time-bound. They have really distinct timelines, and so from my perspective, as someone who works on affordable housing developments, but also advocates on behalf of them for folks that are having a hard time recruiting and retaining working-class employees, I just wanted to say, yeah, go for it, and it's great to see that this is coming because it's what we asked for, thanks. Thank you, Mr. Grebel. Ma'am, I don't have a card for you, so if you want to introduce yourself, go ahead. My name is Linda Sheehan, and I'm thrilled, absolutely thrilled to see these three projects on here. We need the housing basally. My niece was offered a job that paid $30,000 more if she'd come to Santa Rosa than Sacramento. She refused, why? She couldn't afford the housing around here, and she was top in her field, and we lost someone in the medical profession. I just said no, so we really need this badly. Thank you for being here, and thank you for your comments, and hopefully we can get her back someday. Any other members of the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I will close public comment on this item and bring it back to the board. At this time, go ahead and stick with questions for staff or the applicant. Drew? I have no questions for staff or the applicant at this time. Thank you, Drew. Adam, questions? No questions right now. And Brett, questions? No questions at this time, are there? And I have no questions at this time, so we'll go ahead and bring it on with comments.  Cool, so thanks for being here. That's a good package, a lot of information for us to kind of digest, so I always appreciate that. I have a couple of comments, some are positive, some are not positive, but that's okay. So I think this is beginning to be superior design in my mind, particularly the Santa Rosa Ave, it's got a lot going on, it's got some depth, it's got different materiality, but then I move to the other elevations and I'm disappointed just because they don't have kind of the same kind of design complexity as the Santa Rosa Ave elevation. So I would encourage you to really take heed of our design guideline for four-sided architecture. However, YNM wants to interpret that, I'm okay with. I think based on what they've submitted here, I can trust them to take that comment and move it around all four sides. I really like, I think the brick veneer is interesting. I used to live in the southeast where everything is brick, and then I moved here and there's no brick. So I think it's really interesting to kind of take what is brick here, some of our cultural buildings and some of our older buildings and kind of reintegrate that in a modern way. So that was really, that's a nice design feature, I think that will not get lost on some people, but will probably get lost on a lot of people, which is okay. But what is unique about using a brick veneer facade is that you can vary the depth of it in terms of its spacing off of the insulation or sheeting or what have you behind it. And I think there's a real opportunity here for you to perhaps increase the depth just a little bit and to create some shadow lines around your windows and such that you would kind of traditionally have in kind of a more standard brick construction, even though you're probably not doing that. But I think that there's an opportunity there. I went on a tour a couple of years ago on an affordable housing project in New York and they talked about, well, what do you get for free? Well, we're using brick on the project, they just increase the depth of the brick to kind of create some thermal mass and some shadow lines, which is very nice. I'm not in love with paint color three on the color boards. What's interesting though is on the color board, it's kind of looks not so great, but on the rendering, it actually looks much better. Perhaps just evaluating that color a little bit. It is a nice contrast to the dark brick, I think, but it's kind of in this horrible hospital beige family. I would maybe evaluate that. And looking at the parking, that is a whole mess of parking. So I'm curious why a parking reduction wasn't pursued as one of the concessions for affordability. I guess that should have been a question I should have asked, but I guess it's more so tied to where you don't have a solar covered parking. I would encourage trying to find a way to integrate some more orchard style parking, which I think help with kind of the starkness of the parking lot, because there's just a lot of asphalt going on around this project. I would say if there isn't a sound wall on 101, find a way to incorporate one, or find a way to do something there. I think tenants and folks will find a way to, if that's an amenity of the project, it'll check a box for them, I think, pretty much. I really like the parklets and the layout of how that integrates into the pool area, and then how the pool area then spills kind of into the northeast, into this kind of other little park area. And it's a really nice connection between the indoor spaces and the outdoor spaces. And I think you've really leveraged your building mass to kind of take advantage of all of your green space that you're placing in there. And very often we see a lot of these large high density projects, and they kind of forget about kind of the green space component. And I think you've really taken a nice pass at how to make that integrate and work within both the building form, but also usable space between everything. Because it's accessible by everybody. It's not tucked somewhere in the corner. It's kind of just out in front for everyone. So I really appreciate that. The northern easement that's kind of behind the EVA turnaround. I'm just curious if any plantings could happen there. I think that might be a nice buffer, kind of adjacent project, sort of if it's a buyer intention area. I'm not really sure what's going on with that. And then I'm curious about outdoor lighting. I didn't see it in the package. I could have missed it, but I know that's something that the zoning administrator is going to be looking for as a lighting analysis of the exterior areas. But other than that, great project. Thanks so much. And I hope to never see you here again. I mean that in the best way, because you're on the accelerated path. You're going to see them on the next item. So we'll let you stay today. Adam, comments. Sure. And like that echo, the thank you for the package and for the initiative to do this kind of work here. Definitely necessary. And particularly in this area too, definitely appreciate the infill aspect as well. It's compliments what's somewhat on the other side of Santa Rosa Ave as well too, with the housing that's there and getting some on the primarily industrial, light industrial side is a benefit. Makes it a little bit more neighborhood-y. And to move forward with that, the neighborhood and the warmth personable side of things, I think to echo Drew also with the interesting, the interest that you've brought to the facade on the Santa Rosa Ave side is really great. And it's varied. You've got variation in color and texture. And I do think bringing that around will benefit too. It's going to be a five-story structure there. And it will kind of stick out along 101 there and also on Santa Rosa Ave. And stick out is just not necessarily negative, I don't think, but I think it's an opportunity for you to provide this. This is almost like a destination. Just down the road, there's a hotel being built that is about, I think about that height as well. And it's very visible and very apparent. And so this could be something that's sort of the entrance to Santa Rosa. And he sort of, for better or for worse, you know, you're entering Santa Rosa from the south when you get those auto rows and Santa Rosa Ave on your side. And if you have something that is this beautiful, warm, large apartment building, it can be a really great thing and announce both your project and both make that sort of a destination of the city. And so I don't want to forget that western side of the building and also, you know, coming from the south as well. So bringing that interest, the color palette, the textures around, I think in terms of the color palette, it's a bit drab and dark. And I think really kind of bringing in that warmth because there's plenty of, you know, metal facing along that Santa Rosa Ave corridor and on the 101 corridor with all the car dealerships. And so to have something that provides a counterpoint to that that is less, you know, I appreciate the modern look to it, but I also want to bring in some personable aspect to it that's saying that it's homes, it's people live there rather than it's, you know, continuation of the light industrial. And that can be done, I think, with that brick cladding, but then the wood cement fibresciting, the wood look to it is also a really great bringing in that warmth of the color and the texture. So going along with that, I'm moving towards the layouts but it does seem like the northern sections, I know there are easements there and probably is hopefully still underdeveloped but it seems a bit unfinished. The outsides seem a bit unfinished. You know, I could see some more thought going into there. I know that you're trying to do the net zero and I really appreciate the solar and all the sustainability initiatives that you're bringing into the project, definitely commendable. But, and you mentioned that you're struggling with that balance of trees, vegetation and then cramming in all that solar and getting everything there. You don't want the shade and that's a really difficult thing to do because you want to have both ideally, be able to get that aspect of the sun aspect while also having it be visually appealing. And so I think the, just the edges, both of the around the sides can, Drew's suggestion of a sound wall is interesting. I'm just looking at the layout. I do think that you've done a great job with how you've situated your buildings and you're really focusing on the Santa Rosa ad side of things and kind of bring everyone over there. The play structure area, the outdoor community spaces are nice and nestled in there. I want to see some more way to kind of buffer the 24-hour sound and bustle of 101 there. It is a 24-hour highway. And so specifically that southern edge of the pool, there's the fence, fencing around the plaza area and the trees and the tree buffering kind of stops. And I know that you want to have the sunshine come into that plaza area, but you're also going to be, if there's just the solar and there's the parking on the southern edge and there's no trees or anything that is buffering either the views of the highway and the views of the parking and the sound is problematic. I could just see that being kind of a loud place to hang out and a loud place to gather. Potentially on that fencing and that southern area of the plaza, thinking of vegetated screening, something coming up there. Because it's hard to, you don't have a lot of space with all the access. So I understand what you tried to do. You really tried to maximize that outdoor gathering spot, but there are ways you can really think vertically of getting some screening and it can be visual and oral. And so vegetated fencing, trellising somehow, columnar trees, going along with that. And then similarly with the western edge and figuring out how to, how to buffer a little bit from the highway to the structure. Just a bit more thought because again, shade is a problem with other solar, but you really wanna see some more softening. As far as the landscape design goes, I think it's a great job. I was really impressed with the plant pallet as well. I think your designer did a really good job. I really appreciate all the natives. It's very sensitive to the area. I mean, this is in a pretty urban area of town, but the plants that are there are really well-chosen. So kudos to that. With some of the, I think that definitely with the plant pallet for the non-tree species, some of the tree species, I think a little more thought can maybe go into that. It's specifically with the pistache and the crepe myrtle of there are other species out there that can maybe be, bring some interest to the area. So just thinking of a couple of other, a little more thought into the specific tree species that are thought of. And you can have ones that are of seasonal interest and then provide great shade on specifically along the center of the Ave area. And yeah, so looking at that a little bit, that covers my notes. But yeah, I definitely appreciate what you're doing here. And I think you're definitely on your way. Thank you. Thank you, Adam. Brett, comments. Sure. Yeah, thank you. This is a pretty exciting project. I like a lot of things about it. And I think Drew and Adam both touched on a number of things I was curious about, so I won't reiterate, but rather just agree on most of those, especially with the kind of attention to architecture on the West side versus how it's addressed on Santa Rosa Avenue. One thing I was curious about as well with some of the comments about the color warmth is if another type of brick or color of brick could be introduced as well. There's very complimentary colors for that type of product. And it might be helpful, especially maybe along the Santa Rosa Ave to kind of break up the massing a little bit more or something kind of to differentiate the backside. So that's exciting to see in particular. Love the idea of the balconies and patios that are kind of facing on to the public spaces that's really good for security and things like that. So I would encourage keeping those types of features, especially because they also act as kind of private respite spaces for the residents. I'm sure you're aware of that. I really like the features and kind of the image board that you've presented with some of the outdoor spaces and kind of the level of finishes. And I like how you really talked about providing market rate for these folks. And I think that's incredibly important in terms of just feeling like a human I guess or like a sense of belonging. The one comment I would have on that is just the play elements. You've gone with, I think on the architecture, a very clean kind of modern aesthetic. And so if that could also be applied to that type of equipment or that type of play, it doesn't necessarily have to be, I guess I always think of something from a catalog, but it's rather how the design is approached that can provide these types of spaces for the variety of children and people that will be living here. So that would be my only, I guess, comment in terms of the open space elements. And then I don't know if it's, I kind of in that same, that longer amenity area where you've got the two barbecue spaces in the play area. I wonder if there's opportunity to, it seems like the buffer to the parking is a little narrow. So is there, and I think maybe Adam was kind of touching on it, how do you buffer from that view? How do you create either through landscape islands or compact stalls, et cetera, or eliminating maybe parking along there, but that's 19, 20, 21 spaces. And that's, I think that maybe goes to say also with kind of the general kind of parking configuration and layout, but maybe that's a space where you could pick up some open space or amenity zones and really kind of highlight that side or bring in more planting or more trees in that space as well. I know it's giving up parking is quite a challenge, but that can kind of maybe get at that lushness that maybe some people were talking about or maybe you spoke about a little bit with the trade-off with kind of the carports and then really making that space feel like it's a lush, well-canopied space to be in. You've done it, I think, the size of the spaces, the outdoor spaces north of the pool. Those are really, I think, really scaled really well. And then kind of I think I'm looking at kind of like plaza space with bistro-type lighting or hanging lighting above is a really nice kind of high-end feeling amenity that is nice kind of transitioning from the more commercial area out toward those central areas. The other thing I would, I guess, you talked a little bit about bike parking. I noticed there's a few spaces up front along Santa Rosa Avenue. I didn't know if there's an opportunity. This is obviously up to your team and maintenance and operations. If there's an opportunity to put additional short-term parking or facilities, I don't know, outside, as opposed to maybe the tendency of bringing a bike in and putting it on a balcony kind of thing. I know there's security concerns and stuff like that, but maybe that's with bike lockers or some type of controlled access may help. I believe that those are all my comments right now. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Brett. Again, in the interest of time, I won't echo or repeat everything that my colleagues have said, but they've said a lot of great things about the project and I think ways to enhance it. The only thing that I didn't hear kind of on the site plan is in this maybe not allowed, but if you're gonna allow pets, you probably want a pet area or two and just throwing out potential opportunities. On the west side, there's those two corners on the north or south. And if you lost one parking space in the middle there and sucked those in a little bit, you could probably have two kind of pet areas, one on each side. And I would reiterate one thing is that if you can find more, even if they're not trees, more planting areas, the area in between on the east side between the covered parking and the uncovered parking of that little island there, there's a long 100 foot strip. They could certainly, it's probably gonna be a bioretention area, but at least some grasses or something like that would go a long way. I do think that the trade-off is worth it. I haven't heard anybody mention it directly, but I do think the trade-off of trees for solar, especially in this general location. I don't know that the trade-off works everywhere in the city, but in this location where we've got some more industrial areas and you're right up against the freeway and all those spaces, most of those spaces are tucked back to the west and away from the main corridor. I think it's the trade-off's worth it and we gotta figure out some way to get to net zero. And going up five stories, you leave yourself a lot of room for all the amenities, but you don't leave yourself a lot of room for rooftop so you can't cram all the units and solar all up on the roof. So I think just going five stories, brilliant. I think if it was four and more squatty space, we'd probably be talking about the site plan being too narrow to not enough amenities. So I think it's very well done. I had the same thoughts on the four-sided architecture. Again, architects can give better comments on how to achieve that, but I did see that as well. And I think a sound wall is a great idea. I know budgets being what they are, even if you could get just on the bank of covered parking on the west side there, even if you can just cinder block that, it'll go a long way, I think, to getting rid of some of that sound attenuation. Overall, I think it's a fantastic project. I think it really fits within the location. Oddly enough, I mean, I kind of looked at it and go, wow, really? Okay, and then more you look at it, it actually works rather well there. So thanks for bringing it before us and best wishes. Any comments before we wrap the item? I actually was thinking about one thing and it's kind of, I'm prone to hair brain comments sometimes, but there was something Scott was saying about solar panels, which I found very interesting, because you hit the nail on the head. I mean, you don't have a ton of square footage on the roof, so you gotta find your solar panels somewhere. And I was just thinking about it. You could potentially put some solar panels vertically on the south side of your building, kind of like you've done on the west side, the east side with your fiber cement siding. It's just an idea, you don't have to do it, but it could work. And it adds another kind of design element to this. That's also a functional kind of power producing element that also kind of can look cool. I've seen it on a number of projects where they've taken vertical solar panels on southern facing facades, and because you leverage that facade, obviously, because it's southern facing, so. But that was my only other thought. Thanks Drew, any other parting comments? Any questions of the board? No, I appreciate all the comments well taken. We'll digest those and try to accomplish as much as we can, obviously, and look forward to getting you guys out there for groundbreaking and getting this housing up. It's really exciting, so thank you, and that's it, thank you so much. Thank you. All right, lost my agenda here. I know we're on item 6.3. Okay, moving on to item 6.3, concept design review. Kiwana Springs Apartments, 500 Kiwana Springs Road, file number DR19-086. And again, we have Planner Triple to give us a staff presentation, and we have the same applicant. Welcome back. Great, thank you, Chair Kinkai. So this project is being proposed by the same development team at two parcels located at 450 and 500 Kiwana Springs Road. You'll be most familiar with it. It's the empty lot there across from the entryway to Target on Kiwana Springs Road. So they would be proposing 151 units, which equates to about 25% of the rena goal for a low-income housing at 50, 80% AMI. This particular project, the parcels combined, total about 3.73 acres on an even more narrow and perhaps deeper lot than the Santa Rosa Avenue project. Would be 151 units. The building mass ranges from two to five stories, achieves a maximum height of approximately 60 feet. The project does have a very similar indoor and outdoor amenities package and would be proposing 229 parking spaces. Again, those would be comprised of covered spaces designed to host solar arrays as well as uncovered spaces. So here we see the overall location located across from Santa Rosa Marketplace on Kiwana Springs Road. Great access to schools to the east, to downtown, to the north, 101 to the west. A really an ideal location for this type of housing and as well as to the employment centers and retail services offered by the Santa Rosa Avenue commercial districts. This project is interesting in that the smaller parcel at 450, 450 Kiwana Springs Road is zoned RR 40. While it would allow multifamily development, it would require a minor conditional use permit. And then the larger parcel at 500 Kiwana Springs is zoned PD 0408. That plan development was approved in early 2000. I believe it was for 98 high density senior housing units. So obviously this project is not consistent with that plan development. And because that plan development specified number of units specified those senior housing and even provided a site plan, it would have required a rezoning in order for this project to move forward. The underlying general plan land use is medium high density residential. So it does support the density, I believe that's a maximum 30 units per acre. The state last year passed assembly bill 3194. And well, let me jump here real quick. So this is also in the Santa Rosa Avenue corridor priority development area. So assembly bill 3194 is now codified in government code 66589.5. What that says is that if a development of a low income housing does not require a rezoning, if the project is consistent with general plan objective criteria, that objective criteria in the general plan is the density requirement. Additionally, the project would have to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the otherwise applicable zoning district. So what we have here is an opportunity to allow this project to move forward without a rezoning that would otherwise be required pursuant to this government code provided that the project complies with the applicable zoning district, which would then be the R330 zoning district. So I think it's a really great example of another tool to support housing development in action on this project, as well as we have the other opportunities offered through the resilient city measures. Because the R330 would otherwise allow multifamily development as a permitted use, there was no need to streamline that use through the reduced review authority. But the design review approval is delegated to zoning administrator through minor design review for this project as well. Therefore, it comes before you as a concept review item as required. And then formal application for minor design review, as well as a density bonus. The density bonus would provide 100% of the project would be affordable. Therefore, it would receive the maximum of three incentives or concessions as well as an unlimited number of waivers of standards. And so through the project details, I'll turn it over to the applicant and his design team. Thank you, Andrew. The floor is yours again, Adam. Thank you. Not to be redundant. I just introduced, you know, who we are, what our company, who we are as a company, what we're trying to accomplish here in Santa Rosa and basically all those same comments that I made with regards to Santa Rosa Avenue apply here at Kiwana Springs, we will be looking to utilizing the same financing mechanisms. And I just wanted to again reiterate my thanks to the city for all that they have done through their resiliency measures and through their priority development areas to make these developments feasible in the timelines that we were requesting. This is, as I stated earlier, Governor Newsom's desire to get housing on the streets right away. We had to be able to work in jurisdictions that could move quickly and that were fully supportive of affordable housing and of mixed income housing. And so I applaud the city for the steps that they've taken. And I know that there's been a lot of efforts put in this by leadership and they really position themselves well in order to take advantage of this opportunity. So without going through all of the same development team information, I think what I'd like to do is bring up Ingrid Anderson who is the lead architect from Hedgepath Architects to walk you through the architecture and the design. And then I will just sit back and obviously if there's any questions of me or the development team, I can answer those. But thanks again for this opportunity. Thank you, Adam. Welcome, Ingrid. The site is largely very flat. It's actually got a thing of less than 1% slope from the north to the south. Right now on this drawing north is to this side to the right. And we tried to really use the massing of the building and the floor plan to create the outdoor spaces. And just like on the Santa Rosa Avenue project, we're trying to create a major and a minor courtyard here. They're linked at the dog leg in the building where you can come in the building and then come out again into the second courtyard. But we've also provided a two-story breezeway or large-scale dog trot right there where you can come through and get access to the other side of the building. This is a five-story building, so reducing mass bulk and scale is our primary objective in the design. Oh, one more thing is the project required us to, for the fire department and their requirements to get into the site for any emergency as quickly as possible to widen our driveway and to signalize it. And that's shown there. And we've taken advantage of that requirement by creating a tree-lined entry, a primary entry, so that we don't have two equal entries, but one primary that really signalizes a ceremony, so ceremonial act of entry into this new community. And also, traffic wanted us to align that widened driveway for safety reasons as well with the Santa Rosa Marketplace Entry. So I think the entry being so celebrated in this project and given a lot of design attention and drawing a relationship with the community is a real plus for it. This is the second floor. It's a two-story community building. And as I'll show you in the elevation, we've taken a lot of care to break down that mass bulk and scale and to identify the distinguished public spaces from the residential spaces above. The third, fourth, and fifth floors are all alike. And as you see here, three two-bedroom units sit on top of the community center. This is the roof plan, which shows a combination of parapeted elements with flat roofs that are 58 feet tall, anchoring a low-slope single-ply roof with an overhang of three, four feet, three to four feet, that provides a shading brow over the whole project that we were hoping would bring down the height of the project visually, also provide weather protection from the elements, and also introduce an iconography that is identified with residential architecture. These are the unit plans. We have 14 studios, 24 one-bedroom, 72 two-bedroom and 23 bedroom for a total of 151 units. And this is the building section, which shows how on one side there's a very long courtyard separating the community center, massing from the rest of the building behind to the south. And then another building section through the major part of the northern portion of the building. It's type three construction, type 3B. This is the color chart. We're planning on using a combination of stucco with lap-siding in three different colors, an anodized bronze finish on aluminum flat bar railing, and a weathering steel or other panel material painted that color on the balconies as well. The exterior doors and windows are either anodized bronze finish or black. And there will be a perimeter six-foot privacy fence, which in this case is detailed as would, but it may turn to a different material. And this is the, these views are black and white and primarily to show massing bulk and scale. Again, showing the commercial architecture with a more whimsical curtain wall design at the first and second floors of the building. That's the community center and the fitness area. We're also trying to create a lot of play of void and shaded areas or voids and solids. And then emphasizing all that with the material choices that I'll introduce later. So here you can see the dog trot or the breezeway. And this is what you would see from the entry drive coming in, looking at the two-story area. That's the, on the left, that would be the community center. There's an exterior stairway there that leads to a roof deck overlooking the pool area. This is the rear of the site to the south. That is a view of the dog trot that we introduced the curtain wall again there. That would be the passage through the second floor from one part of the building to the other. Above that dog trot are three one-bedroom units. And this is the showing the color palette. We're trying to really take full advantage of the floor plans, the unit floor plans, have walls that go back and forth in space. And so we're using those and cladding them in different colors to really break down the length of the building. These are the elevations. The one on the upper left is the elevation going front that you would see from the swimming pool. The one to the right at the top is the front elevation and Kiwana Springs Road. We're using the fiber cement there in the golden area at the Kiwana Springs Road elevation in a slatted, as a slatted frame that's offset from the stucco wall. This, the creaming color stucco wall is reading. We wanted that to read as a baseline that runs through the ground floor and also at the fifth floor so that your eye can see the building as a unified whole. And that is the rear elevation at the south. This is just a vignette of the middle of the building mass with the dog trot and the pool area and the lower drawing. So and then moving on to the landscape architects drawing. The landscape, we're going to propose solar panels on top of carports at the west and east long stretches of parking on the property lines. We've tried to mitigate the lack of trees and orchard parking by placing as many trees as we can in the courtyards and also trees around the buildings which are smaller and comply with the fire department regulations for height on buildings over three stories. On the front where we don't have units with egress windows, the landscape architect is proposing large scale trees, London plain trees and also along the driveway and at the rear, there's a columnar oak that is proposed as a screen. So I'll turn it over for your comments and questions. Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. Drew, actually I should take public comment first. So hold on Drew. So item 6.3, any public comment on item 6.3? Seeing no one approach the microphone, we will close public comment on item 6.3 and bring it back to the board. And now Drew questions for the applicant or staff. So I have a technical problem that I had and I think Henry had it as well. And we at this end have it as well? Yeah, so we on our delightful iPads had your concept plan set that I guess was the original one and then there's a revised concept plan set which it appears you have, but we do not. When we try to open it, we get unable to display documents. So I don't think any of us have reviewed any of this in any great detail. So that's I think perhaps somewhat problematic potentially. At least for me, because I haven't really dug into this too much. Unfortunately, originally my original comment was, I'd like to see this again. Information presented is somewhat lacking. It's also difficult to comment on because there's no information. Obviously you have all this information. It just wasn't in front of us. So that's kind of, I don't know. How do we fix that, Andrew? How do you think? I think you take the recess and like give us like five, 10 minutes to kind of look at this or you know. Or we can just go slowly through the. Or go slowly, yeah. I think maybe we just go slowly through the presentation set and take some comments as we can give them. I would preface with a question for Ingrid. It appears to me, and you can tell me if I'm way off base of this project architecture is much like the North Street Apartments. It doesn't have the open air stairwells, but as far as the material out and materiality and we got some offsets of you know, things being proud, which turned out fantastic. Well, I think it's very typical of architects to build on a theme, but the slatted screens were used in the North Street Apartments to enclose the exterior stairways between the units. And we are going to use that tech, that motif and improve on how you know, based on our experience and how to apply it to a building to provide texture without overly needlessly complicating the material palette. Right, and I think where I was going with that is that because we know the level of finish that goes into these projects, I think we take it slide by slide and have some comments. So that being said, I do have a question on you. You got a heart game. Yep. One question before we get that. Is there any chance of having just one hard copy that we could potentially pass around of this? I don't know, but this isn't it, isn't it? See, we have one. It looks like there's a couple hard copies. Whoa. Great, thank you. So my question is about parking. And I think, you know, actually kind of looking at these two projects, the previous one and this one kind of together, because they are very similar, but also dissimilar in a way. I guess my question on the parking component is I'm confused about how many spaces on this because I read this and it was the topic or something. So how many parking spaces? We now have 229, so we're somewhat under parked. But before we were over parked. And that was due to the fact then that we had to realign the driveway with Target and the fire department. We met with the fire department kind of concurrently at the same time that we supply the drawings to you, so. Okay, so I guess what my curiosity about the parking is really related to I think your comments about the lack of orchard parking and how do you kind of balance the needs of the zoning code, frankly, for number of spaces for this number of units and balance it with how the hectia meet design guidelines kind of sort of affordable housing. It's a really, anyway, you answered my question, but that's why I was confused. So thank you. That's my only question. Talk to the parking. You want to answer that? Sure. With regards to parking, we have based it on a state density bonus code parking. So this is a reduced parking from the standard. What we still have to do is play that balance of how much mass transit our residents here in Santa Rosa truly using, how much high quality transit do you have available to the site? There is definitely transit opportunities in this location, but at the same time, we still need to have a proper vehicular ratio. We are going to be requesting through the state density bonus a slightly reduced standard even from state density bonus code. Again, as Ingrid touched on because of the requirement from the fire department, they really want a wider ingress and egress in order to make sure that we are fire safe, which of course we want to make sure that we are. So we will be slightly below actually the state density bonus parking. I guess that triggers a second question. So is there something different about this site with fire access that was not present on the other one? Yes, so there's two items there. In fact, on the past, I know we're talking about this, the past was parked exactly to state density bonus code parking so that it was at the proper levels. The difference here is the local ordinance differs from what state fire ordinance calls for. When you have a building under 200 units, the state says you only have to have one approved fire access road. The local ordinance in 2016 was changed and anything over 50 units requires two and they must be far in the distance between the corner of the property, from corner to corner, cut in two, diagonally divided by two. Those fire access roads have to be that same distance apart. In this site, we don't have the opportunity to create a ingress and egress situation that will meet that local ordinance. It's geometrically impossible. Yeah, it's geometrically impossible. So really, we went to the fire marshal and asked for alternative means and methods. We said, this is approved and legal under state code and not under local ordinance. Can we try to work together to find a solution and what we came up with was this widened ingress and egress and then what they also asked was for us to put in a stoplight and bear the burden of all of the cost of that. And also to install OptiCom on the, so that when they approach the intersection, they can change it and get into that and not have a stacking issue. What they've also done is they've asked us to align that with the shopping center that's directly across the street. So those things all coming together is what kind of pushed that entrance down further east. But at the same time, I will again commend the fire department on working with us because this is a highly desirable site for this type of product. And it allows us to keep this at the density that we needed in order to make it economically viable. So it was really a great win-win solution. And I wanna thank Ian Hardidge of the fire department for helping us out with that. So thank you. I think that fire thing answers my questions about kind of globally what happened. Cause again, we didn't have, you showed the site plan with the little swoop and we went, I went, huh, what's that? Also, in addition to that, the Santa Rosa site has an easement already built into its title, yeah. No more questions. Henry, Scott's busy. I was just saying that one of the plan sets that was handed out was the old one still. So I don't know what, it's old. Okay. Henry questions. Could we see this slide bigger, please? No question, I'm scared. Go ahead, Henry. Andrew, you are there in your presentation and your presentation isn't in here either. Just FYI, but are there three concessions being applied to this project or available to this project that maybe one or two haven't been applied yet? Correct. So the density bonus eligibility would result in three incentives or concessions being available to be applied to the project. At this point in time, the applicant doesn't have to request those concessions, that's done up on applications so they usually keep open and remain kind of fluid with what concessions they are going to use as the project evolves. So is parking reduction a concession that could be applied to this project? Right, so, and as Ingrid just mentioned, there will be requesting a concession for height because the maximum height per the R3 zoning district, which would be the applicable zoning district is 55 feet and the project would exceed it. So they'll request a concession for height and then a concession for parking as well. But I just wanna add that we may in the request for reduced parking approach that from a different standpoint because the owners have a history and huge database of how parking Ashley is utilized and they can support a request for reduced parking with factual data based on other projects that are similar. So according to the planning staff, I don't necessarily, we don't necessarily have to use that to apply that as a concession, right? Okay, so you got four maybe. No more questions. Thanks Henry. Adam, questions? No questions. Brett, questions? Yeah, I just had a question about the state, I guess state ordinance that was recently, I guess ratified, right? Is there, I guess just for staff, is there any danger in allowing this to move through without the rezoning? Is that a, I understand the state law, but is there any precedent that's set then that might be of concern later on down the road? Well, one of the reasons I issued a zoning clearance to document it and to memorialize it is to create that paper trail, if you will, of what happened because I think certainly without a rezoning that would change the zoning map, somebody could look at it in the future and say what happened here? Especially if the AB 3194 is not used regularly and it does seem that it was designed for situations like this. So we're using the zoning code to memorialize it and to provide that information if it should any future questions arise. As far as any implications for the future, we do have to comply with state law. And so when it was brought forward, the development team proposed application of this law and we reviewed it and found that provided that the project does meet the operational criteria of the general objective criteria of the general plan, then it could be reviewed under the appropriate zoning district. Okay, thank you. No further questions. Just checking in members of the board. Patty was able to actually email the revised plans to you. So if you have access to your email, then you can pull up the current plan set. And I was able to open it, so success. Okay, so comments, Henry? Gonna take a little minute to look through the package. Yeah, why don't we take a three-minute recess? Okay, I'll bring us back to the item. And Henry, you wanna start out with some comments? Yes, thank you for the revised package. I probably should have alerted staff or Patty at least that that link was not working in our packages. I started reviewing all of the various items last week and noticed that that wasn't available. I thought it was just a site plan that was missing. But appreciate all the hard work you've done. And this package, it just got emailed to us and makes me much more comfortable with the design concept and where you're headed with it. I think the elevations are playful, like the colors. It's very well-developed for a concept review. I appreciate the time and effort in this. My only suggestion I'd like to see when it comes back is the parking. And I kind of quickly calculated that four parking spots and fingers on the... And I'm gonna defer a little bit to our landscape experts on maybe what the appropriate numbers of those might be or they may suggest or they may not think or even agree with me, but I think it would be important to add some canopy to the paved parking areas. And I would suggest that you look at maybe adding four on the west side of the parking lot. You probably mean the east side, which is the other driveway, not the wide one. The lower part of the paper. I'm looking at A4 in the new set and it'd be at the top. Oh, at the top. It would be four. Oh, I see. But Jason, too, the, obviously not under the canopies that you're gonna have solar panels on. And then on the east side, I would put in six. Look at that. I give up 10 parking spots, whether you did it as a concession or did it as under the argument that you may have? Yes, we did consider on the east side. That's actually exactly the number you're proposing, but on the west side, what we proposed was that the trees, which I believe were the pistachio, the other one, the golden rain tree, that row up on the east side is planted in the courtyard and acts as the tree scape there. Yeah, I still don't think it puts enough canopy on the paved area. Okay, right. That's my... I understand. My only kind of knit with the whole concept that you've got, I like the vertical circulation and the amount of access points coming from the parking and getting up to your unit. I just like the amenities. I think it's a pretty well thought out project and look forward to seeing that preliminary. All right. Adam, comments? Sure, thank you. And Henry, I do agree with you on the, of trying to ameliorate the mitigate of the canopy and the parking and the paving specifically in the east side. Because I do see that it was on the preliminary plan and then taken out a fair amount of it. Yeah, I appreciate the design of the buildings. I think it's similar to Santa Rosa. A lot of the comments are gonna be similar to Santa Rosa. This one does get that four-sided concept going on. And I think it does, it succeeds pretty well with that. I do appreciate the playfulness of the color palette. And I do think that the rhythm of the colors, now they kind of go the variation with the balconies. And again, it's really great to see this revised plan. It does provide a lot more context. And I have the same issue as Henry with trying to download it last night. But I do think the buildings are successful. Again, they are similar to Santa Rosa. They have five stories. And so it's going to really bump up in this neighborhood there. And looking at the satellite map on the west side, you've got Coachman Lane, which doesn't have any street trees or anything along that side of the road there. And so it looks like either you've got buildings, there's not much of the front of those buildings on their property.   And so yours are gonna pop up a lot. And so it's the same issue. I know you're thinking about it, same with Santa Rosa have of getting that solar while also trying to figure out canopy and figuring out if there's ways to shuffle around areas, if there's ways to get some kind of buffer canopy in there if it's different tree species, more columnar aspect of things that don't really grow out, much more up to just a buffer that, thinking of course this area, the surrounding businesses to the south are open lots primarily. And so urban heat island effect, you've got the wide open spaces of Santa Rosa Plaza there across the way with massive amounts of parking lots. And so it's to not bring in that personable side of things like with the Santa Rosa Ave property will be really good to take your phone for the microphone here. In response to your comments, I was looking for a sheet L2 or L1, the landscape architect sheet. Yeah. I just wanted to point out that she did draw in or specify the London Plain Tree along the entry so that as you're coming down Kiwana Springs Road towards the east side of the property line of the property boundary, I think some of the issues of the barren landscape are mitigated by these very tall street trees that she's showing. And also the five story massing of the building, the principal massing is set more to the east. And so there are trees in front of it. There's a layering of landscape elements in front of the five story massing as you're coming down from Santa Rosa Avenue down to Kiwana Springs Road. If anything, I think the more surprising massing of the building would be surprising to someone approaching from the west or from the east. Yeah, right. True. Yeah, I don't have a problem with the massing of the buildings and the five stories. I think it's good to have that amount of housing in here. And I don't think it would be very out of place. And there's a lot of structures around there. So, and I do appreciate the groves in the front, especially on the northwest side, as you mentioned. But to think a bit more about how to bring more of the less infrastructure and more of the natural feel in there, where you can. And it's similar to the Santa Rosa Ave project. I appreciate the plant pilot and the design. And encourage the same kind of creative thinking on the choice of tree species as well. London Plain, I can understand why you went with London Plain, but there's plenty of London Plain just across the road over in front of Target along the Santa Rosa Ave parking lots. So trying to reference neighborhood context. There's right there, but is that a context that we really necessarily need to reference? I think just a little more creative thinking on that can go, yeah. Do you have any suggestions for species that you're thinking of? Because by all means, I'll take those into consideration. I'm just wondering if you have anything in mind that you're thinking of? Sure. We can email after this interest of the long meeting. Okay. Maybe do that offline. Yeah, that'd be great. I really, yeah, that's fine. I'd appreciate that. Thank you. Oh, definitely, yeah. But I think it's a good package in your on your way. And thank you. That'll do it for me. Thank you, Adam. Brett, comments. Yeah, another exciting project. I think my biggest concern is just with the context in kind of the scale of this compared to the context. So I know you're well within your rights to kind of obviously develop it as or maximize as much as you can, but I just, I'm a little, I guess, concerned about, yeah, the adjacent properties and the scale of, well, to the, I guess, east. You have two story kind of structures and then to the west being what I think is a mobile home site park. Ferry. Yes, it is mobile home park to the west. Right. And I think what Adam was talking about with, yeah, Coachman Lane is really basically what's set up now is you've got the roadway, you've got planting buffer between the parking, the shaded or covered parking now, but in a small landscape strip at your property line. And so if there's maybe an opportunity to provide a more robust screen and maybe that's where your fencing, your fence is going, but essentially, you know, basically providing a bit more buffer similar to kind of what's on the, I guess would be the east side, probably these plans are, yeah, on the east side, there's a bit more robust of a existing planted kind of row, and that's probably on the Meadows development, but that kind of buffer and privacy, I think is, could be played up a little bit along Coachman a bit. I think I had another, I guess, question, and it was about, I guess, the roof types. So there's a lot of it looks like you have parapet and then there's portions of the building that have a shed type roof. Did I get that right? Did I get that right? Henry, did I get that right? Like the, it's like the shed piece. A seven kind of lent some clarity to where the flat roof saw versus pitch truth. There's actually quite a bit more pitch truth than you might think from the elevations. All right. And I guess my, there's, it's kind of punctuated then by the parapet kind of moving up next to it. So I was wondering if there's an opportunity maybe to either select one or the other, and maybe there's a larger strategy that I don't know about as just a landscape architect, but maybe that's something you can address. Okay. Yes, we will. Thank you. We were just trying to give some, we were trying to break down, I mean, the fact is, the building height is driven by the need for density and the need to provide outdoor areas for recreation. And so it creates a very long building span. And so we try to use the unit plans and find where there are logical places for burying walls to come all the way up full height and be treated as elements or architectural elements. And so those are the parapet elements. And in between them, just because of the practical need to provide weather protection and to drain the roof, the simplest and most efficient and most attractive way is to provide a very deep overhang and with a recognizable residential form and that's the gable pitched, the pitched hip roof form. Okay, thank you. Yeah, I guess I would just, my suggestion would maybe be to either stick with one or the other. That's all I get why it's probably in there, but for me it's just, it kind of sticks out a little bit. And maybe that's because we saw the previous project, but yeah, so that's one comment. Otherwise, yeah, I like how the, again, the outdoor spaces seem very similar. I have the same comment about the same imagery that you provided in terms of the outdoor space and kind of play features and such. And I didn't know, I'm sure this, again, as a concept, maybe the two kind of barbecue and lounge spaces can kind of differentiate themselves from one another. I get the adjacency for like the lounge next to the playground and so on. But maybe one of the spaces is designed a little bit differently to provide a bit, a different amenity or a different, at least overall kind of feeler space, space to that. And maybe that's the one that's farther south where it feels like it's not, you know, it's not up against kind of these other amenities and other uses, but it's kind of separated a little bit. You'll figure it out. Yeah, and then I think the same comments on the parking. I imagine that fire is going to have some concerns or questions about that, especially with the height of the building. But it'd be great if those could be added in more orchard style parking as well, so. That's all my comments. Thank you. Thank you, Brett. I actually rather like the architecture. Interestingly enough, seeing several projects from Hedgepath Architects, I see a lot of learning going on, not only in the product type, but also in what will work financially. And I see a lot of these elements that are carried through that are really nice elements, but at the same time, you can actually build them and have 100% affordable projects. So, you know, it's kind of the, it's been the growth of, you know, what the city wants to see and it's being delivered, I think both by the applicant as developer and by the architect in designing it. And I think, you know, as much as we lost maybe with the change in aligning the intersection and having to signalized light, I think you're gonna gain with people being comfortable entering and exiting the property. I think that's, you know, from a marketing standpoint, I think people are gonna be, you know, rather safe. I mean, it's a tough place to turn, you know, when you're at the center of the marketplace, turning it in and out, and I don't live there. So, I think you're gonna, as much as a cost burden as that's gonna be, it's gonna be a good addition to the project and probably worth whatever had to get given up to achieve it. I think the only, I would echo the site comments.  I think that this piece, as I said with the other one, maybe the trade-off isn't as great with solar and tree can't appreciate him. So it's in between in my mind. The other side, I think it went itself a little bit more to that, but I think you'll do your best. I really compliment you again on the amenities piece. 100% affordable project with this many amenities is fantastic. So again, you know, kind of live with a tight site plan to give the residents what they deserve in a place-making area. So I think it's well done, like see it get built. So thank you for being here today. Any parting comments? I know we didn't have a lot of time to look at this package, so, Henry? So we're not gonna see this again. You are not gonna see this again. Well, good luck with it then. Thank you. I was gonna try to help Brett with a suggestion on, I would stick with both. I like the mix of the parapet and the pitched roof. If I had a preference, I'd like to see more pitched roof, but I don't see a good, in a quick 15-minute look at it. I just don't see a good way to solve that. I do, like you're amassing on A-13, I think it really shows the difference between where it's pitched and where it has elevated parapets. And I think it's a very nice solution. I think if it was all pitched, I think it would, that top roof line would get too monotonous. I, on A-15, I don't like that back south. East elevation, it's a little too harsh for me, but. We're working on that one. Then exactly. Well, it's not consistent with everything else you've done. And I thought, for a second, I thought we're gonna see this again. So I figured you might either be working on that or would change before it came back to us, but other than those few additional comments, I do wish you good luck with it. Thank you. I've seen it in Bill. Adam, any parting comments? None for me? All right, Brett, parting comments, you know? Okay, well, again, best of luck, there's 305 units and two projects to my account, and we really need them, so let's get them Bill. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, we are moving on to item 6.4. This is a concept design review, Southside Apartments, 2706 Dutton Meadow, file number DR19-087, and we have Planner Adam Ross, so we'll say thank you to Andrew Triple and have a nice rest of your evening, and welcome to Planner Ross. Let's get set up and when you're ready, the floor is yours. All right, we're gonna go ahead and take a five minute break, and we will come back to item 6.4. Okay, we'll go ahead and bring us back to order, and we are on to item 6.4, and with the break, I'll just go ahead and reiterate, it's a concept design review item, it's Southside Apartments at 2706 Dutton Meadow, file number DR19-087, and we have Planner Ross for the presentation. Thank you, Chair Kincaid and members of the Design Review Board. The item before you, the Southside Apartments concept design review, this is within the Resilient City Development measures, it's in a priority development area within the Resilient City Development Measures, it comes for concept, and final is delegated to the zoning administrator rather than back here. For the purposes of time, I think I'm gonna go through mine pretty quickly and then hand it off to the applicant team and let that discussion go. But it's a 70-unit, three-story multi-family apartment complex on a 1.75 acre lot. There is a very low-income affordability component to this to include a 35% density bonus. Concessions that would also be included are for parking, for minimum parking standards. Some of the amenities is a community center and some common space in the front portion. It's retail, it's a mixed land use designation of retail and medium-density residential. It's in the PD 96-003, and here's the site plan. And so again, I'm just gonna go quickly and pass this off right now. The project includes, I don't have the file with me, but it includes a rezoning, a general plan amendment as well as this designer view application. And with that, I'll just hand it off to Ingrid and Frank Gobar, the developer, owner, and Ingrid, as you know. Thank you. Welcome, Frank, and hello again, Ingrid. Thank you. Well, I'm Frank Gobar. I'm the owner of the proposed Southside project. I've been involved with a number of developments in the area over the years. And I own and operate properties in the city currently. This particular project, it's our intention that we'll develop a site and we'll retain, own and operate the property as a personal investment. So we're very interested in the details on it and looking at it as a long-term asset. We've been very fortunate that we've been able to put a group of local experts together here to work on the project and four of them, I believe, are here this evening. We have Don McNair of McNair Landscapes, Andy Bordesa, Civil Design Consultants, Gene Kapolchak with Jake Kapolchak and associates, and of course, Ingrid here with Hedgepath, who's been kind of the point person for everything. As the group, we've gone through a number of renditions of the project to optimize the site and to address comments and input that we've received up until this point. I personally am also involved in a lot of energy developments and projects. So I'm heavily involved with that as well as electric vehicle technology. I was also principal in the first all-solar housing project here in Sonoma County. Due to my background, we've incorporated a number of features to promote CO2 reduction. The project's been designed to encourage community interaction as well. It's well located for public transportation and the use of bicycles. We have incorporated EV charging and we've proposed a convenient EV and hybrid car share program that will be at the site as well. This site will potentially be the first multi-family project in the US to be equipped with an advanced solar allocation system. This system will allow us to optimize the direct solar usage at the complex for the individual units and for the common areas. So it's currently under patent pending and this will, depending on timing, may be the very first site that it's implemented. So we're rather encouraged about that. I've been very pleased with the proposed project and the thought and the level of detail that the team's been put into it. And I hope that you all agree. We're looking for any comments and any and all comments and with that, I'm gonna let Ingrid go into the details of the project. Thank you again. When we first looked at this project and designing it, what we saw we needed to do was put quite a lot of parking on a very narrow and small site. And so after doing several iterations, it looked like we would have to provide a parking garage and we would have to go to three stories. Another decision we made was that the need to provide the maximum number of units, which was what the owner wanted, what Frank wanted, would constitute a different mix of units than what you typically see. We have 23 studios here, 25 one bedrooms and 22 two bedrooms. So it's exactly the opposite of what you would normally see in the housing development. And that kind of helps, that helps our parking situation because then the parking numbers go down. But we still needed to provide covered parking or to put parking in an enclosed parking garage or it's a sort of a different kind of a podium. The building code allows us to put housing on top of an enclosed parking garage and still construct out of type 5A construction. So we have standard construction here. We don't have to move up a level to a different fire rating. But in many ways it helps the project because you get the taillights out of you and you minimize the impact of motor traffic through the site. The project is three stories, but we try to keep the bulk mass in scale as low, slung as possible and to step down in the front to a two-story community center. We broke down the mass of the community center by having a rather large roof deck which constitutes almost half the area of the upstairs of the community center. There's also an offset of about 12 feet from Dunn Meadow Road with an enclosed protected yard which is sort of a surrogate second living room for all of the apartment spaces. The second method that we use to offset the parking garage is to cantilever the units above it off both sides of the parking garage and to provide some deep shading and covered walkway area to the back building. Thirdly, we broke the project into two buildings and instead of looping around the site at the back, we actually loop around the site with a driveway that is located between the two buildings. I think when we were looking at this plan, we wanted to firstly, as I said, limit the presence of cars while still providing maximum density. We wanted to also bring in elements of what was historically a rural area. It's an area in transition. Within the city limits and yet it's historically a rural area and since in that period of transition, it's seen some random patterns of development, I would say. And so in searching for a design inspiration because of the importance that Frank places on the building's efficiency and the innovative technologies is bringing to it, we found a relationship between that and the way that farm buildings approach farm architecture. It's simplicity, avoiding needless complexity in material palette and simplicity of colors as well, but still providing that sense of the visual connection to residential architectural symbolism. So that accounts for the deep overhangs and the low slopes again and the creamy colored plaster accented by the fiber cement lap siding in yellow, which is sort of, I guess, a farmhouse color. And finally, punctuating and anchoring the different wings of these buildings are tower elements, either where there were stairways or where it seemed that all of the slopes that we're showing needed to be broken up and visually accentuated by some vertical elements. So it's a combination of low slung roofs and tower elements along with the cantilevers and the deep shading, which I think provide the major architectural interest on this project. And... That's it, thank you. Excellent, thank you very much for the presentation. Peter Roth, did you have something to say? Okay, at this point in time, I am going to open this item up for public comment and I do have one speaker card for an Evan Livingstone. Once you hit the mic, you got three minutes and welcome. Hi, I live in the neighborhood. My name's Evan Livingstone. I think it's a cool building, an exciting building. I like the mix. However, there's going to be a parking and additional parking problem and a traffic problem. Briefly, there's a lot of working families in the neighborhood, in the Amorosa Village in the Catalina project. And a lot of these families already have young, working folks and there's already about an average of, I would just estimate four cars per family. Currently, parking is backing up along Tuxhorn, along the side of the park for a quarter of a mile. And the fact that there is a less than the required number of parking spaces is going to further aggravate the parking in this area. Especially if each family has more than the anticipated number of cars. In addition, you need to take a look at, there's a school directly across this property. And so at certain times of the day, there is a lot of traffic going in and out. And you may want to consider whether traffic control should be required as part of this project. Thank you. Thank you for your time, Mr. Livingstone and the comments. And we will have the applicant and staff talk a little bit about those items. Any other public comment on this item? Seeing no one else approach the microphone, we'll close public comment for item 6.4 and bring it back to the board. And Henry, let's start with some questions for the applicant and or the design team and staff. That's the first question for you, Ingrid, is the transition between the, actually let me have you pull up on the slides. About 16, can you go to 16, Adam? How are you transitioning between the Stucco and the, that's a lap siding? Lap siding, yeah, normally we use a channel material. So it's going to be flush, the- Right, right, uh-huh. Yeah, I like on the previous project where you actually built it out and there was a- A standoff? A standoff to it. And that's something that we're considering.  But I do agree that we will, we're actually considering that. Yeah, I guess the other question is on the very left elevation of that vertical element, the decision to stop it at exactly one half of the window. Is that what I'm reading there? Yes. Okay, that's it for questions. We'll comment later. Yep, questions, Adam? Sure, one question on the landscape plan on the south edge of behind the covered parking. Just wondering a little bit more detail about what the proposed planting behind that is. Let's just say it serves the green swath on the lake correspondence, yeah, that one there. Just thought that I'd just stop here. Good evening, Don McNair, McNair landscape architecture. So you're referring to that little section with the five trees right up against the building? No, the entire swath there. That is bioretention. Okay. So that's just typically treated by myself as a grassy swale. Okay, sure, yeah, just I didn't see where I was called out into around the plants. I wasn't certain where I was there. Okay. Yeah, thank you for the clarification. Yes. Yeah, well, we can still have my attention. Thanks, Adam. Questions, Rhett? No questions. It's covered parking. Okay, and Adam Ross, can you talk a little bit about how the city is gonna deal with parking and traffic, whether there's traffic study required and particularly, I guess, integrates and egress and those sort of items. Sure. So a project like this would be reviewed by traffic engineering. They would dictate what requirement that would be. Usually that starts off with a trip generation study. Once that goes over 50 peak hour trips, which I can't say for certain it would, but I would imagine so, then that would trigger a greater study of traffic impact for the site. That would dictate any sort of mitigations and additional conditions, special conditions for the traffic on Dutton Meadow. That can include, we can see anywhere from a traffic signal or a stop sign or painted crosswalk for traffic. As far as parking goes, typically staff would ask for some sort of support for the parking reduction. In this case, when there's a density bonus, they're allowed a certain amount of concessions at 11%. I believe that's two concessions or incentives. And one of those concessions can be for parking reduction from normal standards. Once that goes into play, there's not really much we can, many grounds we could deny it from. So that would dictate the parking reduction of 9% for this project. Excellent. Thank you. Very thorough explanation. Okay. Henry? Comments? And unlike the other project, I'm gonna back away from my desire to see fingers orchard planting in this case. I think this one just feels a little different and the close proximity of the units to that street, it just feels narrow or feels like the shading might work a little bit better. I just strongly suggest you take a look at the mixture of the materials and how those either stand off if they're gonna be a lap-siding as they rather not see a budded stucco, I'd rather see you eliminate it and just use color. Maybe there's a couple of variations on the cream color stucco that might speak to making it more affordable to build and have some variation in it. I almost wanna suggest you use it at the base and then let the stucco go above it. I just think there's a couple of awkward transitions where it goes from stucco to the lap-siding in the middle of a window. It just feels awkward. A little awkward is probably too harsh and I kind of get where you're going with it but if it had a little more playfulness to it, it could be fun. Generally overall, the projects is really nice. As long as traffic issues can be alleviated and concerns of the neighbor I think are valid. Generally overall, supportive of the project and wish you good luck with it. Thank you, Henry. Adam? Sure, thank you. Thanks again for the presentation and thanks for your efforts on bringing the sustainability and the solar and energy. I think that's really great. It's really interesting about the test or the first project. I know it's a test project but this might be sort of a trailblazer in a way. Nice work on that.  I like what you've done with the circulation patterns and you've also got to really maximize the space while making it livable and so. And one of the things that you guys do is bring a lot of that playfulness to your designs and I appreciated your design rationale with bringing in the farm architecture and the farm iconography and the feel of that. I like the interplay of the materials. I like you have the understated palette and color palette that's going on but you with the vertical elements coming through the windows I think does add some interest. It's not just a vertical line, it actually interacts with the elements of the building. So I enjoy it, I think it's understated which is nicely done. And again, the site plan I think is great. And in terms of how it actually fits in with the surrounding area, I do wonder with that. One of my, why I brought up the question of the south side, it was nice to hear about the buyer retention that's there but there's the, on the direct, on the very other side of the property line there's the neighboring properties that have the roadway there bump up to your covered parking. Yeah, I was wondering if it was going to be in a lower vegetation or mid-level vegetation but I appreciate that it's the buyer retention there. As opposed to how it was with the previous two projects of trying to, like Henry said, bring in the orchard parking. I think that bringing in that solar is really great. They're really maximizing that exposure. I don't think that it will be too obtrusive for them to have those structures there. They bring in a lot of good tree canopy and vegetation ringing the site and a lot of times I hammer on the tree species. I feel like actually there's a good mix of the street trees in here. I do think that there could be thinking of other species besides the pistachian, the crepe myrtle but I like that it seems the overarching design theme is with the valley oaks and that's really great to emphasize that and bring into that architecture of those trees and so nice work on that but just maybe a little more thinking of diversity of those street trees to now go with the standard species. Other than that, I think it's a really efficient use of space well done on both counts. Thanks. Thank you, Adam. Brett, comments? Yeah, thank you again for another really nice project. I think on this iteration, different from my comments about the roof lines and such on the previous project this feels a lot more, this is a lot more successful and I guess in feel and scale and size and the way in which I think in particularly the east elevation of that of building I guess building A with the community center is really nice.  It's a fairly large home but it feels right for that especially the street and kind of the making your way into the kind of larger mass of both buildings to the east. One thing I was curious about and this is probably a non-starter but wondering just about the entrance to building two and there's four or five parking, compact parking spaces back there and I just wondered about additional amenity spaces or something, again this is something you have to either kind of figure out with losing, can you lose additional parking spaces? Probably not but it might be a nice kind of plaza or a four court into that main entry instead of having kind of cars backing up right into it and then in particular kind of that well these spaces here so I don't know if parking can continue across, you can create a little bit more separation there, just a thought. We agree, we're just showing this in response to the neighborhood meeting and all of the concern about the parking but it was designed just like you say at one point so. Yeah understood and I really like the light well in that building as well, that idea, the section is particularly nice in terms of just being able to get that kind of, get that natural light down into a building like this. My only other comment would be if it's possible to continue the kind of street tree, larger street tree treatment along Dutton Meadow and maybe there's a reason why you're calling for smaller ornamentals, maybe that's a fire concern but just to continue that canopy and that streetscape element along Dutton Meadow. Otherwise I like how you address the parking and kind of utilizing that first story or the ground floor for that and then yeah, I really do enjoy the elevations and especially the building A just feels like the vertical pieces, kind of the faux chimney or whatever you might think are really nice, they're scaled really well and it really complements the project so that's all I have at the moment, thank you. Thank you Brett, I too am very complimentary of the overall architecture, much like Henry I would strongly recommend that the start and stop be re-analyzed with the different materialities. I see what was trying to be done, I think it works actually well on one of the elevations but for the majority of it, I don't think it works very well. It kind of takes away from what you were talking about and about the simplicity, I see you're trying to get another material in there which I don't disagree with. I think that either would work either going full stucco or just kind of having a more customary start and stop rather than mid window. I also really like, and I hope it stays is that the color of the banding at the bottom of the balconies, I think that that adds a nice element and almost creates like your fin element coming out at you while it's still just a practical balcony. So I hope that sticks as a different kind of contrasting color. I agree with all the other comments that have been made in regard to, you know, if there is some way to get some more amenity space on site, certainly wouldn't hurt, you know, course of schools in close proximity. So when the school is not in session and there's people home, they can go play at the school. So I think in that general neighborhood, there's plenty of places to get to relatively easily to have recreational space. So it's not the end of the world, but and certainly if the neighborhood is saying, hey, you know, park it appropriately, you'll play somewhere else, I'd listen to the neighborhood. So it sounds like you are, I appreciate that as well. Any parting comments, Henry, after hearing to everybody else? Comments, comments? Any questions from the applicant, design team, staff? All right, get your built and congratulations on trying to get past net zero. Net zero specific, you got a title or something, right? We'll try. Thank you. Three minute break. Yeah, we'll go ahead and take a three minute break. We're gonna transition a board member out and one back in and maybe grab a quick bite to eat. Okay, we will call the meeting the design review board back together and I want to thank the public and applicants and their design teams for indulging us in a quick meal when we might make it through the rest of the meeting now. So we are on to item 6.5. This is a public hearing preliminary design review for Santa Rosa self storage at 1100 Santa Rosa Avenue, file number DR19-019, and we have Planner Ross to give us a presentation. Thank you, Chair Kinkade and members of the board. The project is Santa Rosa self storage. It's at 1100 Santa Rosa Avenue. The project includes preliminary design review before you today. Overall, it's nine single story self storage buildings approximately 83,000 square feet. The project entitlements are a minor conditional use permit, which was approved this earlier today with the zoning administrator pending a 10 day appeal period. The major design review because it is over 10,000 square feet in ministerial actions of a lot line adjustment and lot merger. General plan is retail and business service. The yellow dash outline shows the kind of the encompassed area. It's a general commercial zoning and it's off Santa Rosa Avenue. And I'll show you the access plan shortly. Some project history. The project came in in March of this year. Neighborhood meeting was held. There was the zoning administrator meeting today. The application was deemed complete in November 14th of 2019. So this is the site analysis and access plan. As you can see in the, sorry, let me pull up this laser pointer. So the access code requires that it take access off of an arterial street, which is Santa Rosa Avenue. So it would come in and there would be an easement, an access easement established with the neighboring property. But most of the access will come off of Lotus Court. There is a single family residential abutting the site on the South East side of the site. And other than that, it's primarily surrounded by other commercial uses. Here's the site plan. Here's that access that would come from Santa Rosa Avenue. This is the access off Lotus Court. There is parking here, which is up to code standards. There is a covered parking space. It's the office right here. And then the access gate would be set back in this area. This entrance down here is for EV vehicles only and exit for regular clientele exiting the site. And these are the nine buildings surrounding the site. Here's a building A floor plan, which is the office and some of the storage upfront. This is the tallest building up here. It's furthest away or it's one of the further locations away from the adjacent residential neighborhood. Building B floor plan, it's pretty straightforward. As far as the interior goes floor plan, it is a personal storage facility. Building C and D, E, F, and G, and building H. Building I floor plan. Here are the elevations for the site. They use three different types of masonry brick. This is the office that would be located off of Lotus Court for you to enter the site. And this is the tallest building proposed. Just a little more, there's the lighting fixtures on the backside of the buildings. On building E is good to see and building C and D, the elevations, these are the light fixtures. One thing that we talked about with the applicant, that staff talked about with the applicant was trying to, while they use three different colors of that masonry brick material, adding the planter trellis on the backside to kind of soften the appearance of the brick. You can hear more elevations. Here's a 3D renderings of what it would look like from Lotus Court with the office. Here's closer up to where you'd enter the site once you pass the office. There's an existing commercial space that will remain. So this is the view from Lotus Court looking into the site. I'm sorry, I'm having a, it's frozen. Hopefully it'll catch up. Here's that EV entrance and how that would look from the street. This is from the, I believe the backside of the building facing the existing Santa Rosa auto supply store. Auto parts. An example of the landscape trellis. Here's the landscape plan provided. Part of code requires a 20, I believe it's a 20 to 25 foot, it's a 20 foot setback between residential, residential zoning districts with existing residential homes and the storage building. So you see a landscape buffer surrounding the site. They continue that up against the existing commercial and then a little bit outside as it faces the parking lot to the Santa Rosa auto parts store. There's landscape proposed up front and on both frontage is off Lotus Court. One of the things that came up in the zoning administrator meeting this morning was there's a code requirement that any sort of walls be wooded or stone so that you couldn't see through it, basically. And then which they do provide between the buildings around the site and that's something that we worked on together. But because of the neighbor's concerns with that open space on the sides around here, the landscaped area for to not be a nuisance to existing residential areas. Condition was placed on the project to add a perimeter fence to kind of keep from anyone from trespassing. And then another bit was the, that same landscaped area. The landscape plan appears that it would be, looking at this, it looks like it would just be a grass and that was a concern from the existing neighbors adjacent to the site. However, it's not, that's what it represents. There's a limit to how much grass is in there. You wouldn't have a flat kind of grass patch to kind of provide a space for someone to trespass on and be there and become a nuisance. But what happens is that's also their bioswale that they would have for the water capture on site. So it's not going to look like a flat landscape. It's going to be kind of depressed and they can add in maybe some rocks or harder features as well as complying with the water efficient landscape ordinance. And then the photometric plan, it shows they have to comply with city code which they will and they do. They can't bleed any light onto the, onto the residential properties southeast of the site. And they also, there was also a couple other concerns with the perimeter fence, what that looks like. And while we didn't want to condition it for the, at the ZA meeting, we wanted the design of the board to kind of weigh in on that as well as the other portions of the scope for designer view. But that was, so that's why that perimeter fence was also brought up. And then another, the last thing that came up is the lighting. I think this may or may not be yours but I think we can hear what you would think about it. But the lighting as it relates to the safety lighting at night and how it would look to the residential properties to the southeast. And with the designer view criteria, the layout is consistent with the general plan and zoning code. It will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring and existing future developments. The architectural design is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and uses the appropriate use of materials, textures and color and it would not be detrimental to the public health safety or welfare. And with that, the planning and economic development department recommends the design review board adopt the resolution of proving the preliminary design review for Santa Rosa self storage and delegate final design review to the planning division. I'm here to answer any questions you may have. The applicant and the landscape architect is here to answer any further questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you, planner Ross. And does the applicant have a presentation or? Yes, thank you, board. My name is Mike Marquard. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. And I just would like to read a summarization from the architect, mostly dealing with his thought process surrounding how he came up with the design and how he arrived where we are. He says the preliminary design objective is to provide a functional and efficient group of structures that are both secure and durable and to fit into the existing neighborhood context. The customer service office, which he refers to the office structure with a slope metal roofs and detailing as suggested in the city's building design guidelines for business and light industrial are, it is indicated. The entry porch that he provides is an element that he believes will provide a human scale to the customers. He thought that was important. The perimeter buildings all face inward, which provides both security for the site itself and shields the activities inside the site from the surrounding uses. And he goes on to say the design of the perimeter building walls is intended to emulate a residential community boundary wall, the use of