Okay, I'm going to go ahead and call tonight's meeting to order of the City of Santa Rosa Planning Commission and ask for roll call Please let the record reflect that all commissioners are present Great with that. We'll move on to the approval of our June 13 minutes any Comments or corrections on those minutes not seeing any those will stand as printed Next is a time for public comments This is a time for any member of the public to address the Commission on matters of interest to the Commission That are not listed tonight as a public hearing So I'm going to go ahead and open public comments I don't have any cards But if there's anyone that wants to make a statement under public comments you can move to a microphone And I'm not seeing anyone do that. So I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment period and move on to planning commissioners report any Reports by commissioners tonight Okay, moving right along move on to department reports Thank You chair Cisco No, no specific items. I just wanted to remind the Commission I believe that the orientation training that happened recently the video of that was sent to you If you did not receive it take a look at your email Mike just re-sent that If you weren't able to attend it was a very useful session went over all of the different Regulations and procedures for conduct as a commissioner things like how you Obtain information how you disclose that your ex parte disclosures Brown Act issues The use of devices at meetings Essentially should not be using personal devices at the meetings To gain information that the others don't have so I just would direct your attention to your email and take a look That video if you haven't already done so great. Thanks Next statements of abstention by commissioners any abstentions tonight not seeing any Okay We have no consent items and so with that we're going to go ahead and move on to our first public hearing of tonight Which is item 10.1 a public hearing on the baguette Cottages tentative map and it is an ex parte disclosure Commissioner Carter anything to disclose? I did visit the site. I have nothing further. Okay. I also visit the site I have nothing further to disclose And I visited the site and have nothing further to disclose. I visited the site and have nothing further to disclose I also visited the site and have nothing further to disclose. I Have nothing to disclose okay, and I did see this item at the waterways committee meeting and visited the site and have no other information to disclose. So with that we'll go ahead and move on to our staff report with planner Adam Ross. Thank you chair Cisco and members of the Commission. I'm Adam Ross planner here the city. Today before you you have the Baguette Cottages tentative map. The project includes is a 1.06 acre site which is being divided into six lots. Two existing houses will remain on the site they'll be relocated onto their own lots in a new position but relatively the same as where they are now.  So two attached four attached housing units. So four unit the four additional units and two existing units are market rate they're less than 1% of the city's regional housing needs allocation. There will be an ADU above a newly constructed garage which under the ADU ordinance if it's not owner occupied which this is not this is a rental project a for a project that ADU will have to enter into an agreement with the housing authority for a 55-year term at a rate of at a low-income rate. So again the site is 1.06 acres six lots are proposed two lots include existing single-family homes so detached homes. One of those lots will have an ADU above their garage the remaining lots incorporate single family attached duets. There's a private shared access driveway and side improvements include a sidewalk on West Barham Avenue and two class two bicycle lanes or a class two bicycle lane going down West Barham Avenue and Dutton Avenue. The lot sizes are lot one is 6,199 square feet lot two is the largest at 12 little over 12,000 lot three is 4193 square feet lot six is 2,804 square feet lot six lot five is 2,804 square feet lot six is 3,132 square feet. Again the associated infrastructure improvements are frontage improvements sidewalk on West Barham and class two bicycle lanes. The vicinity map is the project located within the city it's in the Roseland Roseland area here's an aerial image of the project location this is Santa Rosa Creek Santa Rosa Creek runs I'm sorry Roseland Creek runs along this area right here on the back of the property. Project history a pre-application meeting was held a concept meeting with the Cultural Heritage Board was held after that and then the plans were then submitted to the Planning and Economic Development Department. There was standard referrals for the project on October 25th it went to the Waterways Advisory Committee and then notice of incomplete letter was given to the applicant and they've since resubmitted and satisfied all issues and comments that city staff have on the project. The general plan land use designation is low-density residential which allows two to eight units per acre the site is a little above the middle of that at six units per acre again it's in the it's in the Roseland area Sebastopol Road specific plan area it's a planning level document that addresses land use circulation infrastructure needs for the area some of the project or the project meets some of the what that plan strives for in the Roseland area by providing a diverse housing type it also provides the frontage improvements that includes the Class 2 bicycle lane. The zoning is in a PD PD 96-002 which allows single-family and multi-family housing units. This project also because it's in the Roseland area specific plan it's subject to the Resilience City Development Measures so normally some of these lots are less than 6,000 square feet which is a standard lot size but the city allows that with a use permit a conditional use permit to be smaller than that and with the Resilience City Development Measures it allows that use conditional use permit which would normally be with this tentative map to be given a different review authority of the zoning administrator which its intent is to streamline the process so the use permit is now a minor use permit so the applicant would save on fees and public hearing fees and then would go is scheduled to go in from in front of the zoning administrator on July 9th. Here's an image of the tentative map we have lot one this is where one of the single-family homes the detached single-family homes is being located lot to the other one and then here are the duets units these on lots five and six they face West Barham Avenue they have a shared access driveway adequate parking on the site and here's Rosalind Creek the applicant has done their best to preserve as many trees as possible on the site and is also consider of the Rosalind Creek in the development of this so here's some existing elevations of the homes on the site so these both face Dutton Avenue with their backs kind of entrance access showing on to West Barham Avenue here's some proposed elevations for the project site that are for the attached units as of this riding of the staff report and this presentation staff has not received any public comments during the pre-application meeting there were a couple of neighbors who attended the meeting but were interested in the project but did not object or oppose the project at all so some of the comments by CHP was that there was not enough information for them to make recommendations or comments so and then at the Waterways Advisory Committee the the recommendation was to move the fence further away from the creek so the applicant responded by providing staff with more details on the project and the the applicant did not want to move the fence closer because they would have to dig it out and then remove a lot of vegetation that is currently grown over the site and it was a take it while taking care of fence it wasn't in disarray or anything so they they they feel it's it's in the best interest to leave it as it is the project has been reviewed in compliance with CEQA and under government code 65457 of the public resources code the project is statutory exemption in that a specific plan with a certified EIR was approved in this area and has and no further mitigation measures would be attached to this for it to to be for it to be exempt or sorry no further analysis would be required than what was provided so the site also qualifies for a class three exemption of existing facilities in that the site involves new construction and urban urbanized area involving six dwelling units and as well and also and also qualifies for a class 32 infill development because it's consistent with the general plan and zoning it occurs on a site less than five acres within the city limits there's no value for habitat and as supported by the biological survey by Monk and associates it would not it would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic noise air quality or water quality and can be adequately served by all public utilities with that the planning and economic development department recommends that the planning commission approve a resolution for the tentative maps of divide of 1.06 acre parcel into six small lots for the purpose of baguette cottages and I'm available for any questions the owner and applicants as well as the design team is here to answer any questions you may have yeah on slide to your presentation yours says low-income with 180 with one of the ADU unit ADU unit excuse me yours says low-income ours says moderate income which one is it it's it's low-income there were some edits done after you had received that and so you were not giving a copy because it was a little late and yeah thank you any other clarifying yeah vice chair weeks related to that ADU which where is that going to be which lot while you're looking for that let me ask something else and then also related to that the owner will enter into an agreement with the housing authority that's correct so it's on lot to right here this is the garage and ADU will go above it thank you and then one other question will it go back to the cultural heritage board no this area of that PD PD 96-002 it's it's a it's not a preservation district but under that PD it explains that new developments require a concept hearing with the cultural heritage board for recommendation but not for their approval for landmark alteration permits any other questions yeah because you're Carter I'm not sure if the drawing showed it but I wasn't clear about you said class 2 bike lanes on bar and are they striped bike lanes it's not clear from the drawings yeah class 2 bike lanes are striped so here you have the striping right here on Dutton Avenue and then it's hard it is hard to see there's a lot going on on these but it's see this little by-school guy here there's a stripe right there and then there's the the driving lane for Barham Avenue so no parking on bar that's correct and just for clarification the fence shown on the tentative map that's the existing fence and it's not to be relocated correct correct thank you any other quick questions would the applicant like to make a presentation you don't have to but okay so we may have questions for you after the public hearing so okay this is a public hearing tonight I'm gonna go ahead and open the public hearing I don't have any cards on this item you do not have to have filled out a card if you'd like to speak on this item go to one of the microphones at the top and state your name for the record and I'm not seeing anyone do that so I'm gonna go ahead and close the public hearing bring it back to the Commission any other questions of either the applicant or staff yeah Commissioner Carter note that there's a 30-foot creek set back that the buildings were designed to avoid are any improvements to the landscape or the yard space allowed within that creek set back yes because it's no structure is allowed and part of this included on on lots three and four they even have landings that were encroaching that set back and and we had the applicant remove those landings they removed the door as well because I believe building code would require the landings but they were second doors from the garage to the backyard and they were able to remove those from the design that where there was only one landing on each unit outside of that 30-foot creek set back but the landscaping itself is allowed within the subject including earth disturbing activities like paving and walls and things great question I believe that that is okay as far as because it's not considered a structure but I can look into that a little bit more and get that information for you if you'd like any other questions okay so would somebody like to move the resolution for the purposes of discussion I'll move a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Rosa approving a subdivision tentative map for the bag at colleges subdivision located within the Roseland priority development area to subdivide a one acre parcel into six lots that would allow development of four new attached residential duets the relocation of the two existing homes on site with addition of an accessory dwelling unit subject to the approval of minor conditional use permit CUP 18-125 and minor design review permit dr 18-056 located at 18 1084 excuse me that in Avenue assessors parcel numbers 125-281-045 file number PRJ 18-046 MAJ 18-007 and wave for the reading and do I have a second okay I'm saying you did it okay so that was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner Collier Commissioner Duggan would you like to start sure I think this is an appropriate use of the parcel and an attractive subdivision and I think it's a good one and I can make all the findings and I'm supportive of the project I agree with Commissioner Duggan I think this is a great use for this site and I can make all the required findings and I will also be supporting this project did you want to go now or you want to wait till you get the answer to your question okay great so so the code says that no structure including buildings of any type swimming pools including prefabrication swimming pools driveways streets parking areas patios platforms decks fences liquid storage shanks mobile homes broken concrete rubble earth fill or other structural debris fill or retaining walls shall be placed within the creek side setback within this section so the applicant as part of this project does not propose any changes to the existing landscape within that creek setback most of it is just preserved of the existing landscape as is thank you I agree with my colleagues that this is an imaginative of use of the site and provides some much needed housing and redevelopment of the site and I believe I can make all the findings and support the project okay first two weeks I'm also going to be supporting the project I like the fact you're utilizing the existing homes I think that's very important for that neighborhood and I can make all the findings appreciate Peterson I echo my fellow commissioners I think it's a it's nice to see the actual impact of the resilient city development measures in these priority development areas to see that it is actually doing something I think the design is well integrated and I can make all necessary findings I agree with my fellow commissioners that it's a great use and it's a good example of infill development expansion and I can make all the required findings will be supporting project okay I really really like this project a lot I'm so appreciative of anyone that retains existing housing and sort of designs around it some of the most favorite projects I have in the city have been projects that where that has been done because I think it really it's it's very very appealing and I really I drive by that house a lot and I really like it so I appreciate what you've done to keep it I like it that it's all rental housing that's definitely badly needed in that area so really like it can make all of the findings as well so with that the resolution was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner Kahlia and your votes please and that passes with seven eyes so thank you let Miss Murray get down there and we're going to go ahead and move on to item 10.2 which is also an ex parte disclosure for Acacia Village a conditional use permit and tentative map for any disclosures I can disclose that I visited the site and have nothing further to disclose okay Mr. Kahlia I also visit the site and have nothing further to disclose I visited the site and had nothing else to disclose my I visited the site and have nothing further to disclose I also visited the site and have nothing further to disclose I visited the site and have nothing further to disclose so with that we'll go ahead and move on to the staff presentation which will be given by Susie Murray thank you and good afternoon chair Cisco and members of the Commission the project before you is a small lot subdivision Acacia Village which is located at 746 Acacia Lane the project proposes to subdivide two and a half acres into 25 residential lots the project has designated three units for low-income occupants or property owners actually and as such it qualifies for a five unit density bonus which has been granted with the new new regulations for density bonus that is in that is a by right it's by right it is not an entitlement other required entitlements for this which is before you today are both the conditional use permit for a small lot subdivision and a tentative map I'm going to talk a little bit more about the density bonuses we get into the presentation I also notice that there is a slide missing out of my presentation that talks about the percentage of meeting our goals I'm not quite sure how that happened but the low-income the the goal that slide that Adam had in his presentation is 600 low-income units this will be providing three of those and that gets us to about half a percent of our goal and market rate is 2,550 units and that gets us to 8% or I'm sorry 9% of our goal I'm sorry 0.9% just under one so here is an aerial of the neighborhood right at the lower right-hand corner of the screen you can see highway 12 it's kind of cut off where acacia lane connects to highway 12 the blue square borders the proposed development site and here's a close-up you can see that it's currently developed with a residential unit in several outbuildings and there are several trees important to note that a couple of rather significant trees on the site will be preserved and incorporated into the landscape design it's an unusual site it's kind of kind of a hybrid the site design is something that you see more commonly with attached housing these are detached single-family residential units they will be for sale units and there are two parking lots for these units the parking lots include garage units the two air purple arrows up on your screen point to where those those parking lots are one will access off acacia lane and the other one will take access off the extension of winding creek there is one garage space for each unit there are six units to the front on to acacia and for the front on to winding creek and all of those have attached garages the rest of them are detached and and and located in those parking lots also located in those parking lots are trash enclosures and the project has been conditioned to require a separate man door a fully enclosed garage or garbage enclosure plus a separate man door to allow people to go in without opening those big squeaky metal doors to dump their trash the project has quite a history it started back in December of 2016 at which point the applicant met with city staff and that's kind of to look at the the concept drawings and address real you know city or what may be an issue the project plans a neighborhood meeting was held in the project applications were submitted in 2008 prior to the applications being submitted the council had approved a housing incentive fund pilot program I believe there was three three million dollars and of that one point one million dollars was designated to this project so the project kind of went on hold while we while the applicant worked with the city negotiations and finally after almost two years of negotiations they we came up with the applicant defined declined to the funding and at that point the project was revised the project was originally submitted with three or with six affordable units all it for moderate income but in order to make it pencil out the applicant reduced it to three affordable units for low income and they still qualified for the density bonus with that on June 11th earlier this month a density bonus zoning clearance which was issued by the zoning administrator the general plan land use designation there is low density residential well I don't want to verify that yes it's low density residential which allows two to eight units per acre and the zoning is r1 six which is consistent with that zoning district or with that general plan land use designation you can see here the surrounding areas are the color separations always throw me on the screen the good surrounding areas the site is surrounded by low density residential land use designation nearby there are some higher density residential land use designations as it gets closer to as the property gets closer to or the street gets closer to highway 12 and zoning for the most part all around the site is consistent with its land use designations so there are there were a long list of goals that this project implements in the or is supported in the general plan first and foremost it meets the housing requirements of Santa Rosa residents it also implements our densities bonus ordinance and compliance with the state and provide some housing for lower income property owners it also I'm going to let the applicant talk a little bit more about the way the site plan is developed but it also provides another kind of a new diverse mix for housing if you will so in terms of the urban design I there are no designs in before you in terms of architecture tonight that's not a requirement for small lot subdivisions although you've seen them in the past the applicant has a presentation that will provide you an idea of the cottages that they're proposing transportation this is that is this implements our circulation plan or helps to implement our circulation plan and there are some well talk about a memo that was provided to you earlier by the traffic to our department that the R1 six zoning district is intended for residential neighborhoods and the conditional use permit findings have all been met has shown in the resolutions the density bonus our our new ordinance is in compliance the project has been found in compliance with state law actually and it includes like I said three affordable houses and based on that it does qualify for five density bonus units as I mentioned earlier if these were been moderate they wouldn't have gotten that that that much of an increase so there are some tables there depending on the income level it depends that will dictate how many additional units they qualify for the parking requirements of parking has been an issue that we've heard about about this project and I'll touch on it again in the neighborhood comments but the parking has been found in compliance with what the state allows us to require for density bonus projects and in fact exceeds that the required parking in terms of the state's requirement the density bonus was also approved with four development waivers private open space they have their small lot subdivision is only allowed to exceed the private open space by 60 or they're only allowed to cover 60% of a lot three of the lot succeeded by going up to 60.5 percent the lot sizes a small lot subdivision generally says two to six thousand square feet the the density bonus that was another waiver called in and a few of the parcels are go down to 1,966 square feet I think and then the rest of them are over the 2,000 foot requirement the there are some reductions in setbacks and private open space now the setbacks I've put a table up here the front yard setbacks in a small let subdivision which can be modified through the conditional use permit so those aren't etched in stone but typically we see a 10-foot front yard setback and the front yard setbacks for these units range from two to 11 feet where they get down to that two feet those are on properties that access onto common areas the front yard is on common areas it's not like it's on a street frontage the rear yard is 15 feet is generally what we ask for and the rear yard setbacks range from 10 to 15.3 feet throughout the subdivision side yard interior and exterior requirements are four feet on the ground floor stepping into eight feet on the second floor again that can be approved through the conditional use permit and has been actually but in this case there they're not proposing a second floor stepping so they've asked for a development waiver for that that requirement there are several other city codes or yeah city and state codes that this this project has been found in compliance with title 19 for our subdivisions the tree ordinance the noise ordinance and of course the zoning code and state density bonus so the project has been found in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act it is consistent with the general plan first and foremost but it also qualifies as in fill development the applicant has provided several technical studies which were attached to the staff report that support this it is not it's consistent with general plan and zoning occurs on a property less than five acres has access to all city sewer services and utilities and would not result in any significant impacts relating to traffic noise air quality or water quality that weren't otherwise considered previously in the general plan there have been there's been a quite a lot of correspondence and I apologize because a lot of the correspondence may have looked the same but there were just minor changes so I had to send it all on to you part to summarize parking which we've already discussed there the state tells us what we are allowed to ask for with the density bonus that's allowed by right and we that's not an appointed negotiation privacy was also an issue that came up and when the first iteration of the site plan came in I'm going to back up to the site plan here along the the top of the site plan which is actually the east several of those lots were originally oriented so they were going their side yard setback was adjacent to their neighbors to the east or the top of the page the the applicant met with the neighbors and they went ahead and realigned those parcels they kind of reconfigured the the north end of the the map so that there their the privacy would be maintained for those neighbors off you know the existing neighborhood there was also a question about second-story windows on the parcels that are removed from those lots now the the developer has made an agreement with the the residents that he would or they would develop only single-story homes along that shared property line that is not a condition of approval this is an R1 six zoning district so if they have a private agreement it's not something that we're reinforcing with the condition because it's very difficult to enforce that but as a result of that one other request was that the windows on the second story of the units that are further away from those existing residential lots that they would have opaque windows or windows that you can see out and and the project was not conditioned for that either again two-story residential units are allowed in the R1-6 standard single-family residential zoning districts throughout the city so lighting was also a concern in the parking lot there the project has been conditioned to comply with lighting standards and it's it's a standard review as part of the building permit where we make sure that lighting is not spilling onto neighboring sites so those light fixtures will be shielded and they can't exceed I think it's I think it's 14 or 16 feet I think it's let's say 16 worst case scenario a few there was a question about future changes to the CCNRs one of the things that we did to address the parking concern was condition put a condition of a pro or a condition in the CCNRs that requires or precludes storage in the garages that would that would wouldn't permit parking I guess I said that wrong it doesn't allow storage that would preclude the parking of an automobile in other words the primary use for the garage has to be for storing a vehicle and then for personal storage so that will be enforced not by the city but by the homeowners association there was some concern about what the project will do to contribute to local parks so that is it's a standard when they they come in and pay their building permit fee they will have to pay park fees and the you know parks department takes care of that for us but this all this site also includes in their common area a play a play area for children because the emphasis is community here they also have in the center area a kitchen outside kitchen and a cover and what have you so it makes it easy for people to gather out there circulation and safety was another issue that's come up winding Creek Avenue the opening of it and there's been kind of a conflict and that they the neighbors are concerned that there's going to be a thoroughfare it is an alternative very definitely it's part of the circulation plan but there's been some concern that people will be going very quickly down winding Creek and then the conflict there is that there is some concern that by adding a stop sign in at the corner of Breeden and winding Creek we go back up to the aerial because I think that will help the gosh do we have a pointer that I can use there's you can see where winding Creek is on the southern side of the the property and it's going to extend over to Acacia Lane so along the the bottom of that blue box there that section will open up it'll it'll provide an alternative to driving down highway 12 where people can come down Acacia Lane and travel on winding Creek and go east and and reconnect so the the conflict has been that if we put a stop sign at that corner of winding Creek and Breeden that it will be noisy it does create more noise when people slow down stop and then start up again but without that stop sign it doesn't it it it it's an incentive to go a little faster so so there's been a conflict and I'm hoping yeah our our traffic engineers here and hold on and I I don't see the project engineer I didn't see that the stop sign was required in the conditions of approval but that doesn't mean a stop sign will not be added in the future so my read of the conditions do not include the stop sign and I did it I hope I was thrown enough in that so let's get back to those concerns circulation safety then the trash enclosures which I already addressed there was some concern that people would be opening them up and making a lot of noise to drop their trash off late at night and that odors would come out I've I've never been hugely aware of odors in a residential garbage area generally they're they're emptied weekly so it's not that bad it's just like our own our single-family residential neighborhood trash anyways with that it is recommending by the Planning and Economic Development Department that the Planning Commission approve a conditional use permit for a small lot subdivision and a tentative map to subdivide a 2.5 acre area into 25 residential lots for the development of a Keisha village and hold on one sec that's on the public streets and the public street we have a light fixture height for 17 feet on the public streets but on the private property I it's it's 16 feet we'll go with that and that concludes my presentation I know that the applicant has a presentation for you if you have any questions for me now I'm happy to answer them Commissioners unless you just have a quick clarifying question I recommend we we wait because there might be I know I have more complex questions okay we'll go ahead and ask the applicant to do their presentation good afternoon chair Cisco members of the Planning Commission Robert Upton on behalf of Keisha village and I have here today with me my partner Michael Hooper our architect project engineer and landscape architect so hopefully we've got to everybody to answer your questions a Keisha village is designed as a pocket neighborhood and okay we go this way yeah so this is some context for you I'm happy you've all been out there and had a chance to look at the site but as you know it's truly an infill project it's surrounded by existing residences it has a lot of amenities and services schools in the area a lot of them within walking distance we've got pretty good public transit along highway 12 so this is a Keisha Lane today this is the project across the street prospect village 10 homes currently under construction as you can see I really put this in because a Keisha Lane is sort of like the land that time forgot I imagine it probably got a next into the city back when the breeding street winding Creek subdivision was annexed and built and it just got left so a Keisha Lane itself has never been improved it's as you saw when you were out there it's still a gravel road our neighbors across the street here as part of their project they are going to improve their side of the street and then we'll finish it off as as part of what we're doing so I've said a pocket neighborhood or what is a pocket neighborhood pocket neighborhood is a concept which originated up in the Northwest and the Seattle area and has been extremely successful up there there are examples elsewhere in the country relatively few in the Bay Area we've been looking for a site to be able to do a pocket neighborhood for a number of years and it's quite challenging to get the right size of site the right configuration in terms of dimensions and we now know having designed this one what we should be looking for and it's two and a half acres on a corner flat exactly like this so what is it well it features a central common area as Susie explained we've got 19 homes in the middle of the project served with garages on the outside so the garages are remote and the architecture can be anything in our case we've chosen craftsmen which we feel is very appropriate for Santa Rosa something that we see in a lot of the older Santa Rosa neighborhoods a pocket neighborhood can have a number of amenities which are shared between the residents and we haven't finalized exactly what our package will be but we certainly see a closed or a covered area I should say a gazebo with a kitchen barbecue area some seating outside that probably a fire pit if we can find room we could have a bocce ball court we definitely want to put community gardens in there again if there's space maybe somewhere for bike storage that sort of thing so why a pocket neighborhood what are the benefits of a pocket neighborhood well the bottom line really is to create community it's an intentional community designed to increase the interaction between neighbors and to help that feeling of neighborliness which is often lost in a typical subdivision tract area also it gives a sense of security because it's enclosed it's not enclosed with gates which I would find personally rather obnoxious but it gives a definite sense that this is our place and the neighbors just automatically react to that by protecting their space not protecting in an obnoxious way but just keeping an eye out for what's going on who's there if something suspicious is happening then somebody's probably going to spot it and and take some action it gives a safe space in the center there for kids to play and the front porches are an important part of the concept they add usable space to the floor area of the homes and some of our homes as you'll see in a moment are quite small and that usable space all fronts out onto the common area so it encourages people to sit out in the morning with a cup of coffee in the evening perhaps with a glass of wine and as they're sitting out there their neighbors rather than being able to come and drive up into their garage shut the doors and go inside they are forced to walk all of 50 or 100 feet to their front door past other people's porches and again always encouraging that that sense of interreaction so that this is our site plan this is the the landscape plan Susie had the technical tentative map plan I think this gives a better sense of where the common areas are it's really a t-shape coming up from uh acacia at the bottom all of that is pedestrian space no cars in there and then across the top we've got broader common area our covered gathering area is to the right of that central rectangle and then we have further pedestrian paths going out to the right to the parking and garage areas on winding creek and to the left down back onto acacia then we have six homes on the outside so the four to the right of that plan and then two following around onto acacia those are more uh we call them typical homes they're two-story with attached tandem garages utilizing the street frontage the homes on the inside the 10 across the top are all single-story cottages so there'd be two bed two bath cottages and as Susie said we've agreed with the neighbors that we will make those single story there to reduce the impact onto the neighbors at the back the remaining nine in the middle there are two-story two-story homes they're all craftsmen in style and they all have front porches so that's just a summary of what i think we've pretty much covered we have the three deed restricted affordable homes that Susie talked about and we will have a homeowner's association and i think that's very important because the homeowner's association is ultimately going to be responsible for enforcing the ccnr's and the rules and generally making sure that the place is maintained and properly kept up and they're the right people to do it they are the people who have the biggest vested interest in making sure that everything runs properly and appropriately it's where they live and ultimately it's their property values that they're protecting so Susie had mentioned the concerns of the neighborhood we've had a number of meetings with the neighbors primarily the folks who live along breeden to the back of us and i'm sure some of them are going to want to speak tonight i would characterize those meetings as being very constructive they have been very realistic about the fact that although i know they were very much prefer to continue to look at an open field forever that's just not going to happen that this is going to be developed and we've i hope work together to come up with some solutions to their concerns so as far as traffic is concerned i think the biggest issue is winding creek which is now going to extend through onto acacia and we're totally aligned in this regard we want to see that traffic calmed to the extent that we can and it really becomes a question of what are the most appropriate measures to do that our first hope was that we could actually restrict access through there and just limit it to emergency vehicles have an emergency vehicle access controlled where the existing fences that's not acceptable to the city it's not what the fire department wants to see so we are going to have to have through traffic so how do we calm that there's a number of ways to do it nobody including the fire department wants to see speed bumps or anything like that along there i think you know the the possibilities are some striping possible ball bounce at breeding and a four-way stop personally i think a four-way stop is really the best way to slow the traffic down although i do appreciate there are other implications to that we will prefer not to have the ball bounce it presents us with some engineering issues on the storm drain at that point if this is a continuing concern then i suggest that we defer that back to staff and work something out between the staff neighbors and ourselves which which improves the situation approximately to the rear property line i've talked about what we've done there we put single story units we switched the site plan around we agreed to minimize noise and light from the parking areas i think we do have sufficient parking we do have 12 spaces actually out on acacia which doesn't get counted under the city standards but it is nevertheless going to be available so i'll ask adam gardener our architect to come down and quickly explain what we're thinking about in terms of design my name is adam gardener with william hezmerholz architects i know we're not specifically here to discuss architecture but what we did is we developed some architectural studies so that you could get a sense of how the whole project would feel the first and the last slide really characterize the 3d impact of what we're looking at so we'll go back to those slides at a point but this first this slide that's on the screen right now just shows us the exterior elevation characters craftsman style as robert mentioned we have three different plan types plan one ten of them plan two nine of them and plan three six and we're trying to create a variety of massing in character so plan one is truly a one-story house with a steeper pitch roof and okay thank you and as mentioned it would not have any windows at the second level at all it's just a decorative vent plan two's design kind of as a story and a half look it has a dormer on the front which is a bedroom and then the roof slopes up at a 8 and 12 pitch was a fairly steep pitch and at the back of the house there would be additional bedrooms at the second level and then plan three is as robert mentioned kind of a more traditional two-story home with a full upper floor so a brief summary of each plan type plan one is a two-bedroom two-bath it's only 1,038 square feet plan two is planned as a four-bedroom two-and-a-half bath home which is 1,660 square feet and then plan three the largest plan which there's only six of would be a three or four-bedroom house with a two-and-a-half bath and 2,000 square feet so we've got a range of pretty modest houses from 1,000 to 2,000 square feet each of the homes features a broad usable front porch that does encourage that social interaction and each house also incorporates the craftsman style which has traditional window patterns trim and a variety of siding we have warden batten siding shingle siding horizontal siding and then a mix of stucco along the bottom elevations we also have three different porch railing styles and two of the plans have no garages so you really do get that old world 1920s kind of character that you see all over the town let's see and another thing that we're able to do with these modest style homes is kind of by creating the smaller individual yards give that space that would typically be divided up equally among all the houses and distribute that throughout the site with the common areas so it's kind of a very exciting project for us and I hope that the architecture that we have here does give you an idea of what it will look like how do I go forward and back just with the arrows okay or up yeah I'm going to go back to the beginning just to show you the very first line this is a view of the houses that are envisioned for the eastern property line the one-story homes this is a view kind of looking east kind of southeast from one of the pedestrian passeos so this shows what we're envisioning on the right-hand side is a little bit of a two-story home plan too that you can just see at the right side that large tree in the middle is actually an existing tree that we're planning on preserving and then the cottages across the back the large porches so that gives you an idea of what that would look like from inside the project and then I will skip to the last slide we'll come back and then this is a view through the central entrance off of acacia and this shows the variety even though it's there's two different plan types shown here at the end is a plan one the single story and then flanking this pedestrian pathway are the plan twos and you can see how large the porches are they're eight to ten feet so they really are usable and then those dormer elements really bring down the scale of the second story so we're trying to make these houses as authentic and interesting as we can and then just briefly I'll just flash through these I've already talked about the four plans but another feature that we're trying to preserve in this type of neighborhood is a house that someone can live in their entire life plan one has a master bedroom downstairs and a guest bedroom as well since it's a single story with the main living space in the front adjacent to the porch so really encouraging that social interaction that the common green space provides plan two additionally it's a two-story house but it has a master bedroom downstairs so again an aging in place someone could purchase this house they could live downstairs or upstairs and it's also set up for a family so we have the laundry room downstairs so that someone could actually just live here on the ground floor plan three is unique and then it's kind of a narrower house but it's a little deeper taking advantage of the site plan and it has a tandem two-car garage so from the street you only see one car in terms of a garage door and then this these plans actually have a bit of a private backyard so we've provided a front porch with a den space in the front that could also be used as a bedroom and then these plans actually live to the rear and this is more on the busy busier street if you will acacia and winding way so those are the floor plans and elevations turn it back to robert if you have any questions and we're happy to answer them okay again any just clarifying questions right now we'll wait to the public hearing and we may need you to respond after the public hearing so don't go away and are you is your presentation complete i'll wrap it up okay thank you you're done yeah no very close yeah so uh what are we trying to achieve with this and in terms of uh the product types i think we've managed to appeal to a very wide group of homeowners the single story uh two bed two bath units are honestly the ones i'm most excited about because i think they're very livable for either a move down couple an older couple being on one level or a couple starting out but we've also got family units we've got the larger ones out on the street and the the nine homes in the middle and then the nine homes in the middle as adam said we have the master down so they could also be a move down unit with lots of room for visitors grandkids or what have you i think the integration of the private spaces and the public spaces is is really important and we have really a hierarchy of of spaces obviously the private spaces inside and then there's a semi-private space which is the front porch which is not uh accessible unless you're invited to it but it's it's visible and uh you you can talk and wave from there and then you have a barrier of the landscape between the truly public space the per seos and and the porch areas we have the opportunity to build uh an exciting suite of homeowner amenities which i've touched here touched on here and this all goes towards creating the sense of community which is really at the heart of what we're trying to achieve here i mean we set out to design this and came up with the concept for the pocket neighborhood here two years ago which as you all know was before the fires and we saw at that time uh we thought the desire in the marketplace generally in in the area for a greater sense of community than is generally available in a typical subdivision and we also thought there was a desire for a simpler lifestyle well i think we all now know after October 17 that that is absolutely the truth i think it's it's been drilled home to all of us who went through that and i think acacia village will will meet those criteria and will have a great demand thank you very much okay thank you okay so we're going to go ahead and move on to our public hearing i don't have any cards on this but i'm going to go ahead and explain how this works for those of you that haven't been here before i'm going to open the public hearing um and you have the opportunity to move to one of the microphones with or without having filled out a card um i'm going to ask you to state your name for the record and pay attention to the little light bar you get three minutes and i'm a very strict timekeeper so the light bar begins with green and as you make your comments as it gets closer to the end of the three minutes it'll go to yellow and then go to red and a buzzer will go off and i'll just ask you to stop at that point so really try to make your your comments fit in that window um once the public hearing has been completed and i close it that is the end of your opportunity to speak so then it comes back to us and we're going to have our discussion so at that point no calling out no add trying to add additional information or ask questions if a question pops up for you please listen because you you may get an answer it as you listen to our discussion but if you don't get that question answered you'll be able to speak with staff or the applicant after the item is ended but just please no call outs don't interrupt our process and we we want to have it be respectful both ways we want to hear what you have to say and we want you to hear what we have to say so with that i'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing and if anyone would like to speak go ahead and move to a microphone and again if you just give give your name for the record for us you can get a little closer to the microphone for me great thanks okay is that it okay can you hear me now we can i'm alan kaufman and i live excuse me thank you that's better and um my husband bruce dekowski and i are the owner occupants of the property at 325 breedon street in the austin creek neighborhood our property is directly adjacent to the proposed acacia village project and i'm speaking on behalf of a group of austin creek neighbors many of whom are not able to be here today we submitted a detailed document with concerns and recommendations on june 18th and we hope you've had a chance to review it given the high density of nature of acacia village we're most concerned about maintaining the current privacy and security that the austin creek neighborhood has enjoyed for over 20 years neighbors are concerned that opening the winding creek extension to acacia lane will add significant traffic disturbance and noise to the neighborhood we're especially concerned with the increased number and speed of drivers going down winding creek to acacia lane in addition to neighborhood residents opening winding creek to acacia lane at breedon street would create a shortcut from highway 12 in middle brinken due to what we consider an adequate parking plan for acacia village neighbors are concerned that opening the winding creek extension will add significant parking overflow most significantly to both winding creek and breedon street with the density bonus incentives given to the developer there will be a higher density of houses with more cars and there aren't any minimum parking requirements due to the density bonus concessions these extra cars will increase noise and disturbance cause problems with our garbage service and mail delivery make it difficult for our visitors and trades people to park their vehicles as well as compromising our privacy safety and security we've made the following recommendations with the extension of winding creek to acacia lane install traffic calming measures including visual striping on winding creek avenue corner ball bouts and speed limit signs we prefer the current two-way stop on breedon street as opposed to the four-way stop which we think would be noisier and not be effective in traffic calming and as mentioned before we're not in favor of speed bumps which we also consider noisy neighbors are concerned that the proximity of acacia village houses parking areas garages and garbage receptacles to breedon street residents will result in increased loud noise artificial light and this is important because all of our houses face west onto acacia what they face west onto acacia village we've made the following recommendations that the garbage area being closed accessible by a man door facing winding creek to minimize noise and odor for both breedon street and acacia village residents since this project was first proposed over a year ago okay thank you very much and we do have your materials so so thank you for that for submitting them and writing also anyone else wishing to speak okay hello my name is uh frank Rivera my wife and i own property the corner of a winding creek and breedon street i agree with mrs. Kauffman you know been attending all the all the meetings and agree with uh the lack of parking um on acacia and on winding creek winding creek is going to be narrower than the section the corner of winding creek and breedon so with two-way traffic it's going to congest the street more more traffic children are children playing on the street right now and to have more more cars coming and going is going to be concerned to us the previous development that you guys heard you know had a seven units on 1.2 acres here they're going to you know 2.6 acres for 25 units that's you know 30 to 50 additional cars on three acres um and on top of that they're adding four houses on acacia street already that they're developing right now so that's an additional you know 6 to 10 cars so you know putting 60 cars in in three acres it's going to be a lot of a lot of traffic a lot of garbage trucks a lot of you know post office people um kids you don't have a park within a mile right now uh so where the kids where the kids going to play you know you guys say that they're you guys are going to have an area for kids to play but kids kids are going to need places to ride their bikes skateboards and um it's just going to cost more more traffic parents taking the kids to the park to school uh in the mornings you know driving out winding creek to drop off the kids you know increased traffic people going to work um yeah parking parking cars and safety of the kids our concerns just like all the other owners and neighbors in the neighborhood thank you thank you mr vera anyone else okay great state your name for the record please bruce dekosky uh 325 breeding street i'm a neighbor of franks and a lot of people down here um first of all i'd like to just call your attention back to the site maps that we add out that street along the top of the picture not here but uh like uh susie's third slide i think that's breeding street all those homes were built facing this project that's where we have our bedrooms our living rooms and our dining rooms and because of that we are quite concerned with our there that's them across the top that's the immediate neighborhood we're third from the right frank is there on the far right corner and uh we are all situated facing this project we were very happy to hear from mr upton and mr hooper that they would only put the plan one single story homes along that line we're very appreciative of that one of the other things that i'd like to address now is the fact that the city standard 15 foot setback would really be appreciated by us as well and i think from the the look of the plan drawing here i think that would be quite possible without having to rearrange the front yards of those homes um a couple other things that we're concerned about regarding noise if the garage which is right up against the back line of the property the arrow on the upper right there if those closed garages could be insulated for noise that would be a consideration as well there's a garbage area there we would like the personnel door for the garbage area to face winding creek where there are no homes um that's a noise issue and um one of the other things was we were concerned about if there are any lights in the back of this project they're going to be shining right into our bedrooms i'm not sure that there are but i just wanted to mention that as well i think that's about all we had i want to appreciate once again the developers for changing that back line to all plan one homes and i hope i think we'll be fine with that after it gets in there but these other considerations or things we could deal with right now that might would help us a lot and i don't think would inconvenience the development or the developers too much thank you very much thank you mr kowski anyone else wishing yeah go ahead hi my name is uh james gowan i've lived in the subdivision since october 1997 my address is 358 breeden so i'm on the south side of winding creek the one thing that's kind of missing from the presentation is a that part of breeden street is an elevated part of the street so it's a magnet for kids so many times you'll have kids going up there on skateboards bikes bikes carts and go zooming down the street because it is an opportunity for them to have some fun so i think regarding the four-way stop at winding creek and breeden is is a necessity even without this project i've seen too many kids go zooming through that intersection not paying attention because they're having fun and so i've already had to warn my family to please be careful and drive it through there the other thing that i think that we have to also keep in mind is we're when we're talking about safety and circulation is our other main roads in in that area our main roads are highway 12 and middle rican currently there's only two access points from our subdivision to those main streets we have approximately 130 homes in in in our subdivisions that are only have two access points having this third access point will relieve some of the the issues that we have especially during commuter hours and coming in and going out of our subdivision many times when i'm driving home at night between hours of four and six in the evening i'm always concerned by getting hit on highway 12 as i pull in to make a left turn to middle rican because there's too many cars already queued up to try to make a left turn also in the morning when i'm trying to get on highway 12 the one access point i use currently does not have a light occasionally does have a light and so that will also be additional safety for us that are commuting during commute hours to get out of our subdivisions lastly i just also like to mention i know there has been talk about emergency gate in lieu of having an open street during the fires in october 2017 we do have an emergency gate at the south side of beriden that was never opened for the two weeks when we had the evacuation orders and that was always a concern of mine so i i do hope that the street does open up and i hope that you can get a four-way stop there thank you thank you anyone else yeah i don't know i'll start this i'll just wait for you guys to give me that ring lighter i'm sorry i can't hear you can oh i was gonna say i don't know what exactly when i start this i just start talking in your timing yes we'll give us your name first and then he's going to hit the green button okay i'm kody kyle a resident of 690 kasha lane i'd like to cross supply and echo all the concerns we're having about the possibility of increased traffic already when there was the connection with kasha lane to the division to the south of us when they're doing that new construction for a while we had greatly increased in very rapid traffic through our street and it only died off once they tore up the street extensively and clogged it with construction vehicles that people stopped taking as an alternative to cut around the intersection between 12 and mission our other concern is that we are to the right of that development as on screen and that they're planning to put a road extension right along our property line and that our house when it was built had no intention for there to be a roadway there so our specifically the bedrooms of that house are joined up right along that side there we also have the issues of the increased lighting that's going to be for both the development and for the parking in the back great thank you anyone else okay oops hi my name is terry sarasini i live at 705 akasha lane and i the traffic already with the construction that's going on is kind of crazy and i was there long before the subdivision that is breeden lane and where winding creek is going to open and what i'm concerned about is i'm a little bit towards highway 12 from this plan but i don't know that you plan to actually pay the kasha lane to absorb all this traffic that's coming my way that's it great thank you anyone else wishing to speak okay i'm not seeing anyone move so i'm going to go ahead and close public hearing and i think mr upton we should start with you and addressing um where'd you go there you are okay some of the concerns that i think you can best address is maybe going through um how the garbage service is going to be dealt with sure we have a trash enclosure uh two in fact one in each parking area uh we haven't designed those yet but uh you know they will be communal trash areas we will include a man door to address those concerns and are they considered enclosed i mean some of the concerns that they're they're talking about they will be enclosed i think that's a condition of the okay and they're just not designed yet yes okay all right and i believe there was a question about the potential of a 15 foot setback on your your cottages you want to speak to that certainly uh i you know i can certainly understand the comment and the request uh what we've tried to do is balance those rear yard areas which are not really intended to be usable i mean they're big enough that people can use them but uh you know we've oriented our homes out into the common areas and try to encourage people to use those common areas um you know i i do totally understand the residents along there uh and their feelings i think we've reached a reasonable compromise uh if we moved the increased the shortest setback which i think is 11 feet to 15 feet i honestly don't think it would make a whole lot of difference to to their situation um but it would impact our common area in the front i'd also mentioned that one real challenge that we've had in designing the site plan is incorporating the current stormwater plans i mean we're quite properly uh required now by the state to retain stormwater on site rather than just dump it into a big culvert and shoot it off to be somebody else's problem somewhere else so we have to design a series of swales and infiltration basins and on a tight site like this that becomes a real challenge to get those to the necessary standards and also to get the underground utilities in and everything else that we have to do so uh but there's not a lot of flexibility in our site plan here okay and then um a couple more things are the the garages planned to be insulated not insulated as such but i mean there'll be solid construction that there'll be wood framed with wood siding uh i honestly don't see a noise issue there i mean that they purely are for storage of cars they're not intended to be workshops or anything like that um you know the other point that i think we've made already is that we're going to insist through the HOA that cars are scored there and there is uh space for a car in each garage but you know uh frankly i don't see it as a noise issue okay so um and then just uh lighting at the rear of the project yes lighting uh would be directed towards the common areas and would be the minimum required for safety and security purposes uh i'm a big fan of dark sky lighting we should be projecting all our lights downwards onto the ground where it's needed we shouldn't be this is not a Walmart parking lot with 30 foot pylons and sodium lights so you know again we haven't designed the lighting but it will be sensitive to uh the residential situation and uh we want to do that for the benefit of our neighbors but also for the benefit of our residents you know they're all going to be in close proximity to to the lighting okay great um so i think the rest of the things don't go away we may have our questions of you soon but i want to make sure that the public questions get addressed and the next ones i think will need to be addressed by staff so hang on okay okay and then um staff i think the um it may need to be our our engineer uh some of the the concerns about the street stop signs i'll get more specific as you but you were here you heard them so go for it i chair sisco and members of the commission hey susan mckeague speaking and i took some notes on this as well um it seems like these would be things that we could add if we had to um i i would have uh the city traffic engineer weigh in on uh stop signs and bulb outs and that sort of thing because that's really more traffic engineering's purview and these also represent off-site improvements that weren't originally envisioned here but i i think that it would be possible to add them okay um so we'll get to mr sprinkle here soon but um their concerns and i know is a concern for me and looking at how winding creek will ultimately join acacia lane the improvements are going to be within the property line right i mean there's sort of a place where zigzags out how's that going to be handled and it looked like the dac indicated that there'll be half improvements on winding creek and then just sort of a pavement and a curb on the other side so it's drivable but maybe you could describe what's going to happen to winding creek absolutely um so on the westerly side of the street the project side of the street since there isn't the ability of having a parking lane there because the spacing of the driveways actually prohibits any parking in between them the parking lane is is not there and the travel lane is then widened to 12 feet and then on the other side of the street it's also 12 feet um and then that has just a standard ac dyke or ac berm as they call it so but there isn't really any way to get parking there any house so that actually having that open and not be able to have parking on it is not would make it unnecessarily wide and a really wide street really makes it look more like a opening for uh fast driving but but the the other half side of winding creek will be paved with an an asphalt berm it's not just going to be gravel the way acacia lane is right now no definitely not sir it will be drivable it's going to be the essentially the travel lane is going to be the same on both sides of the street but it's it's called out as half width improvements on one side since they are different along the curb line but the pavement it will be the same on both sides okay okay and um and because of that narrow I realized mr sprinkles is going to speak to this but would the bolt out be a problem given that property line it would reduce parking up towards the intersection with breeden so that might be an inconvenience to residents there who would otherwise want to park there but outside of that I don't envision it would stick out further than the parking lane itself so it would probably neck down to the width of winding creek along the southerly portion which is 24 feet okay and then I think just generally for miss sarasena's issue I understand that the the one project that's currently being built on acacia they're doing their half street improvements the half street in front of this project will be left as gravel until it's built and they do their improvements but is there any other plans cip plans or anything for other improvements to acacia lane or are we going to wait for development essentially um as it has been occurring along this street and will it is likely to occur the same way it'll just be built through development I've not seen any plans through cip for any sorts of improvements along that corridor okay okay all right so then I think maybe the rest are for mr sprinkle to speak to stop signs bullbouts traffic calming striping christs go members of the commission thank you I'm Rob sprinkles city traffic engineer I did want to make one clarification I think the bullbots that's being proposed is actually at the intersection of breed breed in and winding creek not at the site location oh okay so I didn't get that I think that's I wanted to make that clarification that wouldn't be within the purview of this development correct it could be an offsite improvement it could okay is my understanding correct correct um the stop controls can definitely be optional I don't know that they would meet full warrants but I understand the concerns of the neighborhood as far as the installation as was mentioned they are noisy but it also does you know stop traffic at those locations so it um so it's a consideration we can make and it's something that we could look at with the project or following the project if it's needed at at a later date so it's it's something that's within traffic engineering's purview to review and install as needed so we could definitely work with the neighborhood on that by either holding off and waiting and then installing on a later date or doing them with this project we're open to either okay um as far as the bullbots oh I'm sorry did you have a question no go ahead okay as far as the bullbots are concerned um my suggestion with those would be just to bowl about the direction of winding creek because that is the more of the direction of concern because as you do bowl about the curb returns you do diminish the ability to park near those corners so if parking is a concern which sounds like it is from the residents we won't provide as much parking as possible for the existing residents we won't want to necessarily bowl about the entire intersection for both the breed and lane approaches and the winding creek approach is just the winding creek which is where I think the concern is with a cut through traffic and that's where we'd want to narrow the lanes there was also mentioned about conditioning some edge line striping I believe and we're fully on board with that that's something that we would we would support as well you didn't mention the paving on acacia and I'll check on that with the cip I don't think that we have any cip projects however we may be able to do some temporary paving if that is an issue through our maintenance staff so I'm gonna I'll check in on that it's very sad out there I dreadful to drive I understand that's another traffic comment yeah um speed limit signs was also brought up we would definitely can review that um look at installing additional speed limit signs if that's a concern typically we do push speed limits and have speed limit signs on the entry to neighborhoods but not throughout um but we can supplement the existing signs if they're not if they're not there or if the addition ones are appropriate I think that covers unless there's other questions I'm happy to answer other commissioners may have questions but just and again it sounds like all of those could be handled without us actually changing a condition on the DAC or would something have to be changed on the DAC if we choose to do so I think we all let them they wrote it so I guess they better answer I think the bull bouts could be attached to the project but anything else that could be at the discretion of the city traffic engineering department not attached to the project I think that would be preferred okay okay great so commissioners any questions of staff yeah commissioner dug in so just to clarify on the bull bouts mr rose that would be only at winding creek in breeden but on the winding creek and not I believe that was good it was as mr sprinkle described it okay because it sounded like I wanted to ask the applicant it sounded like he was they were resistant to having bull bouts condition but it sounded like along their property frontage I'm not sure about that this is kind of a compound question well I think staff would recommend if there's anything to be proposed as a condition of approval that's not in the draft we certainly should inquire with the applicant to see what their thought is on that okay and also I had a question or sort of a curiosity about the condition of the garbage pickup after 8 a.m. and is this because the garbage truck would not be the same truck making the rounds in the adjacent neighborhoods because it's picking up a dumpster yeah typically it is a different truck the picks up dumpsters rather than the standard single family residential trash bins okay because I know that lots of the single family trash bin come they come through much earlier than 8 a.m. typically yeah they they do on mine too but the the the reason for that is when they open up the the storage area and they have to wheel them out sometimes if they're not able to just pull in pull in and given the restricted area there that would just make more noise so all right thanks that's all right now okay any other questions of staff down here Mr. Carter yeah my questions pertain to the expansion of the street network in general in the neighborhood I noticed signs on prospect one to the north of prospect by the creek at cabera or something anyway winding creek all had signs indicating future expansion of those streets is that but I'm hearing that there's not anything in the cip for those extensions or the total improvement of acacia is that correct my understanding I believe the reason for the the signs and if you can correct me if I'm misinterpreting your question that this says future traffic will be on the streets do the extension of the this is exactly the reason why those signs are placed is to notify residents as they are looking at purchasing homes in the area that the street will eventually according to the general plan be connected to another street and will not be a dead end so there are other streets in the neighborhood that will prospect to the north will also connect over to prospect that's on the on prospect on the west will connect to the prospect on the east that's to the north of this location thank you yeah commissure okay um yes the advocate indicated that um he was he had inquired about not extending winding creek and that the the city and fire were not applicable or amenable to that is that correct yes correct that's part of a circulation plan that's been approved is there any kind of development on this particular parcel that it would be amenable not to extend winding creek i i don't think so this the site is targeted for residential uses and i think any residential uh project proposed at it would be required to do that street improvement okay thank you any other questions of staff right now yeah commissure dug in i have one more about acacia lane the unpaved portion so once this if this project goes forward and they do their half street improvement on acacia and then the one that's currently out there under construction does their half street improvement do we know how much of acacia will remain unpaved and is that that would that be covered by a cip project i think casus um answered that saying that if the street will be completed through development projects and uh rob has suggested that perhaps where it's not complete through the construction of acacia village that perhaps and we don't know that but perhaps we'll look into doing a temporary paving where it's not the same as the street you know and it's a but it was connected like prospect and then whatever is on the other so hasis has just notified me that that portions of the acacia lane may be private or we don't have jurisdiction to actually do the paving so those are the things we need to look at before i that's why i don't know exactly if we can do it so we have to make those clarifications before we jump out and start paving and if i if i may just chime in on that um these items since since what you're hearing is we can evaluate those city traffic engineering can evaluate those could implement them on their own if they're feasible and if they're needed staff would recommend that that's the approach that's taken rather than attach these to the project particularly if they're off-site improvements because then there needs to be a clear nexus and we've not done that evaluation so i think that staff recommendation would be for all of these items that we're discussing they'd be left to the evaluation and to the discretion of the city traffic engineering department okay and that includes the bulb outs yes okay great that's what we want to know um any questions of the applicant yeah mr. okraki uh yeah regarding traffic your traffic engineer here no we do not have traffic engineer here the project engineers civil engineers okay my question is there's a net 226 trips on here and uh with um a.m. of an additional 24 net and p.m. of additional 18 net for total of 42 yet there's 185 missing there and it was deemed to be uh less than significant impact if even if you're using 10 trips or 10 hours between those peak hours that's 18 and a half trips so how so you're saying your peak hours are the same as your regular hours i'm just wondering how that was how that determination was made i'm afraid i can't tell you i i would need the traffic engineer to address that so i think i understand your question um the the trips that are listed here are generated from the it transportation um engineering manual for generation of of single family trips for the first single family dwellings the standard rate is correct it's about 10 trips per day per household as a standard rate and it's 9.44 so that doesn't raise any issues for me um so that the total being uh 227 net i have on my sheet maybe that's a different than yours um and then having okay i think i i think i see what you're saying so the the amp peak trips being 18 that's basically the conglomeration of people going to work or maybe returning from work and then the 24 in the in the pm peak um again people returning from work throughout the rest of the day it's not just the rest of the middle of the day it's the rest of the entire day all the 24 hours which this 226 or 27 trips are being generated is um spread over basically is that answering your question or not exactly uh a little bit but i mean i guess it's just when i'm looking at it you have you're averaging you know 10 trips an hour at three in the morning four in the morning two in the morning one in the morning when that's just probably not likely and it to me it looks like that using that it it it looks like that there's a lot of trips that are being spread out not in peak hours which would be the most likely use of those so that it doesn't hit that 50 trip threshold no we we don't allow the um applicant to spread the trip generation this is what's generated in the actual manual so they don't have the latitude to do that the um the way we if we look at it just on a rough schedule we would say that this really the trips are spread over to 10 to 12 hour period is basically where we're looking at so 10 to 12 hours um period 24 being the most then in the rest of the trips throughout the day being about equal but less would add up to the 226 trips as i think you're talking about yeah it's just it doesn't seem to me that two extra trips would equal peak hours versus on non peak hours i see exactly what you're saying i know you don't have an answer i'm just that's just a concern right and but we do check these numbers according to what the manuals are indicate to make sure that they are correct according to what the manual is so we do double check those things and if i can just chime in i the analysis that was done the conditions that were applied to this project it's a consistent standard convention to how we evaluate the traffic studies and how we condition these projects so that same methodology is used consistently throughout this type of project hey mr weeks this question for the applicant can you tell me what are the bedroom sizes and the low-income units uh well the units haven't been designed yet but uh there'll be the three or four bedroom units uh i can't really comment as to what sizes there'll be but well i can say they'll be consistent very similar not necessarily identical but very similar to the market rate units so they'll they'll be reasonably sized so i guess my question is really um are you planning on having them be just the two bedroom units or the three or the four or you don't know yet uh there'll probably be four bedroom units so they'll probably be family units and when do you execute the agreement with the housing authority uh i well susie would have to answer that final map they'll have to execute the agreement before the final map is recorded i believe certainly before a building permit issuance but i think it's it's actually um it's it's a deed restriction on the final map anything else from staff for the commissioner carter yeah i hope i'm not going back too far here but when the um housing incentive fund was offered it was uh in the staff report it said it was for infrastructure improvements were were there identified infrastructure improvements at the time or was is that i'm actually going to defer to the applicant because that was something that was handled with another the housing department and uh planning staff was not involved in that discussion we just kind of put the brakes on the entitlement process until it was resolved so let me now happy to answer that um yes uh the improvements were the off-site improvements so the work to uh acacia lane and the extension of winding creek uh those were the improvements it was after we uh made that estimate that the project across the street which was already approved started and that changed the scope of what we would have to do it reduced the scope of what we would have to do but that that was the work that was intended so the infrastructure improvements that you've included in your project were the were the ones that were identified for the incentive fund yes what we're now building exactly the same ones yes thank you okay any any other questions okay thank you um go ahead um have the commission move a resolution we'll start with the uh conditional use permit resolution for purposes of discussion i'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa making findings and determinations and approving a conditional use permit for acacia village a small lot subdivision located at 746 acacia lane file number prj18-036 and wave further reading all second that was moved by commissioner duck and seconded by commissioner peterson uh vice chair weeks you want to start on this one sure um i am going to be supporting the project i do appreciate that you've worked with the neighbors and some of their issues uh not all of them um but they do appreciate that you've um have changed some of the design because of that and that you're providing um some low income uh rental unit so i'll be supportive of the project i can make all the findings commissioner peterson uh i also think that this is a great example of what appears to me to be pretty positive interaction between the community and the developer where um with sort of a back and forth it was able to come up with a better designed better integrated plan and and so i commend the the community and the developer for that um i think in in a general sense this what we've heard from the public both in the written comments and tonight was uh cars are the problem and uh whether it's you know speeding the noise uh parking the dangerous to kids what we're facing in a lot of these projects and especially in infill projects um are the issues around cars where do you keep them uh what are they doing uh how's it affecting the neighborhood and the character and i think as sort of counterintuitively what the developers proposed with this development is one of the solutions to the issues that were raised by the public i think if we get denser housing if we get people out of their cars if we get walkable neighborhoods if we get that level of density that justifies having services nearby in order to grocery store or dry cleaner parks all these sort of things that people want in a walkable neighborhood i think you solve the car problem i think if people don't need two cars or they don't need to have you know get in their car to go visit a friend or um run errands i think it would uh really change sort of the nature of of these types of calculations that we make at the planning commission level related to that in terms of the design and the development i i think it as was pointed out by the architect i think it's great to have these more modestly sized houses i there's just an article in the wall street journal that said you know these boomer retirees can't unload their five six seven thousand square foot houses because nobody wants them and they can't keep going up and down the stairs they can't maintain the yards or keep it clean and so i think having a focus more externally solves problems like that as well as safety security the sense of the community safety of the kids playing outside and um so i i think it's it's a very thoughtfully designed development and i think with the concessions the developer is given to the community in terms of the orientation of the houses and the lighting i think really really makes sense for the area and as a model going forward uh the specific issues that have been in in front of us that have come up from public comments as well as questions from the commission i um i'm not sure i'd be inclined to include a a bulb out as part of the conditions of the project i'm i'm interested to hear from my fellow commissioners on that uh but that's certainly the the way i'm leaning i i would be more inclined to uh sort of deferred to mr sprinkles approach which is have the sort of the development go in get feedback from the community and the developers see what would work best whether it's a two-way stop four-way stop no stop um that's that's sort of the the sense i get is the best approach um so uh with that i depending discussion among the commission on that issue i'm uh i think i'd be able to make all necessary findings for this project and i believe that was staff's recommendation that we not try to condition even the bulb outs that we just let it go through that process so and i agree with that too so commissioner crepeki um excuse me uh there's a lot to like about this project um this application low income housing especially on the east side the tree preservation i'm happy the advocate made some concessions i will say that i was very pleased to hear the back and forth and how respectful and both ways it was including public comment that's not always the way it goes in correspondence or in this room um that's a i agree with my my colleagues is a great example of infill with community spaces and learning to beat neighbors i'm kind of forcing them and um uh with winding the winding creek extension being unavoidable with any development of any kind um uh my only concern would be the traffic that i brought up but i guess my qualms aren't so much for the applicant and staff but the methods and and and uh that are used to get to those numbers so all that aside uh i am in i will be in support of this project i'm also going to listen to staff's recommendation to not condition this at all um and i can make all the required findings please for a second i can also make all the required findings i think it's a great project i like the common area and the front porches and the common amenities and um the fact that the the applicant has worked so hard with the neighbors and and made some changes because of the neighbor input i think that's a great start to a successful project and interact with an existing neighborhood i like the um affordable units and that it's a four sale project and so i'm fully in support of it commission call you i also agree with all my fellow commissioners um i really appreciate the back and forth with the community and the developer as commissioner krapke said that's not usually or not always the way things go um i really think this concept of a pocket neighborhood is really interesting and i think it's a it's a great use for this for this site and with the smaller sized lots and the smaller houses and having really creating community with the neighborhood is is really interesting to me and i can make all the required findings and we'll be supporting this project and commissioner carder i generally agree with my colleagues that this is another imaginatively designed infill housing project i do believe that as we approach more urban densities and textures in this part of town i think we need to pay careful attention to the development of infrastructure not to enhance traffic but to give opportunities for connection for all modes of travel i think acacia lane is going to become a very important connection to this neighborhood and the sooner we can get a full service acacia lane that serves all modes of travel the better awful be so i'd encourage staff to pursue a cip program that looks at getting a street network in here that can support this type of density and imaginative planning and i think with that i can make all of the findings and i would just echo all that's been said and in particular recognizing the back and forth with the neighborhood and the applicant that's it's always such a pleasure for us to see um so many positive things have been said that i won't repeat but i would just repeat for the the benefit of the community there that the connectivity is really really important every time we plan anything anywhere and streets are involved we're looking at where the next project might be and how do we we get a circulation route so that traffic is reduced so you know i appreciate the desire to continue to have your your fence there or your emergency exit there but it that just really isn't how the city is designed to work and how our general plan works so and i definitely would vote for anything that could be done to improve acacia lane wherever it could be improved because i know i was dreading going out to visit the site because i've been on that road before and it needs a lot of help so this project will definitely get the front portion of it good up up to where you guys are but boy it's it's not pleasant so with that um the conditional use permit resolution was moved by commissioner dug in seconded by commissioner peterson and your votes please and that passes with seven eyes and then we have another resolution i believe the tentative map i'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of san erosa approving the acacia village tentative map located at seven four six acacia lane file number prj one eight dash zero three six and wait for the reading all second okay so that resolution was moved by commissioner dug in seconded by commissioner peterson any other discussion or comments great your votes please and that passes with seven eyes and i believe that concludes our business this evening i have word that our july 11th meeting is being cancelled so i'll go ahead and adjourn this meeting to our second meeting in july