Welcome to the March 12th
2026 regular meeting of the Planning Commission of Walnut Creek
Would you take the role?
Thank you chair
Commissioner Moran here Commissioner clop
Commissioner clop
Commissioner Commissioner strongman here Commissioner clock. Sorry about the rotation there. Mr. Clock here
Vice chair meeting. Yeah chair Anderson. Yeah
Commissioner count is attending a California League of Cities planning conference and she will not be here tonight
And I would note that anyone who's up into that that's a terrific thing to you learn a lot
So next year, they'll do it again
So the first thing on the agenda tonight is to elect a new chair
It comes with this fantastic old nameplate here. It tells you who you are and
that's not all. You get the
famous Walnut Creek gavel toolkit
which
you know hardwood
It's slightly used
Slightly because Walnut Creek citizens are by and large very well behaved. We don't have to use it very often at all
So I will take nominations for the new chair
I'd be pleased to nominate Pam needing for chair
second
Commissioner club
Yes, mr. Strongman. Yes, mr. Moran. Yes, mr. Kwok. Yes
vice chair needing
And chair Anderson. Yes, that is motion carries and we have a new commissioner. We'll go. Are you gonna do the honors? Okay, great
You are now driving the boat
Now I would like to
Who would like to nominate for vice chair? I'd like to nominate Molly cloth for vice chair
second
Commissioner Kwok. Yes.
Let me catch up here. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Okay Commissioner Klopp.
Yes. Commissioner Strongman. Yes. Vice Chair Needing. Yes. And Commissioner Anderson. Yes.
Motion carries. Did I get everybody?
So before we go on to the consent calendar, oh
Can I was it commissioner strongman that second second in that okay, I'm sorry I got that wrong. Thank you clear
But before we go to the consent calendar, I just want to thank
former chair Anderson
For just doing such a wonderful job. We we had chicken
We had so many we a pickleball
All how many other things we had so many
built we had yes
You chaired the first builders remedy project notwithstanding the last
Either the last the one and only
Pardon me two dealerships
Dealerships you chaired us and walked us and guided us through
chickens and foods and coffees and bakeries and all sorts of housing legislation
And you did it so gracefully also.
And also helped us out whenever we
had to call for a break to use the potty.
So I thank you for even being considerate for that.
So I just want to thank you so much for everything.
That's the first time I've been accused of grace.
Thank you.
OK, so now, do we have anything on the consent calendar?
There is nothing on the consent calendar,
nor are there any recommendations
to move any items to consent.
Perfect.
So now on to public communication.
So there's two opportunities for the public
to propose public comment.
The first is during each item of the agenda,
which we only have one item as it pertains to that item.
But if anyone in the audience has a comment
that is within the purview of the Planning Commission
and that is not on the agenda item,
which we only have one,
The time to do that is now.
Do we have any?
Seeing none.
Great, so now I'd like to start the portion
of the public hearing, which we have.
Oh, that's right.
Before we start the public hearing for the item,
did anyone have any ex parte communication?
I see a lot of shaking of no.
So the project that we have before
is the Sunnyvale Single Family Residential Development
Major Subdivision Density Bonus Design Review Tree Removal
Tree Drip Line Encroachment Permit.
Does the staff have a presentation?
So I apologize in advance for my coffee.
Good evening, planning commissioners.
My name is Gerardo Victoria,
Assistant Planner Community Development Department.
The project before you today
is the Sunnyvale Single Family Residential Development
located at 1725 Sunnyvale Avenue.
As some site context, the general plan designation for this site is single family medium.
The zoning designation is Single Family Residential 8, and it is surrounded by other single family
neighborhoods and the Taiwanese Cultural Church.
So this is where the Cultural Church is located right there.
As you can see, the lot is outlined in yellow, and this is Sunnyvale Avenue right there.
And this is the front of the property, the one single-family home, and then this is on
the inside of the property, the second single-family home.
So the project is calling to demo the two existing single-family residential homes and
the accessory structures on the lot, construct an eight-lot subdivision with a private street,
a five-foot right-of-way dedication facing Sunnyvale Avenue that's consistent with the
future street setback standards, eight two-story single-family homes with
accessible dwelling units, one low income will be an affordable unit out
of the eight, the project is asking for a density bonus for 14 waivers, new
landscaping, a new bioretension area, new retaining walls, new privacy fences, and
And the removal of 32 trees, 11 of which are highly protected in Walnut Creek.
So for your consideration tonight at the Planning Commission is for the major subdivision,
the design review, the density bonus, the tree removal and tree drip line encroachment permits.
This project did go to the Design Review Commission as a study session in November of 2025.
At the Design Review Commission, they made the following recommendations.
To increase the height of the perimeter fence to seven feet,
the applicant has revised the plans
to install a seven-foot fence,
which includes a two-foot lattice
along the interface within the existing neighborhood.
Expand the canopy of the trees being planted.
So the applicant has selected trees native to Walnut Creek,
with larger canopies and faster growth rates.
Select tree species known for fast growth rates
and include some trees as 36 inch box sizes.
The applicant has selected faster growth rates,
two 36 inch box native oak trees
have been added to the project.
Re-examining the planting of the gum trees.
There was some concern about the native species
and their growth rates.
The applicant has revised the landscape plan.
Substituting the gum trees for coast live oaks,
Brisbane box trees, crate myrtles,
strawberry trees and a trident maple trees.
Conduct a thorough analysis of the habitat
within the parcel.
There was concerns raised by the neighbors
about the local wildlife.
A biological report submitted to staff
dated December of 2025 shows
that there's no habitat of concern.
The mature trees on the lot are old,
but they are unaccompanied bird nests.
They have unaccompanied bird nests.
No special status, species or habitats were found or are considered likely to occur on the site.
So the Housing Accountability Act, the SB 330, the city's review is limited if the project meets all applicable standards.
The project cannot be denied.
The density cannot be lowered without specific findings due to health and safety.
Invest the ordinances, the policies, the standards when the pre-app was submitted.
The pre-app was submitted in July of 2025.
This project is consistent with the city's objective
standards, including development regulations
and design review standards and guidelines
and the development standards,
with the exception of those waived.
The applicant is requesting 14 waivers.
So this is the existing site plan.
This is Sunnyvale Avenue right here.
These are the two single family homes
that are gonna be demoed.
There's one right there, there's one here.
and the accessory structures right here.
This is the proposed eight lot subdivision.
This is Sunnyvale Avenue right here.
This is a new right of way dedication
facing Sunnyvale Avenue.
New viral retention right there.
The new private street located here.
These are the eight lots
which have a 11 foot rear yard setback right here.
I think the lot four is gonna be
the low income affordable unit.
and lot eight right here has a new 13 foot,
four inch setback along these neighbors right here.
As you can see they have retaining walls
and seven foot fences located throughout the site.
So the density bonus request,
the general plan designation for this site
allows 3.1 to six dwelling units per acre.
The size of the lot is 0.93 acres,
which comes out to a 5.58 dwelling units per acre,
we always round up, so the base density is six units.
One of the homes is low income level,
so they are providing 17% density bonus,
which allows them to increase the units by 30.5%,
which gets them to 1.52, so we round up from 1.52.
We round up to two, that is where they get
the eight maximum single family homes.
Density bonus allows relief from standards
that would physically preclude the feasibility
of the housing development.
Again, the applicant is requesting 14 waivers.
The city is required to waive such standards
unless it makes specific findings
and any such proposal would have a specific adverse impact
upon the health safety or the physical environment.
These are the 14 waivers that are being requested.
I'm not gonna go through all of them, so just a couple.
So in the residential eight zone,
the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet.
They are proposing a 4,100 square foot lot sizes, lots two to six, which they are also
asking for a minimum lot width and lot furnish and lot depth to be reduced.
The minimum rear yard setback in a residential eight zone is 15 feet and they are requesting
11 feet.
So there's two types of elevation plans.
The floor plan is all the same throughout all the lots.
So the first plan is transitional, calls for white snow, board and batten siding with white
no smooth coat stucco with glass sectional garage doors with a gable roof.
These are the exterior wall sconces located on the exterior of the homes
right there and over here. The second elevation plan is the Bay Area Plan,
calls for evergreen fog horizontal siting, smooth coat stucco and also glass
sectional garage doors and they have a hip roof with the same wall sconces. This
This right here, this left elevation with the bullet windows for privacy is going to
be facing the Dunning residence on lot eight.
And I can go back to that slide.
So this is the floor plan for the entire development.
This is the first floor plan right here.
This is the entrance.
The kitchen to this single family home is located in the rear.
The accessory dwelling unit, which is 277 square feet,
is located on the first floor.
It has its own exterior entrance here,
and it has its own kitchen right there.
This is a two-car garage.
On the second floor, you have your three bedrooms.
One, two, three.
There's an option for a fourth bedroom
that if someone selects the option of the fourth bedroom,
it would replace the accessory dwelling unit
located on the first floor right here.
So new landscaping, a new bioretention area.
This is the bioretention area off of lot one,
facing Sunnyvale Avenue.
I'm just gonna go through some of the new trees.
So the blue trees are the strawberry trees
that are located off lots five, six, one, two, three,
and four.
The yellow circles are the new Brisbane box trees
that are located off seven and eight.
And the green trees are the two 36 inch coast live oaks
located off lots six and seven and on lot eight.
There is over 11,000 square feet of new landscaping.
That's the footprint.
5,300 of that is irrigated landscaping.
These are the tree removal details.
So the project is proposing to remove 32 trees.
The ones in red are proposed to be removed.
Eight have already been approved to be removed
the city arborist due to poor health. So 24 are in good health, 11 of the 24 are
highly protected which are valley yokes and black walnuts. So the ones with the
yellow are the highly protected trees and the project is keeping one highly
protected tree located here. So staff anticipates using the CEQA 15-332 in the
field exemption. The project is consistent with the applicable general
plan designation and all general plan policies as well as the zoning
designation. The project is consistent with the single family medium general
plan designation and the single family residential R8 zoning designation that
the proposed development occurs within the city limits on a project site of no
more than five acres. The project site is 0.93 acres and it is within the city
limits. The project site has no value as its habitat for endangered or rare or
threatened species. As a biological report stated, it indicates no habitats
of concern on the lot with no special species or significant biological
resources found or expected on the site. Approval of this project would not
result in any significant effects relating to traffic noise air quality
or water quality. The project will not generate any significant effects related
to traffic noise or quality due to the small scale of the proposed project and
and that the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The project site is currently being served by all the utilities and the public services.
So staff recommends move to adopt the draft resolution approving the CEQA determination,
the major subdivision, the density bonus and requested waivers, pursuant to state density
bonus law, the design review, the tree removal and tree trip line encroachment permits.
is available for any questions. The applicant Mr. Doug Cummings is also here with his team,
if you have any questions for him. Perfect, thank you so much. Does anybody have any questions for
staff? Yes. Could you speak a little bit more about the ADUs and what it does to our
stats and our arena numbers? ADUs increase our arena numbers, so that's a good thing.
I don't have the actual numbers of Farina, but they do impact those numbers in a positive way.
And is there any way we can require that they actually be built as ADUs?
That the ADU be built as an ADU?
Yeah, because the option bedroom is not taken into account.
No, so the ADU is an attached ADU, it's being built unless someone wants the option of a
fourth bedroom instead of the ADU.
Could we restrict it that they have to have it as an ADU?
That I heard of the city attorney, can we restrict that option?
Well, I guess whether or not it will be an occupancy space.
So the motto would be, are you thinking it's just whether or not
they have that kitchen, essentially?
I guess since the ADUs, if we had eight, was it ADUs,
increasing our numbers, if we could retain that as eight
and eliminate the optional bedroom.
Can I ask a question, Claire?
Yeah, sorry about that.
How does it work?
How does the option work for the affordable unit that
has the optional ADU?
When the buyer doesn't have, would a BMR buyer
have an option to build the ADU?
Or is the ADU also an option or not an option in the BMR?
That'd be interesting, right?
The ADU, and the applicant can answer that question,
but the ADU is an option for all the eight lots.
if they choose a fourth bedroom instead of the ADU?
Including the BMR unit.
And that's my understanding.
So then, wouldn't, so since it's one unit,
even though, even though the unit is restricted to low AMI,
that would not, that would not flow to the ADU.
You mean, is the ADU gonna be also a low income?
Yeah, because it's within the,
it's within the home of the restricted BMR.
I don't think we have that restriction on,
I think it's only on the sale of the house,
of the property.
The home itself.
Yeah.
If it's gonna be an ADU, it's gonna be separate.
Okay.
Yeah.
Oh, thank you, thank you.
Great question.
So just to be clear, the ADU's not a part of this hearing.
So because the way that it does
is that it gets processed separately.
So essentially it's for illustrative purposes,
but we don't approve the ADUs as a part of public hearing
because it has to be ministerial.
Just a quick follow-up, just while we're talking
about the ADUs, and I understand it's ministerial.
However, could there be a situation
where the BMR unit is built, sold, someone owns it,
rents the ADU for market rate?
Or would they be allowed to rent it at all?
Or would it have to be BMR as a rental?
I know I'm putting you on the spot, Claire, and I apologize.
But it just occurred to me that that was a-
It's a great question.
And I don't know the answer to that,
but my reaction would be that the BMR unit
is a for sale unit,
and it would only apply to the sale of the property.
But you wouldn't be able to,
well I guess the ADU would go with the BMR
because you can't separately convey it, so.
Yeah, I don't think there's any restrictions
on what that new homeowner could rent the ADU for.
It's inherently low income because of the size of them.
And I would imagine if that were the case,
there's income qualifications
or whoever is renting that out,
and so that would impact the numbers if that's-
And I know we're not doing this here,
but that would be something to consider
if it's going to be a BMR unit
that if it does have an ADU attached to it,
that somehow that also be restricted with the rental,
the market rate.
Kicking up a lot of dust here and I get that,
but it's something to consider
whether it be now or down the road.
I had a little trouble figuring out how you start with five units and you add 17% and
you come up with eight units.
So I look through it, and I think I understand, but I'm going to go through it.
You can agree or disagree or tell me how I'm wrong.
With normal math, you have 5.58 units.
units. That's what's allowed by the maximum general plan designation. If you add 17 percent
to that, the way we all learn math and middle school or even third grade, you take 17 percent
of that, you get up to about six and a half. Now, the wage zoning has been done for the
past 70 years until fairly recently. If you had 5.58 units allowed, lots allowed, since
You can't have a portion of a lot.
You don't have enough land for six lots,
so you zone it for five lots.
The zoning would indicate five lots.
Everybody gets a little bit extra.
So if you take that five lots without the density bonus,
you add 17%, you get 6 and 1 half, which, again,
under standard zoning, would be six lots.
But then you have density bonus math,
which is a little different than that.
It is.
So you got 5.58, but you round that up to 6.
Then you add the 17 percent, which gets you to 17.02,
and then you round that up again.
You basically have three density bonus increases.
You got the 0.42 to get to 6.
You got the 1.02 to get to 7.02, and then you got another 0.98,
and that's how you get from 5 to 8, which is basically a 60%
increase with a 17% density bonus.
Did I get that right?
Almost.
Let me try to repeat it back to you.
So depending on the income limit, medium, low or very low, it's going to tell you the
percentage of increase that you get to density bonus, right?
So 5.58, always round up to 6.
So that's your base density, 6.
And that's part of the density bonus law.
The round up is?
Round up, yes.
Correct.
Six units is low income, which is a 17% affordable, according to the calculation, regular math,
one out of six.
It's like 16.6666, and you run up to 70.
That's how you get to 70.
Yes.
Okay.
Because it's a low income unit, the 17% allows you an additional 30.5% density.
So 30 and a half from six is 1.52 you round up, that's you get to the two additional units.
So total of eight?
Which answers I think the next question which was, is the 17% increase come at 30.5% increase?
Is that some kind of table that they have in the bonus?
Yes.
Okay.
It's a table, thank you.
So one last question, when it says the applicant is proposing a 17 percent density bonus, is
that, when you say the applicant is proposing that, is that because that's what's allowed?
Because one out of six is 17 percent, so they're allowed to get 30 and a half percent.
Okay, so they're proposing to take the whole...
Yes.
They're actually proposing to set aside 17 percent, then that gets them the density bonus?
It's probably poorly worded on my end, but yes.
No, no, that's uh, it's it's not intuitive, thank you. That was a great question.
Any, any other? Yes. Um, so I wanted to ask, as I was reviewing the project plans, I hadn't noticed
that the site is next to the Taiwanese Cultural Center, which is, if I recall correctly, we had
considered them last year in September. So when there's two projects going on next to each other,
Does that become a delicate dance of coordinating the construction crews between the two parcels,
or how do we work to make sure that things move smoothly?
I'm not familiar with the Taiwanese project.
Go ahead.
A couple things on that, and you're absolutely right.
There was a project at the Taiwanese Cultural Center that was approved.
It was to memorialize the church and to build a new cultural center.
Since then, they have encountered some issues with their design team, and they're not likely
going to build what was approved, but might come back for another project.
I don't know what this applicant's construction schedule is, but I would bet that it's going
to be quicker.
However, if there were to be building permits issued for both those projects at the same
in time. We always have pre-construction meetings with our construction crew. We have a guy,
Don Murphy, who's very good at this, has been doing it for a long time. And it's almost
orchestrated, coming and going of materials, extra work hours, things like that, if they're
requested. So it would be congested a little bit. It would be, you know, it would cause
some strain on the neighborhood, if they were both to be built at the same time, but we
would do the best we could to orchestrate that.
Okay, thank you.
Or coordinate that, I guess.
Yeah.
Any other questions?
Yes.
Just for clarity, the staff report says the city is required to waive or reduce local standards
unless it makes specific findings that any such proposal would have specific adverse
impact upon health safety or the physical environment, etc. As I understand, that is
a very high bar. That's not, you know, it doesn't seem, you know, safe, as safe as
we'd like it to be. It means that there is a definable safety hazard or a health
hazard or some kind of environmental habit, whatever, but it's a high bar.
It's something very specific that is noticeably wrong with it.
Correct.
It is a high bar because the statute requires first you have a standard that's objective
and it's actually the law has actually changed to eliminate the physical environment portion.
So it's actually now just health and safety, but you have to have a standard that is published
before the preliminary application came in, and it has to be objective, and then it has
There has to be a violation against that standard that's so quantifiable and significant.
And then you can say that that is a specific effort.
So yes, it is a high bar to me.
Thank you.
And I should add that it is the burden of proof is on the city.
That's correct.
Yeah.
Which is a big deal.
Oh, yes.
Yes.
Sorry.
Can't find my button.
Do we have that our standard in the city of Walnut Creek has been established?
You may have a standard on the threshold for this particular issue.
Well, in the staff report, in the record, we don't see there is such a standard and
that there is a inconsistency with that standard.
And so the findings go through and says that there isn't such presence of that adverse
impact.
Thank you.
I have so many thoughts on CEQA because I know I do CEQA for you know, but well I
think what I'd like to do is does the applicant have because I think they have
a presentation. I don't know if he has a present. Okay. He's available for questions.
Got it. Okay so no applicant presentation then let's open up the public hearing
then, right? That's how I need to ask the applicant questions because I have
questions for the applicant. So what happens if they don't have a
presentation, do they still have a number a set time? They can come and
speak, even if you don't have a slide or anything, they can come and speak and
then you can ask, the Commission can ask a question. Okay, beautiful. Thank you.
Yes, please. Hello, I'm Doug Cummins with the Dallen Group Architecture and have our
consultant team as well here to answer any questions that you guys may have.
would you like me to start or okay I'm gonna I'm gonna ask you questions that
you probably won't be able to answer without CBG if they're here and I'm
basically going it's it's a few things that I saw from the resident concerns
that came to us and so what I want to talk about specifically for CBG is I did
notice something so I'm seeing that on the east side, sorry, north is to the
left, so on the east side of the project adjacent to the three single-family homes
it looks like the proposed development is actually around
five feet lower than the existing.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
It's about four feet actually.
It's about four feet, okay.
I see that, because there's a pad in the finished floor.
So that is one important thing,
because there was a lot of discussion
about the existing homes and adjacent to this.
So one item that I did notice is that
the proposed pad elevations is not set higher.
So that was one important thing.
The other question that I had was,
there was a lot of discussion about drainage,
which makes absolute sense.
And so what I'm seeing is that you've handled,
there was questions about drainage, treatment,
habitat, et cetera, which I'm not gonna ask you
biological questions, because I know that's not you.
but one thing that I did notice is that you have accurately,
so not only are you providing water treatment
where there was none before, is that correct?
My name is Justin, I'll have a CBG civil engineers
just to be clear, that is correct.
Okay, so you're providing water treatment
where there was none, and then there was a concern
about general drainage, so from what I'm seeing,
there's one DMA area and you're providing overland release,
but in your words, can you tell us
how you're handling the drainage?
Yeah, so everything is collected on lot
and then conveyed into the common street.
And then that is actually cheap flowing down
and then goes into the bioretention through an inlet
at the kind of at the beginning of the drive
directly in front of the bioretention.
So it goes through the bioretention
and that handles treatment
before it's discharged from site,
it goes into a storage pipe
and that's mitigating our post-project flows
to pre-project levels.
So we're not increasing and that's a city standard
and a requirement for the ordinance
to mitigate back to your pre-project flows.
So there is no drainage concerns
and can you explain what overland release
because I just realized I said that
and that's an engineering term?
Sure, so in the event that your storm drain system
is designed to convey typically up to the 10-year storm
within the pipes.
So when you get to larger events
where that system may be, capacity may be exceeded,
you wanna design your site to overland release, right?
We don't want our homes to flood.
You want it to get into the street, convey offsite,
that would be overland release.
Your pipes are full, there's no more capacity.
So it basically enters into the street
and then the street's utilized essentially as a conveyance.
And that's pretty standard and in common throughout the city.
Perfect.
And then the last question is, I noticed
that you are keeping certain trees.
So where you could for the grading, did you try to?
It's a pretty tight site.
But at the very least, you tried to maintain the development
footprint to at least maintain those four trees,
if memory serves me correctly.
Yeah, it's a, as you mentioned, it's a very tight site.
And with the approach between the state laws
and everything else, density is a factor.
And on a site like this, you're not left
with a ton of options to keep the trees
and kind of get to the land plan that is here
and the number of units that are allotted
based on the density bonus law.
So it's not lost on us.
It's not lost on the applicant, the significance
of saving as many existing trees as you can.
There's mitigation requirements for those.
It's not very easy and cost effective
to remove trees when you can save them.
Unfortunately, in this case, to get to the density allowed,
provide the access that's required
for the utility separations for fire department requirements
and to deal with just general conform grades
around the edges, it just wasn't a feasible option.
So we had to kind of move in a direction
to where we're gonna have to remove
and deal with the mitigation and permitting.
And then the last item that I see
from just some of the concerns that I was reading,
that hammerhead was very intentional.
And so much so that you if from what I'm seeing
in order to put that hammerhead in there,
which was I'm assuming the standards were approved
by the fire department,
you had to put a retaining wall on lot seven
to make sure that that fire truck could go in and out.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
Does anyone have any more questions?
Thanks guys.
The road, there's no HOA, correct?
No HOA planned on this one.
So it's a private road?
Private road.
Is the assumption that everybody's gonna be neighborly?
You know, when it needs to be re-sluried,
you know, a couple of years or what?
It's basically like an assessment
that's applied to the neighbors.
It just cuts down some of the costs that are associated
with a formal HOA management.
So there will be budgets that are created
that go into making sure that the common improvements
can be maintained and dealt with,
but it'll be more done at a homeowner level
versus an outside HOA management company.
So the homeowners will pay into some sort of fund.
It won't be like, you know, you're gonna take a lean
on the house if they don't start painting it or anything.
More informal, as you would say?
Yes, it's more formal.
Okay, but that's at least comes with the house, I assume.
Correct.
Okay.
I had a second question, bear with me.
Oh, the way the ADEs work, if I wanna buy a house,
do I say I want one or I don't want one, is that,
or I'd rather have the fourth bedroom?
that maybe you should get it.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, really, and then two for the ADUs,
there's really not too much difference
as far as the layout of a fourth-bedroom versus an ADU.
It's really just the exterior entry for the ADU.
And then a small kitchenette, which is a little bar sink,
like a two-burner stove and an under-counter refrigerator.
And we designed those in there mainly
for the demographic of returning students
from college for elderly parents for multigenerational living,
not necessarily as a goal of income for that home.
It's really for kind of extended families
and things like that from what we've seen
from other projects in the city.
That, I guess that's my question too is,
I wouldn't expect you to do any market research
in terms of, you know, there's eight units,
we think we're gonna get X number of people
that want the fourth bedroom versus the ADU,
but do you think it'll be half,
I think it'll be all, I think it'll be, you know,
enough to, just curious what your thoughts are.
I think because they are so similar,
I think it'll probably be about half.
I think when someone sees the ADU
and sees that exterior entry
and kind of the secluded personal space of that area,
I know me personally, I don't have a need for an ADU,
but hey, that's pretty nice to have that
for aging parents or things like that to have that option.
And then, theoretically, you could get an ADU
and then punch a hole in the wall
and then have a fourth bedroom with a separate entrance, too, right, if you wanted to?
You could.
Okay.
Yeah.
Right.
I'm just down the road.
You're not allowed to.
You could.
As far as attachment.
Yeah, I know exactly.
Okay.
Yeah.
All right.
That's all I have.
Thanks.
Thank you so much for answering our questions.
One of the questions that came up I know during the design review meeting and also in the comments
was flipping the project so that the density of the houses
was against the Taiwanese center
as opposed to the other way.
And I think there's some reasons not to do that,
but I just wondered if you could elucidate them for us.
Thank you.
I think mainly it has, go ahead.
Yeah, it really had to do with the drainage of the site
and where the high points are
and the low points are of the site
to make sure that all of that flow that pre and post
was calculated the right way
and be able to be controlled on our site as well.
Any more questions for the applicant?
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Now, are there any public comments?
Public cards?
No?
No cards yet?
OK.
What's that?
Are there any public comments?
If so, yeah, if you wouldn't mind coming,
stepping up and providing your card, please.
And then you'll see Chip put up.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Xuo Diao.
I live on 1715 Seneca Avenue.
So I live in the lot where I'll have four new houses
as my new neighbors.
So I'm really surprised about the density of this project.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
It's very different from the existing neighborhood.
Like, no houses in the neighborhood is that dense.
It used to be just like one house,
and the owner had a renter.
So imagine from there to like now eight new houses.
And if a house, average household, maybe four people,
then all of a sudden, I have 32 new neighbors next to me.
And I know you mentioned that you
have done some traffic or noise or safety study.
But from my perspective, this is going to be a huge change.
The lot is tight, and Santa Barbara is the main road.
There will be a lot of new traffic on the road.
And I work from home.
I need a quiet environment.
Just imagine having 32 new people all of a sudden
living next to me.
It's going to affect how I live my life in my own home.
So I just want to say this is going to be a huge change.
Please consider impact.
It doesn't look consistent with other houses
in their neighborhood.
And it's really sad to see the environment will change so much
because so many trees.
It's true that you have new fence.
But like, for example, our current fence,
we have a lot of nice greenery.
We have plants in the fence.
And how are you going to rebuild those going forward?
Okay, thank you for your time.
Are there any other public comments?
My name is Hilary Heibel.
I live on Maggie Lane, so we're behind this project.
I spoke at the design review.
I'm still lobbying for you guys flipping it.
I mean, I'm hearing, oh, the drainage.
Well, you're gonna have to take out 32 trees,
grind stumps, move utilities
to get to eight different houses.
That lot is gonna be so torn up,
how can you not figure out how to get drainage
so that all those eight houses,
11 foot backyards are facing a parking lot
and not these other neighbors?
I think your hands are tied in a lot of ways,
but they got two, three extra houses out of this project.
They're gonna make some money.
they might have to spend $500,000 to deal with the drainage.
They're gonna make money.
So that, I just think, is kind of a cop-out.
And I also feel like if you were to do that,
you might be able to save tree 14,
which is the tallest valley oak on the property.
It's been there probably longer than most of us
who've lived in this city.
And a coast live oak, I think I know what that is.
It's not gonna be the same.
and I think they're super messy.
So whatever.
11 foot setback is not much.
I'm five foot nine, five foot 10, sorry.
It's two of me.
That's someone's backyard.
So why are you literally putting it up against other people
who have been there forever?
They're gonna go out in their backyard
around their barbecues or fire pits.
You're gonna hear everything.
There's no privacy.
And then lastly, on the bullet windows,
For those that face other neighbors, I don't know if you can mandate it, but why can't
they be opaque so you don't, you know, the other neighbors do have privacy and if the
long as they're not operational, why not make them not be able to see through them.
Thank you.
Is there any more public comment?
Seeing none, I know the applicant has time now to also respond back to any of the public
comment would the applicant like to do so?
Hi, Doug Cummins again from Doll and Group Architecture.
So I think really, I think the biggest one is really the bullet windows.
So the bullet windows are up very high.
So they're eight foot head height, six foot to the bottom of the sill and they are fixed.
They'll be, you know, 18 inches by 18 inches or two feet by two feet somewhere in there
which with the frame and everything you really get less glass than that actually from there.
So with moving on lot eight, moving the house a little bit further away from that lot line
to the 13 feet, a little over 13 feet and those bullet windows, I think we did a good
job of making sure no one's going to actually be peering over the fence or looking at anything
from that side of the lot.
Thank you.
So with that, I'm going to close the public hearing portion and now I'm going to bring
it back to my fellow commissioners for discussion, comments. Who would like to start?
I'll jump in. On the flipping of the project, when we went through the Taiwanese project,
it was very definitely we had suggested they have it in the current configuration to avoid
having the new houses being suffering from noise and other activities from the Taiwanese Cultural Center.
So but and then you have the training so that's one reason why we had it that way.
I yeah when I was taking a look at
the plans from what I'm seeing the
you typically want to have homes on the
like the uphill side
and so from what I'm seeing and that's what I was asking all those questions is that the drainage is going from
east to west, which is why I under,
and then they're to capture all that drainage
within that street and then overland release it out.
So that was one of the big things
when I read the comment about flipping it,
that was what I had understood,
and so to be able as an engineer,
so to be able to hear that,
that was important for me.
Does anybody else have any more comments?
So just to understand this, because I'm not an engineer,
but if we were to flip the site,
because I thought it would be as easy as flipping it
and then it would be flat,
but it sounds to me based on what I'm hearing now
that it would be like a pretty massive re-engineering
of the whole site.
I should not answer that.
Okay.
Because I am not the engineer.
Okay.
Yeah, it would require a massive redesign of the site.
You would end up with much deeper cuts
up against the existing houses.
So we've got about a 3.8 foot delta there now.
You're gonna move that to something
in the seven to eight foot range.
And then you're gonna add four feet of retaining
up against the Taiwanese site or the Taiwanese site as well.
So you can increase your retaining wall.
And from a cost standpoint, projects like this,
the margins aren't as great as you might think they are.
And so that could really just flip the economics
of a project like this.
In terms of the trees,
you're still gonna have the same improvement footprint.
So the tree impacts would be the same.
I just want to thank the neighbors for coming out and speaking up and the builders and
engineers for listening.
I think, you know, in California we're so housing constrained and these projects give
us opportunity to address a significant shortage, but without the public process and communication
process, we don't improve what's put before us. So through your comment, the builder has
addressed the windows, they've addressed the walls, they've tried to address the trees,
the things that are within our control to address. It may not be perfect, but it's a
really important asset to this community to build more housing. It really helps. I have
this passion about affordable housing, accessible housing.
It helps with our numbers in that area.
And we want our kids, family members, et cetera,
to be able to stay in Walnut Creek.
So I do support the project.
I know that it's gonna be a big change for the neighbors.
And I hope, and I expect that the builder will be
good partner to the neighbors through the change process.
So thank you all for your speaking up.
Yeah, from my comments earlier, you probably understood that I'm kind of curious as to
how this much density got on there, but there it is.
And it's, you know, through the density bonus law that, you know, we're required to adjust
the density we'd like to see there to something more.
that I think, you know, that the design is a good one. I think the ADU, the built-in
ADU slash fourth bedroom is really a fairly clever way of, you know, allowing more people
to live here. I can imagine a family staying there for quite a while, perhaps no children
first and they rent out the ADU. Kids come along they turn into a fourth
bedroom. And when the kids get out of college of course they're back in the ADU.
So yeah and assuming that it's just a question of closing one door and
opening another one to make that change as long as you don't mind the fourth
bedroom having a kitchen in it, I think that that's a fairly nice design to to
really address affordable housing in a fairly creative way. I will say that that
with the objective standards that we're you know required to use now it's very
difficult to require design changes so the design review really makes you know
recommendations, hoping that the applicant is listening. In this case, each
of the design review suggestions has a appropriate response from the applicant
to try to make that change for the better. So I appreciate that as well.
So given the environment that we're in and the limited discretion we have, I
I think this is a good project.
I did want to bring something up to staff because CEQA is complicated.
So CAT 32 exemptions still require a review of all 17 items
that is an appendix G for CEQA.
Is that correct?
Yes.
Go ahead, Claire.
Yeah, I think that's an appropriate way to handle the exemptions sometimes
for really small projects, or very straightforward projects.
The record is very apparent that there is no significant impact
then that the city can decide upon those facts.
But the point is that there was a review of it,
there was a type of environmental analysis.
Because one of the questions was like,
it almost seemed like there was nothing.
But there was.
The city did review it to figure out
if there was an impact or not.
Right, and the city is required to do that
in order to find these exemptions.
Exactly.
So I did want to bring that up,
because I know that was a request of the neighborhood
that categorical 32, or as I like to call it,
Cat 32, class 32 exemptions,
it does actually require a review of,
It's a huge long list of PennXG.
I also think it's a well thought out project.
I have the benefit of having to be able to study
that drainage so I understand why it was designed as it was
and I would like to ask if anybody would like
to entertain a motion.
I would like to propose a motion to approve
The resolution for major subdivision,
investing tentative map, density bonus,
design review, tree removal,
and tree drip line encroachment permits
for application number Y25-048 at 1725 Sunnyvale Avenue.
And is there any discussion on the motion or?
No, second motion. Okay.
I don't know who it was.
It came out of both ears.
I'll give it to him.
Thank you.
I'll call vote.
Vice Chair Klop.
Wow.
You made the motion.
Commissioner Anderson.
Yes.
Commissioner Moran.
Yes.
Commissioner Strongman.
Yes.
Commissioner Kwok.
Yes.
Chair Knight.
Yes.
Motion carries.
Great.
So now I'd like to see if there's
anything else on the agenda, any commissions, commission
considerations staff others I just just one mention on on that project that this
decision is appealable for for ten days after the resolution is sent as mailed
which would be tomorrow do I have anything well all I can tell you is that
the Planning Commission is gonna be busy for a while we have agendas going
through I think into June now with at least one item some have several but I
do cap them at three of their big projects four if they're not so big
projects exciting yeah well thank you so much I do have one update report today
was the monthly Transpac meeting and what's going on in Transpac right now is
They are in the process of reviewing applications for measure J funds, which is funding for
senior and people with disability transportation.
They've received 11 projects, three of which are from Walnut Creek, I'll tell you in a
minute.
$1.2 million available and $2.26 million, twice the amount of applications for what
they have for money. You get it. They are currently putting together a scoring
process. Those projects are being presented to TransPAC.
The Walnut Creek applications are from the City of Walnut Creek, a transportation program
for seniors and adults with disabilities,
and two from Rossmore,
one for downtown Walnut Creek services
and fleet modernization, so we'll see what happens.
Thank you for attending that.
Anybody else?
Oh, go ahead.
All right, so last week we had the first draft
of the sign ordinance, the update that came in.
And so we've reviewed it.
The working team has provided the feedback
along with city staff comments to the consultants
and they're reviewing our feedback
and updating the draft ordinance from there.
So it looks like we're making progress.
I think it's exciting.
It takes in a lot of the stakeholder
feedback from the business community,
and we'll see what things go from there.
So we'll have something before you soon.
Things are moving along.
Perfect.
So many signs that have come before us.
So thank you for doing that work.
Anybody else?
I think we're adjourned.
Thank you.
Will somebody take a picture of us with these little things that confirm this?
Do we stand or?
Do we sit by the table?
I'm sorry.