Welcome to the March 26th
2026 planning Commission hearing can the staff please call the wolf
Commissioner Anderson here Commissioner Moran here. Mr. Cown here Commissioner Strongman. Yeah, mr. Quak here vice chair
Clop here chair needing here. We have a form
Beautiful, I don't believe there's any items on the thing. Oh, sorry. I don't believe there's any items on the consent calendar
There is nothing currently on the consent calendar and staff has no recommendation to move anything to consent count perfect
Are there any
Disclosure of Ex parte communications. I'm seeing lots of shaking of heads
For public communications, but I do want to say that there's two
Options two times when there is public comment
There's public comment on items that are on the agenda which is done prior to the agenda item and during it
And then items that have nothing to do with the agenda item. So is there public comment for items?
Not on the three agenda items that we have for today
I'm seeing none
So, okay
I'd like to then open up the public hearing portion
The first item that we have is the safety element update recommendation to City
Council and it looks like staff has a presentation. Thank you
Good evening chairperson writing and members of the Planning Commission tonight's item is a general plan amendment to the safety element
I'm crystal de Castro principal planner in the community development department and I'm here with Darren newfield
Who's our city consultant from Harrison Associates staff is requesting that the Commission approve a resolution?
Recommending that the City Council adopt the safety element this evening
I'll briefly cover what the safety element is, why it's being updated, the
planning process and the key changes. So let's start with making sure this
pointer works. Let's start with the general plan and the role of the safety
element. I don't think this is charged. Okay, thank you. Okay, so the general plan
is a state mandated framework guiding the city's future development. The safety
element is one of the required elements and addresses risks from hazards such as
wildfires, floods, droughts, earthquake, climate change, and other hazards. It
integrates safety into land use and transportation planning to reduce the
risk to life, property, and the local economy through policies, goals, and
actions that support preparedness, emergency response, and long-term
resilience. So why is the safety element needed? The current safety element was
last adopted in 2006 with the 2025 general plan. Since then, the housing element was
adopted and certified in 2023, triggering a concurrent safety element review.
The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, or LHMP, was adopted in 2025, aligning with state and
federal requirements such as FEMA requirements. New legislation, as listed here, also expanded
requirements to address flood hazards,
wildfire hazards, climate adoption, evacuation routes,
and extreme heat hazards. Together these factors
make an update necessary to stay consistent with current data,
evolving conditions, and the state laws. So let's go over the safety element
update process. The city initiated the safety element
update process in 2022 alongside the housing element update. It
included data collection, hazard identification, community outreach,
technical analysis, and drafting updated policies, goals, and actions. The process
paused temporarily while Contra Costa County updated its LHMP and the state
revised its hazard severity zone maps. Because both of those were critical to
the safety element update, the process was temporarily paused until those
efforts were completed. The process has now resumed and incorporates these
updated resources and new requirements. Community outreach was also key.
Community outreach included two community workshops and an online survey.
Participants identified their top concerns which included wildfire,
extreme heat, and drought. Residents emphasized the importance of fire
mitigation, including vegetation management and removing dead trees to
reduce fire risk. They also highlighted the need for public education, emergency
preparedness, and evacuation planning, noting that many households felt
unprepared for extreme weather condition or power outages. This feedback helped
shape the safety element update, ensuring it addresses the hazards most important
to the residents. The safety subcommittee also guided the update. A cross-departmental team
with partner agencies and the city's consultant. They provided technical guidance throughout the
update process. The subcommittee ensured the plan aligned with the city's vision
and existing policies including the sustainability action plan and the LHMP. They also reviewed the
draft and the final documents to ensure it's consistent with the city's policy, state law,
and community input. By combining the technical experience with public feedback, the update
is both data-driven and responsive to the residents' priorities. So let's review the
key updates. The draft update continues to address the core hazards. Seismic activity,
hazardous materials, fire, and public safety. The major updates focused on
emergency planning and preparedness and climate adaptation and resilience. With
the emergency planning and preparedness, new goals were added to improve
community readiness, reduce vulnerability to climate hazards, and to strengthen
evacuation planning. Climate adoption and resilience also added new sections
addressing climate change impacts on vulnerable populations and preparing for extreme heat,
heavy precipitation, and drought.
Other updates include stronger wildfire and vegetation management policies and expanded
public education and outreach.
So we'll move on to the environmental document and the draft element.
An environmental document was prepared according to the California Environmental Quality Act.
This was the initial study and the negative declaration.
And the draft safety element, they were all circulated for public review from February
9th to March 11th.
And the environmental document found there were no significant environmental impacts.
No comments were received during the public review for the environmental document, although
five comment letters were received for the draft safety element.
None of the letters required major changes.
So one of the comment letters we received from the California Geological Survey and
they recommended expanding discussions on slope instability and incorporating earthquake
hazard maps.
Both have been updated in the safety element and one more recommendation that they wanted
updated was related to updating a hazard fault map and they're currently revising that map
and once it's available will incorporate it into the safety element and they expect that
to be completed by May and November. So these informational updates from the California
Geological Survey will not affect the goals, policy or actions in the safety element. It's
purely informational. So to conclude, staff is recommending that
the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions to approve the negative declaration and adopt
the safety element update to the general plan. This concludes the presentation and
staff and the consultant's happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you
so much. Very concise. So thank you for that. Does anybody have any questions for
staff? Yes. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Just for clarification, this,
if assuming the City Council adopts this, we will not have to redo it when we do
the next general plan, is that correct? That's correct. And then likewise the
housing element? The housing element, we foresee that the next cycle would
probably occur after 2030. I believe this cycles from 2023 to 2031.
So we would probably start the RFP update for that around 2028. Okay, thank
you. Sure. Any other questions? On page 4 it talks about how there's a state
incentive for cities to adopt the local hazard mitigation plan into the safety
element. Can you just elaborate on that, explain it a little bit so the public
understands? Sure. So regarding the LHMP, that is required because if there was an
event that the city can then apply for state funding, for recovery and assistance for any
hazards that may have occurred in the city. Great, so that helps us financially with accessing
these things. Wonderful. And then there was just one other thing I was curious about. It's okay if
you don't have the answer today because I just thought of this, but on page 40 it talks about
the lessons learned from some of the previous drills that happened in the Lakewood area.
as well as Rosmore.
And it talked about interoperability of radios
between fire and law enforcement being an issue.
And I was just curious if that has since been fixed
or if that's something that the city's been working on.
Okay, I'm gonna refer to Captain Slater for that question.
I thought he was part of that drill and here he comes.
Thank you.
Good evening planning commissioners.
And this is Jeff Slater,
your operations captain for the police department.
that is an excellent question.
At the time of those studies and scenarios,
we did not have the new eBricks system,
which is the new updated way of having the best way
of connecting all of our resources
under basically one platform.
So I'm happy to say that we are live with that system
and it does work, but we do need to be better at training.
Our own staff, as well as our neighbors,
to make sure that we are proficient
and the use of those, and that's ongoing,
but rest assured that the communication issues
have been resolved with this new system.
Fantastic, thank you.
So, technologically, we have the right systems in place,
and we'll just continue to do the training.
Correct. Okay, fantastic.
Thank you so much.
Oh, sorry, I just gave that off.
Go for it. Your mic's not working.
Sorry about that.
So, thanks to everybody for the work on this
And the research that backs it up is really helpful.
Finding my little street in yellow was like...
But anyway, the question I had is this safety plan
exists in the context of multiple city plans
and it addresses physical safety issues.
And there are other ones, other safety issues,
health, pandemics, cyber security, et cetera.
I assume those are all on the docket for the general plan
that those kinds of safety issues
would be addressed in that context.
Vice Chair, so those issues were actually addressed
in the recent local hazard mitigation plan,
which is incorporated by referencing this plan.
I need to read that, okay, thank you.
Thank you, Crystal and Steph.
My question just is more for maybe the people watching
home and just somebody who jumped in here and is maybe a little unclear about
what exactly this is. And it's my understanding this is a planning document
and that's a hard stop. But the implementation of what is in this
document comes later. Is that right? We're not deciding what goes where and where
the money is spent exactly. This is just a larger framework. Yes. Right. Can you speak to that a little bit?
Sure, that's an interesting point to make,
and it is important that this is a long range document.
The implementation would be the LHMP,
or Sustainability Action Plan,
and working with mutual aid with other cities and counties.
So this is really just the overarching kind of policies
and goals that will help then guide the implementation
process later with the specific plans
and the specific implementation policies.
Got it, okay, thank you.
Sure.
Oh, go ahead, yes.
So essentially following up on his question,
it's more aspirational slightly.
We want to do this but.
It's more of our vision and our guide.
Okay.
It's our direction of where we want to go.
Okay, thank you.
Mm-hmm.
I think that the best thing for me
was the eight-page document
where it says goals, policies, and actions.
I thought that was, it synthesized everything
about it being a future guideline
for that long range planning.
It's interesting because when I was reviewing
the goals, policies, and actions,
one important thing is that I saw
the different relationships of how it's trying
to specifically almost create an objective standard
for different laws.
Can you speak about how sometimes housing legislation,
because this particular commission sees
a lot of housing legislation projects,
how this ties to the various things and actions
and recommendations that we're doing?
Sure, you know, this is a perfect question
because Darren, it was also our housing element consultant,
so he could do this really well,
tying the two together, so.
Beautiful.
Come on up.
Yeah, our firm did the housing element.
Yeah.
So the question was how does this element just sort of
inform and tie into the housing element and everything?
So it's very closely related,
mostly closely related to land use because we have to,
when we're creating our land uses and planning for our city,
we have to take all these hazards in mind.
So you don't want to build housing
and very high fire hazards.
It's a very zone if you can help it.
So this acts as a guide in sort of like
conversation with the housing element
so that we're citing our projects,
both housing and implementing all our housing element
actions in a way that's responsible
and doesn't put our members at risk in the community.
Is there more or?
No, that's perfect,
because it's, to Commissioner Moran's point,
sometimes it's such, you know, it's so complicated
and it looks like what is this for,
like is it just for all things, you know, safety,
but when you start realizing that it is helping
to inform an objective standard
for how several things are done,
and sometimes it's a guideline,
and so I think that it was beautifully synthesized
in that eight-page document about goals, actions,
and recommendations, and so I think this is great
because we've had a lot of recent,
we are the recommending and approving body
on a lot of items, especially state density bonus law,
that there is preemption over public health and safety.
And so this is beautiful because the city of Walnut Creek
takes great care in being able to provide
that objective standard to then subsequently
review those laws, which I know my fellow commissioners,
like we all do our homework.
So thank you so much.
Yeah, and then to Commissioner Morin's point too,
where the city can commit to these actions,
so like fire reviews for private development
and the things we can control.
The other things where you see an encourage or work with,
there are things for existing environment,
built environment, things we can't fully control.
So we took care to kind of structure it that way too.
Perfect.
Any other questions?
Oh, yes.
So, because I just got back from the planning commissioners academy,
which was fabulous, so thank you to everyone who recommended that I go to that.
One of the things that they talked about was being able to incorporate lessons
learned from recent California wildfires like Santa Rosa and Palisades.
And so is that something that we've already incorporated here or
that would be a next step in our planning?
I think that's been incorporated at the state level.
So there's a lot of state actions
and a lot of California,
Forest Stream Fire Protection Board actions,
lessons learned from especially Paradise
and then previously in Santa Rosa.
So a lot of the legislation you see coming out of the state
is geared towards that stuff.
The things here I think that are most relevant
are Senate Bill 99,
where we have to look at the single egress routes,
really for policy purposes so that we know where they are
and we can identify actions to try
to make those communities safer.
So I think you see that.
That's why you see a lot of the state law
coming out of the legislature
in response to a lot of those recent devastating wildfires.
Perfect.
So now I'd like to open it up.
Anything else, but we're good?
Okay.
I'd like to open it up for a public comment
in case there's anybody that would like to come up
and say something about the safety element.
cards received on this item? Oh, item 3B, oh pardon me, okay, so seeing none, you're
you know you don't have to come back up, then I will close the public portion of
this hearing and bring it back to my fellow commissioners to see if any
there's any discussion that you guys would like to have. I'd just like to make
the point that what I appreciated and I think is important is that we recognize
the trends that were discussed, and what really stood out to me was the wildfire
and the extreme heat days that we're going to be having as compared to now
cue the, thank you, right, I did that. And the extreme heat days that we suffer now
are going to be greater in number in the next coming decades, and we don't have
enough cooling centers now so it's nice to be able to see the train
coming down the tracks so to speak. And then the last one I'd like to make is
that, and this came up in the public comment, is that, and I can't speak to
this, but the state of CERT might be an opportunity for our citizens and
especially when people are looking for ways to get involved in their
communities. The city has a responsibility to help evacuate people and cut down on
wildfire risk but we as a community can step up and make sure our neighbors are
taken care of and that was kind of brought I thought to light with one of
the public comment letters and I don't know much about it but I think that's a
real good opportunity especially if somebody's watching and they want to get
involved then CERT seems like it could use some love and that's all I have.
I just want to say thank you to the staff and the subcommittee everyone who
worked on this. It's a very extensive plan update and I really appreciate the
level of detail that it goes into because as I've been you know out and
about throughout our city this is definitely one of the top issues that
comes up is safety right and people wanting to know what is our plan and how
are we gonna make sure that we have that public education and community outreach
that you talked about that is one of the goals here. So the fact that we've added
added that as a specific goal with specific action plans is really great to see and it's
really great to see the data that we're basing that on that we have the evacuation plan,
the evacuation options and things like that.
And I also really appreciated the planning for vulnerable people who may need special
support.
That's something that I've as a in my role in my day job as a state field rep I've interacted
with the Uganda trainings at the county level, with the emergency operations plans, and that's
one of the things that they talk about now, too, that has been previously missing, you
know, sort of nationwide in a lot of emergency planning is, are we actually being intentional
in specifically thinking about our most vulnerable populations and what we're going to do about
that, instead of just thinking about it after the fact and going, gosh, it's too bad for
those people, right? How are we thinking about seniors living alone? How are we
thinking about people with disabilities, people who might not speak English, have
we planned for that? So I really appreciate that that is intentionally
included here because that is a best practice. And then the partnerships with
the community because as just a city entity we can't do this alone, right? We
have to be working with our police, with our fire, with all of our community
agencies and our nonprofits and with our CERT volunteers, absolutely. And just
personally, I appreciate this so much as a Girl Scout, Girl Scout leader, wilderness
first aid, you know, certified, and I really want to do that CERT training. If
it's not on Thursday nights during our Planning Commission meetings, then I will
definitely join it. But yeah, so just much appreciation and I look forward to
seeing how this gets implemented as a city and how we're able to really
communicate out to the community about these plans, because right now in the the
way that it's written it's just you know a hundred page document that is not in
and of itself going to educate the community but the plans are there to do
so so very much appreciate that thanks oh yes there are two items actually and
before we do that because there's two so let me know who wants to do it gave me a
little nod I need I should put my glasses on one super quick thing that I
like to talk about just because everybody knows that I geek out on
environmental stuff, I found it, it was a pleasant surprise to know that when the environmental
analysis was done, right, that there, that the negative declaration was determined that
the project will have no impacts or less a significant impact such that no mitigation
measures were required. And that's important because this commission here, when we do look
at all these projects, we go through in detail what were those mitigation measures to make
it to make that impact less than significant. And so it was nice here that we just went
through all those goals, policies, and actions, and that we realized that the environmental
analysis that studies those goals, policies, or actions, then subsequently resulted into
something that was an ND without those mitigation measures that we didn't have to go through
here today. So who would like to make a motion on there's two items that we have to recommend
City Council. Does it have to be two different motions? Could it be combined in one?
Because there's two yeah because there's two resos the ND and the adoption. I move to
adopt the resolution of recommended City Council to adopt the initial study
negative declaration. I'll second. Roll call. Commissioner Strongman. Yes. Commissioner
clock. Yes. Commissioner Anderson. Yes. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Commissioner
count. Yes. Vice-chair Klopp. Yes. And chair Needing. Yes. Motion carries. Great.
Now moving on. And I would like to make a motion for the second. That's right, there was two there. Go ahead. So I move to approve the resolution
recommending City Council adoption of General Plan Amendment to incorporate
the safety element update. Second. Commissioner Cown? Yes. Commissioner
Strongman? Yes. Commissioner Anderson? Yes. Commissioner Moran? Yes. Commissioner Kwok? Yes. Vice
Chair Klopp? Yes. And Chair Needing? Yes. I believe we covered them all. Yes. Great.
Motion carries. Perfect. Now moving on to item 3b of the Public Hearing Agenda
item which is solar energy system at Diablo Hills golf course permit number
S25188 at 1551 March Bank Strive to staff the presentation yes over thank
you shorter presentation okay okay all right we're ready to go good evening
chair and planning commissioner my name is a Frank Kong I'm gonna be an official
for the city. Tonight I will make a presentation about the solar project at
the Diablo Hill golf course located at 1551 March Bank Drive in Walnut Creek.
This is the photo of the site and as you can see the golf course was a
bounded by the merchant banks towards the east and bounded by the residential
community towards to the west and the project the scope of the project
including the installation of the roof mounted the solar panel above the
existing building where the arrow here shows and also the ground mount solar
panels on the south side of the site which is roughly you can see on the
screen between those two piles of the dirt that's the right relatively flat
side and where the ground-mount solar panels were being installed.
Okay?
So on the left-hand side is this side plan showing the proposed solar panel here and
relatively to the location of the property line.
So from the west side, you can roughly see the ground-mount solar panel is about 21 feet
from the property line.
on the right-hand side picture indicate the solar panel installed at the ground level.
I want to talk about what is the city's right and our authority to review the solar project
here.
So the government code 65A50.5, also called the Solar Rights Act in California, require
the local agencies to approve qualified solar energy system through ministerial building
permit process.
And the City's review authority is limited to determine whether the project complies
with the applicable California Building Code and the objective public health and safety
standards that were in effect when the application was deemed complete.
There is exception to this ministerial process requirement.
the building official can make a finding that the project would create a specific and at
worst impact on public health or safety, which is defined as a significant, quantifiable,
direct and unavoidable impact based on an objective rating standard in effect at the
time of application complete.
The application was submitted on August 1st of last year.
So during the review, staff didn't make funding
that there is adverse impact to the public health
and which will trigger the exception
as we saw in the third bulletin point.
As such, a building permit was issued
on November 24th last year.
And pretty soon after that, the construction started.
On February 13 of this year, a pew was filed to the city.
Now, per the Government Code and also Solar Rights Act,
so the decision of the building official
regarding a solar project may be appealable
to the Planning Commission,
and that's why we are here tonight.
The following is the code and the standard
we used to review this solar project here.
And on the plan, it indicates anti-reflective solar glasses
were used for the solar on the ground level installation.
So I want to make it clear.
So the appeal does not concern the building officials' view
regarding the technical part.
Instead, the appellant contends that the physical units
of a nearby residence, and the glare from the solar panel
constitute a public house and a safety issue.
And a used permit shall have been
required prior to the issuance of the building permit.
So that's the core part of the appeal.
Now, to require a used permit, the California Solar Rights
Act, the city must identify a specified adopted standard and demonstrate that the project
violated the standard in a manner that created a callifiable impact to the public health
and the safety.
Now based on staff's review, no such standard, objective standards are evidence of the significant
it was impact was identified in the review.
And the same time during the, for the appellant,
we can, the appellant was not able to cite
any specific applicable objective rating public health
and the safety standard to demonstrate that
the allegations will meet the statute threshold,
which is what require building a special use permit
through the Planning Commission, for the exception.
As such, staff will recommend the Planning Commissioner
to move to adopt the drafted resolution
denying the appeal of the building code permit number
S25188 and upholding the building officials' approval
of this permit.
So this concludes my presentation.
I will be happy to answer any questions you have.
Thank you so much.
Sure.
Does anyone have any questions for us?
Yes.
Thank you for that presentation.
I drove past it this morning and it looks like it's complete.
Is it connected to PG&E?
Not yet.
But it is building complete.
The installation, I don't know, it's not 100% complete.
Since we reached the peel was received on February 13th.
So I make decision to hold any inspection from there.
Okay, yeah.
Thank you.
Yeah, go ahead.
Thank you for the presentation.
So I wanted to get a better understanding
of when we talk about significant,
quantifiable, direct, unavoidable impacts,
if we would have to make that kind of finding,
are those impacts that would have to be
two specific parties, or would they have to be
more of the general public at all?
Yes, that's right.
Could you clarify which one?
It has to be specific and also impacted general public.
For example, if the glare and reflected to the east side
of the merchant bank caused the driver to lose control,
cannot see it and create the traffic,
so that will be considered as a public health issue.
Not individuals, you know, physical units or.
All right, thank you.
I do want to clarify, so that is based,
that is all has to be based on a standard.
So let's say there is a standard that says,
you know, you cannot emit such X amount of glare
towards the facing of the highway,
but that would be a standard.
So you have to kind of think about that
in conjunction with the result.
Do we have an objective standard on that?
Blair.
We don't have any object standard right now.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions?
Thank you.
So, if there is no standard for glare off of the panels, how do you determine whether
there is a specific adverse impact based on a standard, if there is no standard?
So if there's, yeah, so I mean, the law said it's, you know, at a time when the permit
is submitted, right?
So the staff have to review based on the available formally, you know, adopted standard
in the city's muni code or something there regard, you know, regarding a public health
impact.
So during that time, last year from last August, when staff reviewed the project here, we don't
have any standard regarding the glare you know is a glare will trigger some
kind of a public health issue or not. So if you can't identify a specific
adverse impact even it's because there's no standard yes compared to then you
know then it goes ahead. So I'm wondering you said that there is you did test for
or calculate that there's been no adverse impact
on the road going by.
I just give an example.
I said right now, give an example,
what is the public hazard well looks like?
The example is if you, the typical example is
if the panel is installed something
on the way near the airport, right?
When the airplane is tried to land it on,
The glare will cause the bluntness of the pilot,
that will be public either.
And I just give an example.
That's some standard verify federal aviation.
There's been no conclusion as to whether that is a problem.
I mean, obviously, given the location and the angle
and so forth, if lots of sun is shining
from underground somewhere,
it won't have that reflection on the highway.
So, I mean, that's fairly obvious.
As far as glare into other private dwellings, again, the angle that appears that there shouldn't
be much of a problem.
But was that tested, as well, by you or by the applicant?
You mean to test the...
Whether there's significant glare going into homes nearby or in the other place.
I was not...
We didn't do any testing about that glare.
And to my opinion, the glare, if there's, first let's assume there's a glare to that
private house, that's not a public house issue, but it is a private nuisance, which is a cause,
you know, some impact to the residents enjoy their property, right?
So that's a private manner between the golf course and the impact of residents.
Okay.
Yeah.
just to follow up on that.
So the commission might think of it as,
first, you should look at the evidence
and think if there is an impact.
And then if there is an impact,
there has to be to the level that the statute says
you could require a use permit or to deny the project.
And this is similar to housing project.
Contact is actually, the standard is almost the same.
even if there are times the neighbors will comment
that their view impacts or design impacts,
but they don't rise to the level of meeting the standard
to be able to,
for the city to be able to deny the project,
then the city wouldn't be able to do it
because you can't make the finding.
So I suggest to the commission you think about it that way.
I wanted to ask about, we got a letter just,
well, I guess, late yesterday, regarding ADA compliance.
And I'm wondering, there's one term that came up,
an ADA coordinator.
Can you explain what that is
and whether that has an implication in this instance?
Okay, so the first thing I wanna say,
in the United States Accessibility Law Act,
So there is a definition about obligation
for the private business owners,
and Title II is about the city's obligation
to provide accommodations to the program
and to the facilities the city owns.
And in this case, the Diablo Golf Course
is a private manner, right?
So private property.
So it will not trigger by,
the city don't have obligation to enforce
and accessibility accommodations in the United States
Accessibility Act.
And now the second question I probably
should answer directly.
The accessibility coordinator in the city
is more like in a row to enforce the Title
2 for the American Disability Act, which
is to try to make sure to make the city the program
and the city's facility to make a reasonable commendation
for the people we should have a need.
So the ADA basically says that this type
of situation with a private entity,
if there's going to be any kind of enforcement or regulation
for ADA purposes, it's between that entity,
that private entity and neighbors or whoever
might have a concern about that.
It's not for the city to adjudicate that.
Yes, so the ADA basically said if you,
there was a title one, a,
so there was three titles over there.
So the, for some titles, they talk about private business.
If you opened the, if you are a restaurant owner,
you open the pub, the business to serve the general public.
So you are obligated to do something
to make sure the disabled people will enjoy
the similar service as able body will do.
But that's the similar thing.
So that's applicable to the golf course here.
They are private entity, the dining area in that building.
So the parking lot, they need to do something.
They have obligation to provide accessibility
accommodations or some improvement for disables.
And the city, even if we have a city's building,
the ADA Accessibility Coordinator's job
is going to make sure monitor the city's facility
and come up with a plan.
Even if there is some kind of a barriers
for the disabled people to enjoy the city's facility
or program, that position, the person as a coordinator,
need to come up with a plan to say,
okay, I identify certain barriers
throughout the city's facility or program.
Then it should have a budget,
we call reasonable accommodation, accommodation.
So down the road in certain years, you know,
how to fix it, this bury in this building,
and then move before we move to the next one.
That's their general in their job.
So, but because of the type of entity
we're dealing with a private golf club.
Is a private, so.
The ADA coordinator would not be.
We're not to play that role for this facility, yeah.
And another phrase here is an ADA interactive process.
Do you know what that is?
Say it one more time, sorry.
the ADA interactive process?
I was not familiar with it.
That is a process.
So if somebody makes a accommodation request,
in certain situations, the law requires the public entity
or whoever's responsible to make something accessible
to engage in the interactive process
with the person filing the request
to determine what is a reasonable feasible accommodation.
So in this case, the city doesn't have that obligation
in this case, because it's a private entity.
Correct, the city's role here is really just
the permit issuer, and so it's looking at,
it's making a quasi judicial decision, if you will,
to make sure to look at the evidence and the records
to look at the facts that's presented in application
and see if it's, you know, the permit can be issued,
which is what the building official's role is doing.
Back to the ADA, there's nothing about the solar cells
restricting access to the property, the business,
or the golf course to anyone.
Is that correct?
I mean, we're looking at it.
ADA deals with accessibility or egress into the business,
and it doesn't seem to be appearing
to stop anybody from entering alone.
That's correct.
There's no interference to the accessibility
what it is able. Thank you access. Yeah. Thank you. And just a couple more things. There's
a common here that it's logically inconsistent to treat these large panels on the ground.
Commercial scale solar farm as ministerial building permit. It's inherently requires
just inherently to require the discretionary review. I'm not being any claims that the
legislature's logical gate consistent I wouldn't make that claim but the fact
is consistent or not logical or not the state legislature has said this is a
ministerial yes decision it is not a discretionary so whether it's inherently
discretionary is not a relevant concern because the state says that's not what
So the Solar Act, Solar Rights Act didn't differentiate, you know, the limits, right,
of the qualified solar system, right, to go through this managerial permitting process.
And so it doesn't matter.
It's a big one single, one solar project for single family, or worse this one there is
a commercial installation.
So there's no restrictions over there in the Solar Rights Act.
And the last thing, comment.
The Solar Rights Act was applied while ignoring the city's own safety exceptions.
More we've heard, I assume the city does not have safety exceptions to the Solar Rights Act.
No, we reviewed the Solar Project here based on, we adopted a building code like it I listed here.
So there's, you know, California building code,
California electrical code to make sure
they don't have any fire hazard,
electrical hazard, and the structure hazard.
We got to make sure the installation is installed.
The property over there will stay there.
Doesn't matter during an earthquake,
we just talk about safety elements, right,
and during natural hazard.
And so we review everything based on the building standard,
the code we are enforcing right now.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, I think Vice Chair Klopp had.
Hey Molly.
Right?
That sounds good, I think.
Commissioner Moran, that's good.
I'm gonna get to everybody, bye.
Here we go.
So thank you for your time
and look forward to hearing more,
but I wanted to just ask a couple of questions
about the document received today
from the Solar Technologies Company.
Jeff Parr saying that studies were done
to do time lapse looking at glare,
as well as testing of the completed panels was done,
looking at glare, and it seems as if some of the problem
might have been timing of the complaint,
because at the time that the complainant complained,
there were big metal support systems,
not the covered blue glass panels. So it seems now, based on this time-lapse study and these
pictures, that there's not glare. You can't demonstrate glare right now. Am I correct?
Am I interpreting this?
That's what I read, the same thing as you do, but I cannot speak for them. And is it
a solar company?
here? What we're gonna do is I am gonna open it up to the appellant and the
applicant. Okay. Is that what you were gonna say Claire? Well yeah, the question
you can reserve that for the applicant. Okay, good. Okay. So Commissioner Moran, I think you had a question.
Thank you. Commissioner Anderson stole my thunder. It was about the ministerial, why
we're here, right? Yeah, the steps and the reason the state has deemed that
that these projects get approved, but thank you.
Good.
And then-
Through the chair, can I clear something up?
The document that Vice Chair Klop referred to
was submitted by the applicant, the owner,
a representative of the owner of the golf course.
Thank you.
And then I think Commissioner Strongman,
did you, no more questions.
I had one quick thing and it's to touch
on one more item about ministerial,
which everyone has discussed,
but there was a few comments about why,
why wasn't there a CEQA?
Why wasn't there a noticing period?
Can you just super quickly explain
how when it's ministerial,
and it satisfies all the objective standards,
how that plays?
Yeah, I can answer that question.
Oh, generally ministerial projects,
which is when the city does not exercise discretion
and just basically like building permits, grading permits,
it checks off a list and then says if the permit is approved.
So the minister actions, they're not subject to CEQA
because CEQA says that if you're not extracting discretion,
there's no environmental analysis required.
So this would be one of those permits.
It was a building permit, so it was ministerial
and therefore there's no CEQA required.
And I think the staff report does touch on,
if we were to do CEQA, there are exemptions for facilities
like this, where it's not relatively smaller,
not exceeding, for example, 10,000 square feet,
and this project, based on what's presented,
it would qualify for those exemptions.
And so that's kind of a two process,
or two step analysis that we, or the staff report did.
But as a first step, the ministerial projects,
they not require CEQA to begin with.
Okay, so this is how it's going to go.
I'm going to open up the public hearing and we're going to have first the appellant.
They're going to have 15 minutes, and then the applicant will have 15 minutes, and then
I'm going to have public comment, and then I'm going to have, and then there will be
an opportunity for the appellant to come back up and the applicant.
Because if you forget that, that's OK, because I'm here.
Okey-dokey?
Is it 15?
It's coming.
Is that OK?
Would the app appellant lots of A's please come up?
It's a couple of photos to show what I'm trying to say.
OK.
Someone might have two.
It's OK.
We can pass it down.
I don't have a video.
I'm just going to repeat what I've said here.
Thanks.
That's right.
Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, my name is Michael Rhimes and I'm here tonight
together with my wife Margaret because a solar farm, not the ones on the roof that were mentioned
to you earlier, it's just the solar farm was built within 60 feet of our house windows this month
of March without a Planning Commission public hearing. This solar farm consists of 146 panels
and it adjoins the property line of Heather Farms Homeowners Association.
We, my wife and I, are members of Homeowners in Heather Farms Homeowners Association.
And our windows of our master bedroom, living room and dining room, office room,
all have glare from the 146 panel solar farm in our near view.
I've shown a photo there of what I mean by near view.
It's within 60 feet of our property,
and the photo you are looking at there
was taken by Jerry here, who is further away than myself
and my wife are.
So we are even closer than that photo indicates.
For your information, the first sign of construction of the solar farm occurred January 28th this year
when digging of the support structure holes commenced.
It was only apparent on February 9th that holes were for a solar farm.
We had no idea that such was going in into that location.
My neighbour Jerry here, he went immediately to the planning department to enquire if the project
had a permit and was told to submit any concerns in writing, and he did such. And we had a meeting
on February the 25th with Frank, who just spoke before me, Chip Griffin, and a lady called Erica.
At that February 25th meeting, the above three persons agreed to put this solar farm, which
is nearly complete, on the agenda of a Planning Commission public hearing in the future, as
we had not received any prior opportunity to have our concerns considered.
This is the meeting we were given.
As you know, the golf course property covers nine holes and has many sites where this solar
farm could have been constructed without being a source of glare to us homeowners in the
Heather Farms Homeowners Association.
I would ask that the owners of this solar farm put themselves in our shoes and ask if
they would like to see the 146 panel solar farm every time they look out any of the main
rooms of their house of our house. Tonight my wife and I have decided not
to proceed with a legal challenge to this visual monstrosity although the
attorney that thought he could win if we retained him. Margaret and I wish to
remain a good neighbour to the Diablo Hills Gulf colour. We agree that solar
energy should be used whenever practical but we should but it should only be
been stored after a Planning Commission public meeting is held for the neighbours and for
a solar farm of this kind. And it does not affect the neighbours like this project does.
We hope that the Diabolo Hills Golf Course owners will be a good neighbour also. All
yours Gerry.
Thank you so I'm a little nervous um dear planning commission commissioner and the
department leadership my name is Jerry Chow and uh we have a picture over there well uh
I'm a little nervous I've never done this before um well I'm I'm here because I need to appeal
the permanent number S25188. This appeal is centered on a documented pattern of administrative
behavior and is interpreting the fundamental legal distinction between ministerial and
discretionary action to the detriment of public and safety federal laws. It's a jurisdiction of P859.
This site is situated on a PD859 which is for, I guess is for open space.
It's logically inconsistent, you probably read this already, that 446 commercial solar panel
is treated as minuscule. Such a massive land use in the PD zone should be inherently discretionary
review to evaluate the impact on the adjacent property and surroundings.
During my meeting with 25th, we asked the city official to produce the list of the guidelines
and we were told that it was a lot and they couldn't produce the list to us, even though
So I specifically asked the day before if I could review them.
So my reasoning is very, very simple.
If they couldn't explain to me that it is not ministerial, it's discretionary.
So CECA, S-C-E-Q-A-1-5-2-6-A guideline says, when you have sort of limbo between discretionary
in ministrel, you are discretionary, you do not around ministrel.
The reason why is very, very simple.
This is a time-last picture of, yeah Chip, would you please start that.
Now what you're looking at this is, it is called a, a terminology, a specular reflection
band.
So basically what this is, this is about 10 minutes of it.
this inter to our living quarters. My mom has vertigo. This is, I think I ski, we all
ski, right? We wear goggles when we face something like this. There's a reason why, because this
glaze is below us. Effectively, what the restaurant has done, the golf course owner has done is
create this sort of patch of snow globe, year round.
And my mom, she couldn't get away from this.
Frank just said, we don't have a standard.
Well, we have a standard.
When we go skiing, we wear goggles.
This is a time lapse and this happened every single day.
Every single day in the morning times.
So this is quantifiable.
My mom has vertical.
I have, this is her pill.
I can pass it around.
This was on the 23rd of February, 2026.
She has nausea.
Once again, we are going for common sense.
If Frank has no standards,
I show you everyone that skis, this is a standard.
If you look at this, you go, wait a second.
that is pretty bright.
So the glare report that I submit to you
is fundamentally flawed, because the observer
from the pathway at different elevation and angles.
I mean, look at this.
This is from my house.
This is from my dining room.
This is from my living room, right?
They cannot observe the entire.
This roughly of about 2,000 square feet of reflection
strike directly into my coast and my homes.
While a pathway observer, see that pathway?
They're saying, that's conclusive.
That's a conclusive, what they sent to you,
they said that's a conclusive, that there's no glare.
If you look at it, the person that walked by that pathway,
how tall do they have to be
to observe the entire view of that solar panel.
It is glaring, so it's inconclusive.
Now, the significant public health impact, vertical,
and Michael hasn't said a lot.
He has tube in the back.
He has balance issues.
What he has, I will not review.
He hasn't said, I will not say it,
but he has submitted to you, medical documentation,
a very common one.
All of us eventually will might have it
because this is not benign.
This is just basically something eventually we catch
as we get older.
We're not talking about something that,
oh, this is a disease that you do certain thing
that you will catch.
This is aging.
This is for people that we all age.
So this is a significant public health impact
because my mom has vertigo
And Michael has what he has.
As far as ADA, it's very simple.
Contractors, they can go to city planning department
and say, hey, I have XYZ, this is what I want to build.
Would you take a look at it and say,
do you think this will fly?
They say, yeah, if you have this, it's gonna fly.
Well, my mom has certain medical conditions.
We want someone with professional knowledge.
The last time I checked, Frank and Chip,
they don't have a medical degree.
And yet they are here to tell you,
oh yeah, we know what it is.
I want ADA.
Who knows what happened?
Who knows?
Yeah, okay.
Oh, Jerry's mom has vertigo.
Michael, whatever he has, this could cause issues.
I want expertise.
If the city allow contractor to have expertise
like Chip and Frank, yet the same thing.
When I asked for ADA, they said, no, you cannot have it.
We are talking about a process, a permit process.
We're not talking about restaurant, golf course.
We're talking about appealing this process.
This permit is issued by you.
That's called fiduciary responsibilities.
I just want that.
It is like the police arrest and say,
oh, you know, you're not entitled to Miranda rights.
This is fundamental, guys.
This is called due process.
My mom has issues.
ADA coordinator will easily spot that.
Yeah, this could cause that.
Can Frank, can Chip say that to my mom?
You will be fine.
I don't know, I am not sure.
So I said specifically to this,
California Solar Act gave a specific exemption.
Frank said that.
He acknowledged in front of you,
I have no quantum Bible numbers.
Yet everyone here, you can see this.
I mean, can we press play on this?
Thank you, Chip, I appreciate it.
This is 10 minutes.
We're not talking about instant.
wait for about 10 minutes of this.
My mom has cowering fear now,
all the way in the back room.
And you said this is not a specific adverse health condition?
I don't know what it is.
So I asked you to reclassify this project as discretionary
because that's what it is.
When you call the limbo,
There's a specific guidelines CEQA 15268 guidelines.
It says, if you're calling a limbo, go discretionary.
Don't go ministerial.
I want the ADA who was afforded to us.
She said to Chip, I'm keeping everyone in the loop.
She's not here anymore.
She cannot be here to tell you, yes, Jerry has a point.
Saving as Chip, sending Frank, giving you her point of view.
And I want those two things
Thank you for the time. I appreciate it
Microphone needs to be on
Thank you
Can we do questions after the is that okay? Okay
The applicant now has 15 minutes together
There's a known known soldier coming up
Ready
Chip can I give you that?
Good evening honorable chair and honorable planning commissioner members
My name is Peter Lee Zach. I'm a Walnut Creek City resident
Local planning consultant. I'm here tonight representing the Diablo Hills management group who is the owner of the Diablo Hills golf course
Solar technologies Jeff parr could not be here tonight. So I'm also here to share some of the information that he had provided
And so, let me back up just a moment and tell you that when this came to the attention
of the owners, the concerns of the neighbors, trying to understand how to do the right thing
for the neighbors and understand, was there really an impact here
or was this just another kind of neighborhood and then be concerned?
Difficult to know.
So, they went to solar technologies and said,
explain to us how your solar system is designed and explain
to us why this is intended not to have any kind of glare
impacts on neighbors.
And so the permit contractor solar technology
has explained to us that the system was designed
to be relatively flat, that the system is designed
with non-reflective panels, and that as part
of their analysis, these systems don't have glare,
or certainly not glare to the level
that it's generally considered a health concern.
So, they provided some information,
which I then forwarded to the appellant
to try to reach out and express our concern.
I did not receive a response,
but I did review the appellant's concerns,
And so we went back to solar technologies and asked them,
how do you do a glare study?
How would this be done?
So we'd really be able to address this.
And what we were told was, generally speaking,
they do an analysis ahead of time,
because the glare study is really an after-the-fact
performance check.
And so his review suggested that maybe what they were seeing
was experiencing a glare off of the structure, which
is just a white set of metal, as opposed
to the panels that have this anti-reflective coating on them.
So to try to follow up and understand whether this
was going to be a concern, Solar Technologies went out
the other day and shot this video, which
was included as a link in the letter
that Mr. Parr submitted, though,
because it was embedded in that link
in the way that this came out,
it appears that maybe you missed this.
So this is the other video.
And again, this is not about,
intended to be about, you know, challenging studies.
This is just about to try to help you understand
what we were doing to try to address this concern.
So this is a time lapse video that was taken.
Go ahead.
from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. last Tuesday.
And I certainly wouldn't refute Mr. Chow's observation
that I can't have him take a video
from their second story window.
This is from the top of the fence adjacent to their property.
Really am not qualified to speak to what exactly is glare,
whether it was in his video or this video,
but this is the video that all day long
that our expert is suggesting is why we don't think
that there is a glare impact
and why their system is designed not to have a glare impact.
Now, I would say that some of this stuff
is a little bit above and beyond what we expected to do.
None of these studies were done upfront,
but also we did this all in the best interest
of trying to address the concern of the appellant.
Couple of other comments came up about the PD zoning.
As you might know, I have some expertise
in land use planning and I reviewed the PD zone.
The PD zone was for the entire golf course development area,
including all the residential, the golf course uses,
including the clubhouse,
and certainly solar panels for the purposes
of powering the clubhouse or perhaps on the top of a home
are certainly not inconsistent with the PD
and there's nothing in the PD that would suggest otherwise
or to suggest that it's an inconsistent use.
I reviewed the title report for the property.
There are no recorded easements over this particular area.
There is an easement for the canal
that you can see in front of you.
There is an easement for the trail for East Bay Parks,
because that trail actually connects,
but to the degree that those are on the golf course property,
the solar panels exceed the required setbacks.
So just speaking to the planning issues
that were brought up in the appellant,
I don't know that in this particular case
that's intended to address any of the health
or other concerns that the appellant has brought up.
We're just trying to address those things
that we could address.
Let you know that the golf course certainly did not intend
for there to be any of these issues.
The applicant who is the permit, the solar contractor
was following the law and the process with the city.
And I will let you know that there is fairly significant
expense into the project.
All of which is complete and ready for a final inspection as early as possible.
And if that is not completed and permit issued by April 14th, there would be fairly significant
financial impact, tax credits, and a number of other things related to the PG&E approvals.
And so I'm certainly not looking for that to be part of your consideration, but relative
to the law and the statements about you know financial consideration I just
wanted to let you know that that that is part of this and it's also part of you
know any would be part of any civil matter that would be discussed between
the parties and certainly appreciate the neighbors comments the golf course has
no interest in any kind of litigation the golf course wants to be good
neighbors in the same way the golf course has always wanted to do the right
thing and felt like this is the absolute perfect spot for solar panels that would offset the
use of the clubhouse.
It's proximate to the clubhouse in a way that allows for it to be close enough for the connectivity
that is required for solar panels, but set aside far enough so that it doesn't impede
the other delivery and other access things that you can see are going on in the photo
in front of you. So all this is very deliberate. We certainly did not mean to
cause any health concerns or impacts on any of the neighbors and we hope that
you would deny the appeal based on the state law and understand the situation
is that we don't feel based on the information that we had that there was a
specific glare impact. And while I'm not a solar expert I'm available to answer
any questions about that. Should you have any once you complete your public
comment. And that's all the information I have for you today. Thank you very much
and of course thank you for your service. Thank you. I think what I'd like to do
is let's do public comment first please and then we can have when the
when the appellant and the applicant have a chance to come back up we can then
subsequently ask questions. Is that okay? Beautiful. Any public comments? Chip, I
thought there was some, no? Oh okay, there, there, oh we do have some. Okay. If
you don't mind stating your name, oh Chip, two minutes? Sure, thank you. Hi, my
My name is Ryan Nyberg.
I'm a resident here in Walnut Creek.
I'm also adjacent to the solar industry,
work for a large-scale utility developer.
I do that out of, well, one, it's a job,
but two, passionate about sustainability,
and I would urge that the commission take that seriously
and deny this appeal because I find that,
especially in this earlier agenda item
about the safety element of the general plan,
just looking at climate resiliency
and what offsetting traditional energy sources can do.
I think that signals to other commercial users
the importance that the city places
on looking towards alternative energy sources.
I think if it sets a standard where a building permit can
be obtained, constructed, near complete, money invested,
tax credits lost, it really disincentivizes companies
to invest in this technology.
Thanks.
Do you also have a card?
I don't have a card.
Okay.
Okay.
Hi, I'm David Peterson, resident of Walnut Creek.
I'm a fan of solar, I'm an advocate of solar.
I was just wondering if the lovely neighbors
and the owners of the golf course had proposed
and offered to plant some vegetation and trees
to mitigate both the glare and the view issues
that the appellant has complained about.
Didn't seem as though they had.
When you look at the appellant's photograph,
when they were looking out the view,
the most spectacular thing was a tree
that looked just like the symbol in the city of Walnut Creek.
And it seems like they could add a few more of those
and solve all their problems easily.
So that is a deciduous tree, of course.
so maybe they wanna put in some evergreens as well.
Seems like an easy solution.
In their own video, they showed a tree out of the way
that cast a shadow and fell just short of the solar panels.
Seems like there's plenty of room to add a few more trees
to cast shadows and block the views
and the shadows seem to stop at the street
if they're far enough back.
So seems like an easy solution.
They just have to wait for the trees to grow, right?
Thanks.
Thank you for your comment.
I don't think we have any more public comments.
So what I would like to do first is if the applicant,
I know they were just standing up
and they're probably closer to the microphone.
Maybe not, oh, there you go.
What I wanted to, before,
can we do questions now for the, okay.
So before the rebuttals, what I'd like to do is,
are there any questions for the applicant?
Yes, Commissioner Anderson.
Oh, yeah, New York, thank you.
Look at the two videos.
One kind of striking difference that you noted
was that in the first video, the panels appeared off white,
very light colored.
In your video, they appeared black.
We normally see solar panels.
What I'm wondering, I think you said
that that first video was taken in February, a few weeks ago.
When were the panels complete at that time or were we looking at a substructure of some
kind?
The video that we just showed you was taken on Tuesday of this week.
So it is a current video, reflects the as-built condition of the project, and I'm going to
I guess that the appellants video is also a recently taken video.
So I'm guessing that they're within the same period of time.
And that in both cases the panels we're talking about have this nonreflective material on
it.
And in this case, this happened all day.
So it would have encompassed, you know, the same period of time that the appellant, I
think any difference that you might see in the two, and again, I don't know how to quantify
those differences, but any difference would be just due to the height, because clearly
this is the top of, this is the top of the fence, so this is roughly six feet above the
the grade of their backyard, and he was taking his video out of what was supposed to be the
upstairs window.
So that would mean it's another floor, another eight or nine feet or something higher up.
That's the only thing I could think of.
Thank you.
Commissioner Kwok.
Kwok.
So thank you for these explanations on the video.
It was very helpful to get both the perspectives of the applicant and the appellant.
I did want to get a little bit more insight into what sort of discussions the applicant
and the appellant have had.
As far as I know, there aren't any.
While I'm representing the owner as the land use consultant trying to understand and help
help them through the technical issues.
I'm not aware that the applicant actually reached out directly to them.
I did send this information and email to the appellant on behalf of the owner with the hope
that the appellant might respond.
The only contact information I had was through the appeal process.
So as far as I know, there hasn't been a direct discussion other than our effort, if you will,
to try to item-by-item sort of respond to that.
I will briefly respond to the comment about vegetation.
Because this was an item that was brought up in one
of the appellant's things.
We felt like the other things that the appellant had asked
for including the anti-glare reflection,
a coating on the panels, those other things had already addressed the concerns.
We generally would see a landscaping response to this as being more in the significant cost
area.
This isn't about just planting a couple of trees, even if, I mean, the trees would take
quite a period of time to grow to the height that we were just talked about that would
be helpful, but it's an irrigation system, it's maintenance. There's a whole number of things.
This is an area of the golf course. If you'd see the kind of the area that we're looking at,
this area is on the other side of the canal. There's not infrastructure here specifically to do that,
and we didn't want to place anything on the other side adjacent to the panels that might block the
panels. Again, I'm not going to suggest that there isn't, you know, a possible solution there, but
That's a more significant cost that we didn't think in and of itself.
We thought, in fact, it would impact the panels as opposed to helping the solution.
Again, I know the owners, they're not opposed to trying to work something out,
but we really didn't understand there to be a problem.
And this information that we had gotten suggested that there wasn't.
And so that's why we're here to share that information with you.
Thank you.
Commissioner Moran.
Thanks Peter.
No, I'll let my chair kind of drive the bus here, but thank you for your time.
The panels are built, right?
Yes.
What's the next step, final inspection?
Yes.
Are you involved with that at all?
I personally am not.
In this case, the contractor would call for the inspection,
would certainly like to have an inspection tomorrow,
or Monday.
There are significant tax credits.
This is a net metering to project.
So as you can imagine,
if the project doesn't meet that deadline,
that's a fairly significant,
there's a whole list of things every day
that this project is not connected.
Means, I mean, that building
has a fairly significant electrical use.
And so every day that this is being held up is a cost.
And so the interest of the owners is to have the contractor
be able to schedule an inspection as soon as possible.
I know Building Official Kong is doing
what he thinks to be appropriate,
to have everything on hold so we can have this discussion,
but it's clearly our interest
to do this as quickly as possible.
and the inspection's gonna look at the structure,
the angle I assume, are they gonna look at the glare,
the anti-glare, are they gonna get that deep
in the weeds so to speak?
I'd probably let Frank handle that question
but I would tell you that the final inspection
would review all of the things that are on the plans
to make sure that the construction is complete
in accordance with the plans.
I believe that there have been incremental inspections,
structural inspection probably of the structure
before the panels went on, things of that nature.
But yes, all of the things that you just mentioned,
I would believe to the degree that they're on the plans
and part of the review of the building department
would be checked.
How, last question is, how long,
without this process here right now,
would it have already been hooked up?
Yes.
Okay, thanks.
Any other, Vice Chair Klopp?
Hi, thank you for your time.
Just a quick question.
I assume this is not the only solar project
that has ever been built of this size.
And in the industry, the solar industry,
it's too bad our guy who was the expert left.
I'm not aware of glare generally usually being a problem
with solar installations.
Do we have any clue about sort of industry standards
and benchmarking?
I would assume that they look at this
across all the industry, all the solar industry.
And unfortunately, I can't speak to that directly.
I did ask a similar question when
I was trying to information gather.
And what I understood is it's not that these panels are not
going to have zero glare.
They have this anti-reflective coating,
which is supposed to reduce that glare to the point
where it's minimal.
These are mitigated impacts, perhaps, no impact.
And certainly we have a very extreme case
of what we're hearing in terms of
what may be a medical conditions.
And again, I don't want to speak to that,
but from what I understand, this is standard practice
and that these panels, that this doesn't typically come up.
But I will mention that I believe,
And I don't know where it is and what kind of review it has,
but I believe the Heather Farm Park is intending
a fairly good size solar panel project
as part of its redevelopment of the park.
And, you know, I'm guessing that that array would be bigger.
And I think it's similarly like on the other side
of the street, like this is not,
this is something that I think we were gonna see,
I know we're going to see more of in Walnut Creek,
and I think is an appropriate use for Heather Farm Park
and for this location, at least from a planning perspective.
I have a question.
Does anybody, the plans showed there being solar panels,
the ground array, and then on top of the existing clubhouse.
It seems, from what I noticed, the house,
The clubhouse is at a lower elevation than the existing homes.
Is that correct?
Yes, I would say that's correct that these homes wrap,
as you can see in this photo, around the corner
on a grade that's above that grade below where the trail is.
That there would be owners around the corner
who would be looking down at panels on top of that roof,
that roof.
On the clubhouse.
Yeah, the clubhouse of,
the roof of that clubhouse is covered,
just like in the plan that Building Official Kong
showed to us earlier.
And I would think that people are looking down at them,
none of those people raised a concern that I'm aware of.
So again, I think that this is a very specific concern
by these homeowners as opposed to the larger issue
with the installation?
So the other question that I had was,
and this is in my review of the memo from the solar company,
it also talks about panel tents, site orientation,
And there are panels, to me it's interesting
because they're flat.
So was there an intention to not have them be tilted
in the same manner that the clubhouse panels,
which then would be facing the neighbors?
I think, again, I'm not the designer,
but I'd ask a few of these questions.
So I think the answer is you work from the surface
that you have available to you.
When you're building on the surface of the clubhouse,
you're gonna cover the roof that's existing
and you're gonna place them in certain places
and panels in that space are gonna have times of day
that they have good sun and times of day that they don't.
And so when you're laying out an array on a surface
like this that you get to create yourself,
You're generally laying them out flat,
possibly for reasons of reducing glare,
but also because what you're trying to do
is lay them out in an orientation
that allows for the most sun exposure
generally to all of those panels
across the widest period of time.
So there is a little bit of angle to these panels,
which I think you may have seen better
in the appellants video than even in this particular one,
but it's not great.
It's not like these things are really tilted back
into the adjacent homes in the way maybe one would say
some of the ones are on the top of the clubhouse.
Hopefully that addresses your question.
Yeah, I noticed the difference in the first thing
that popped to me was the difference in elevation,
but I wanna make sure that the appellant has time
come up because they have five minutes. So would you like to come up? Okay thank
you very much. Thank you. The reflected angle is about tangent to the 10 degrees.
The reason why you don't, can we play their video please, the reason why you
don't see any glare, this this panel is specific not to reflect light at this
angle. So what they're saying is of course this is inconclusive. This is
exactly what I said before. An ADA coordinator. What have I done in-home clear study? This
panel, he's not an expert. He admits I don't know anything about this. So I can tell you
these panels, they are designed not to reflect light. At this specific angle, you can do
it all day. You will not catch a clear. Can you please go back to my video, please? I'm
I'm so sorry.
I appreciate it.
We'll extend the time.
If I can time it in a minute, OK?
Yeah, this is the first one.
So while Chip is working on that,
I will say this.
If you look at my video, which is shot two days ago, probably
the same day, every single morning from 7,
roughly to 10 o'clock, this glare will come.
It will show almost every single day.
In-home ADA, In-home GLID, we'll show you that.
And that's the reason why I said earlier.
If I go to a doctor's office and ask for lawyer's advice,
what would I get?
If I go to lawyer's office getting a doctor's advice,
what would I get?
Kinda try to go to CHIP, go to FRANK for construction.
I want ADA for medical advice, for disability information.
If you look at this, this is a time lapse,
probably taking on the same day.
if you look at this angle, it's called a reflector, it's 2x,
tangent of 10 degrees.
And this will predict very, very accurately
when a certain rotation, you will see this clear.
So when they have an expert, don't even know geometry.
Yeah, he is here to tell you everything is OK.
And I am showing you a video, probably
taking on the same day, you do see clear.
This is like us skiing, looking down.
You will see white glares.
This white glare is very visible.
There's no mistaking about that.
For my mom, who love,
if you look behind its head of farms,
I will tell you one more thing.
Why green are so pleasing to us?
Because the plant filter out all the other wavelength.
They only show green.
This, this solar panel, is reflective.
It is like you having a huge,
some kind of a TV over there.
I don't even care what kind of reflective,
whatever you're supposed to have.
A solar panel can only absorb 38% or less.
The other 60% are reflected.
It is a scientific fact.
That's why you're seeing what it is.
That's why I request ADA, and I will say this.
If you want to know specific information,
it's SEQA15268, that's a guideline.
If you want to know about city not failing
to follow city code WCMC 10-21102,
is when I file for this day,
it should have been done right away.
The only reason is this expert say,
oh, we have so many financial at risk
because you want to stop on the day.
If you stop on the day, this will be minimized.
We just need to go back to the day that, hey,
Frank want me to object to this permit back in August of 2005.
I will say this to Frank, if I have a time machine,
I don't want to go back to last year.
I go back to last week, I will get a lotto ticket.
I cannot object to something that's August 2025.
So when this is known, the city code says this very simply,
Jerry, if you put a appeal to it, we will accept
and then we will start this.
That wasn't done.
In my phone, I have day, day pictures.
They stay was not executed.
May I have more time because-
Thank you, you know what,
we actually have some questions for you.
Sure, of course.
But to kind of keep border and to keep,
because everyone wants to make it fair.
Does anybody have any questions for Mr. Schall?
So I have one question.
Yes, Commissioner Cone.
I'm just curious whether you ever invited
the golf course owner to come up to see what you're seeing.
and have you spoken to them at all. So to me, I make my point very clear,
this is not a civil matter, this is about a permit.
Was a permit ever should have been issued? This is a public interactive
process. We're not talking a private issue,
we're talking about a public issue. A permit was issued by the city,
was an issue, was the right set of situation.
So we're talking about purple, we're not talking about, I am for solar by the way.
When Frank called me on the phone, I said Frank, thank goodness you call me.
That's a fact. You can ask Frank. I want to communicate.
I'm for solar. I'm not getting solar. I will tell you one more thing.
This nine-hole golf court, plenty of space, not even, I want to say 100 feet, 50 feet from that,
This additional space, a proper planning by Frank,
from Chip, would identify.
So, I'm sorry, the answer to the question then is no,
you have not invited them to come and see.
No, you might.
So that they could understand the impact on you.
My, Michael, over there.
To answer your question, we have not.
Okay. Thank you. That was all.
Thank you.
Any other comments from my commissioner, Fran?
Do you know exactly what date that video is from?
Yes, this was two days ago.
Two days ago, two days, 24, 24.
You just said you weren't sure.
No, I'm very sure.
In my phone, I took so many pictures.
That's the reason why, when I was short,
I had about six days of time lapse.
So this was taken, that's the reason why I tried
to identify which day it was.
Where's that angle?
Is that from a bedroom?
This is from my dining room.
If you look at this, this roughly, I mean Frank noted,
this roughly about, you know, about 10 degrees, 15 degrees.
So your dining room is on the second level, okay.
So my living room, my dining room is on the second floor.
My mom has cow in fear now.
She has vertigo.
I got you, okay, thank you.
Oh yes, clock.
If I could get some clarification.
I had, I was reading through the appeal
and I had the impression that is the glare
from light that's filtering into the dining room,
so like is it illuminating the ceiling, for example,
that's right, or is the glare
from the perspective that we're looking at now,
where if we were in the dining room
and looking out towards the panels
that we would see the glare on the panels.
Okay, so a picture is worth a thousand point.
You are looking at it.
So you have a difference between energy and glare.
You might be seeing something slightly different.
So a solar panel is maxed at current technology,
roughly 38%.
The other 60 some percent are reflected.
Each solar panel that design a certain way
that the angles sort of shifted away.
So when I show you this picture,
Yes, this is coming to my dining room.
Yes, this is coming to my living room.
Well, Michael is coming to every single room
on his second floor.
I'm talking about every single one.
Master bedroom, living room, dining room,
office.
Okay, so if that-
He has medical conditions.
Okay.
If it-
Assuming medical conditionality-
Thank you, thank you.
If I may.
it's mostly glare from looking directly at the panels,
not from indirect light shining into the room.
Like if I were looking at a wall
or somewhere else in the house.
Okay, so.
But if you were to close the curtains on the house
and then we wouldn't have this issue.
Okay, so do you want me to qualify it?
Do you want me to answer it?
You can answer the question.
I'm trying to understand.
Yes, so to answer your questions,
yes, the glare is coming through.
Okay, is closing the curtains?
Help, yes.
Okay, all right, thank you.
I have one question, and then I think,
are we all done with the appellant?
That photo right there is not taken from your roof?
No, this is from my dining room, from my living room.
If you press play, this is a time lapse.
No, I understand.
I'm just I'm looking at the architecture from the street
and I don't see any portion of roof with a roof vent.
Oh yeah, I'm so sorry.
So our home is slightly engineered differently.
We enter second, the first floor
and our first floor is actually,
you wanna say first floor basement.
So our first floor is our second floor
because sitting on the hill.
Okay. That was the only question I had.
I'd like to give a chance for the applicant.
Is everybody, no more questions?
Thank you so much for coming up here.
Of course. Michael has a question.
Okay.
Does the applicant, you have five minutes,
if you wish to come up to robot.
I'd just like to clarify something Peter might have said,
He mentioned the land between our houses and the solar farm.
That land belongs to the homeowners association.
What you see there, the canal land, the public walkway land, and the slope down to that solar
farm is the homeowner's association property and the idea that some chap had which was
brilliant of painting some trees along there to hide it, there's no land for the golf course
man to put it on. I think you'll find he's put it right up to our property, the association
property and the association will not be interested in planting trees, they are already trying
to cut back their costs, tree costs and landscaping costs and water costs, but all I would ask
is that when you come to inspect the silver panel array this coming week or whenever,
you might consider whether he has built it within the survey lines, property lines that
he's allowed to build it in. Last time he wanted to do something there, the golf course
operator, he wanted to build indoor golf range on that property and when it was put in front
of you planning people he had he was putting it on our property he thought
that that slow plan was his property but it's not well your comment is duly noted
and and since the building official is here I think they will definitely make
sure that where the inspection comes that things are only built on the
appropriate property thank you so much for coming up here absolutely I know I
Pardon me?
I will allow, that's not what we're here to discuss right now about the surveying that
happened but I can assure you that when a ministerial permit is issued that there's
an application that's deemed complete that has all this information so that people aren't
building on someone else's property.
That's correct.
Yeah.
Thank you so much.
I'm glad to hear that.
applicant you don't have to okay thank you then I'm going to close public
comment and bring it to my fellow commissioners for discussion hmm yes
Commissioner Anderson I have a lot to say about some of the solar information
that's been brought out and what I believe in what I don't believe and
you know whether there is a glare or not but I'm not gonna say those things. Okay
because what we really have here is a question of whether a ministerial
process was properly conducted and clearly it was and you know whether we
agree with whether the state legislature in saying you know and demanding this
process you know was logically consistent or whether you know it cries
out for discretionary consideration that's not what the process is because
the state has determined that it is not it is a ministerial process I believe
that has been done correctly, and the appeal should be denied.
Are there any further discussion items from the commission?
Commissioner Moran?
Oh, it's six minutes.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I need to put glasses on.
Anybody else?
Would anybody like to?
Oh, yes.
Commissioner Kwok.
If I can make the motion?
Oh, yes.
All right, so I move that the Planning Commission and I
The appeal to the building permit number S25188,
solar energy system at the lovely hills.
Second.
And that's to adopt the resolution making that decision.
Yes.
Second again.
Roll call vote.
Yes, please.
Commissioner Kwok.
Yes.
Commissioner Strongman.
Yes.
Commissioner Anderson.
Yes.
Commissioner Moran.
Yes.
Commissioner Cownd.
Yes.
Vice Chair Klop.
Yes.
Chair Needing.
Yes.
Motion carries.
We're gonna take a quick five minute break here.
So we will be back at eight o'clock.
Thank you.
Okay, we are back.
Thank you so much for the quick break.
So now we're on our third item, 3C,
and that is the Oceana Design Review Application Y25099,
Located at one 555 Bonanza Street,
the former Yacht Club planning has presentation.
Thank you.
Good evening planning commissioners.
My name is Jessica Gonzalez, a senior planner,
and I will be presenting the Oceana Project.
So getting started with the project location,
the project site is an existing two-story building
at the corner of Locust and Bonanza Street at 1555 Bonanza.
Oceana is a fish bar restaurant
that proposes to use the existing building formerly occupied by Yacht Club.
The proposal is for the ground floor to be used with restaurant and for the second floor
to be used with offices and overall the project scope includes a first and second floor addition
to the existing building, remodeling the building facade, constructing a new trash enclosure
and a new patio as well.
So just for some context, I've included some pictures of the existing building on the screen.
The top photo is the side along Bonanza Street and the photo at the bottom shows the building
side along Locust Street.
Just a quick overview of the entitlement process for the project.
The applicant has applied for an AUP to serve alcohol that has been reviewed and approved.
And the project has been presented before the DRC as a study session.
And tonight the project is before the Planning Commission for final design review decision.
So as I mentioned on March 4th, 2026, the DRC did review the project and overall they
generally felt that they were supportive of the project and the ability to make the design
guidelines and standards.
But there were some recommendations including adding the additional details for the metal
screen on the building, adding some details showing how the rooftop equipment will be
screened and adding details to show how the windows along Logas Street will be screened
and missing details for ground planters along Bonanza Street.
And so since then, the applicant has revised their plans in response to their recommendations
and those revised plans are before you tonight.
Jumping into the site changes, the site plan
on the left side of the screen shows the existing conditions.
And the site plan on the right side of the screen
shows the proposal for the project.
As I mentioned, the project includes a new trash enclosure,
which is circled in red on the screen.
Also proposing a new two-story addition,
which is highlighted as well.
Just for some understanding, this
This is a rendering of the proposed outdoor patio area, and then as I mentioned the trash
enclosure, here are the elevations showing the proposal and design.
The trash enclosure is being designed to match the proposed building colors and materials.
Moving into the landscape plan for the project, the green areas on the plan show the proposed
landscape for the project.
Generally, which mostly includes street-oriented planters planted with grasses, ferns, and
creeping fig plants that are meant to grow along the building side.
Here's some of the proposed elevations for the project.
The project includes painting the building a light seafoam green with some brown trim
elements.
elevations, additional design proposal includes blue mosaic glass tiles along
the exterior, blue awnings, and a floor to ceiling gold decorative metal
scrim system at the corner to highlight and feature. Here the proposed paint
colors and materials for the project. As you can see the project includes a
color scheme which features blue, gold, and brown elements. Here's a proposed
project rendering, showing the proposed design along Locust Street.
Some additional renderings of the project, again, showing the outdoor patio area and
the site of the building that features those mosaic tiles.
And so with that, staff does recommend that the Planning Commission move to adopt the
attached draft resolution approving the design review application Y25099 for Oceana.
I'm available for any questions, and the applicant team is also available to make a presentation
as well. Thank you so much. That was a great presentation. Um, are there any questions
for staff? Commissioner, uh, strong. Yes. Uh, thank you for great presentation. It looks
like a great project right now, but you have the courtyard with permit, uh, permit pavers.
Um, yeah, I can't pronounce these things. He stays. Um, what is going to happen there?
My understanding is that that back area,
and I'll go, let me just pull it back to the site plan,
is just gonna be used by staff for loading.
There is a, we have a corridor area there
in front of that area.
And so my understanding is there will be no outdoor dining
or anything like that.
Oh, okay.
That's pretty much my question.
So it's just gonna be blank then.
Nothing's gonna happen there.
Well, thank you.
Yes.
And a quick question.
the parking that was there, how much are we losing,
and what are the thoughts about that?
So the parking that was there, from what I remember,
I believe it was between maybe six to seven stalls,
depending on how you kind of look at it
and if you view one of the stalls
as an acceptable space or not,
and you feel comfortable maybe getting in and out of there.
But there is no replacement parking.
And what was your other question?
So we'll lose that, and is there a plan
concern about losing the parking? So because the project is within half a
mile apart there is no required parking per state law so there is no
requirement to replace that. Any other yes? I'm just curiosity on the north side
there the very narrow planter described as a biofiltration planter given its
narrow profile. It's not gonna collect a lot of rain. Is there some method of
delivering runoff water to that planter? It's also 30 inches high, so not sure how
water gets to it. I think I'll let the applicant speak to, are you asking if
they're planning on adding additional irrigation? I'm just I'm just wondering
I was wondering if that is in fact a destination
for runoff water from somewhere.
But I'll wait for the applicant.
That's fine.
Thank you.
Any other questions for staff?
One quick question that I noticed.
They did a pretty good job trying to find
the objective design standards,
but the height, it was simply because they're constrained
Existing height of the building right as they're building the second floor edition. It was like 12 versus 18
Correct the the height for commercial uses
Because of the existing because of the that's what's constraining being able to satisfy that objective standard, correct? Okay
Any other before?
Beautiful. Thank you so much. Thank you
The is the applicant here
No, yes. Yes. Oh, sorry
Would you like to come up and make a presentation? I think you have
It's easy to talk now, I feel intimidated
Chip do you want to?
Okay, perfect
Thank you very much for having me here. My name is Mike gaben along with David and Rolla
We are the three siblings involved in this project, and I thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of you
Before our team comes up to introduce the project. I thought would share with you
family history and background to give context to this project and its
importance. Our story begins in Walnut Creek here back in the early 80s. This is
where our family took its first steps into the restaurant world driven simply
by the love for good food, community, and hospitality. A city where we build our
lives, raised our kids, and invested in our future. Our father, a first generation
hospitality professional deeply valued relationships in this city. My
simplicity and I represent the second generation of this legacy. Walla Creek
has been home to our family story for four decades. Give you a little history
about the restaurants that we've been involved in. It began in the early 80s at
at 1516 Bonanza Street.
Oh, thank you.
It began in the early 80s at 1516 Bonanza Street.
I don't have a picture of that here,
but that is the restaurant my parents started
called La Ultima, who was in a New Mexico restaurant.
It was the old firehouse where Havana resides today.
That was back in the 80s.
At the same time, my father also started
at 14 at Walmart Diablo, which is the Chico building.
Back then he had a French restaurant called La Fontaine.
And then after that, he had the Walnut Creek Half-Pro,
which was there for about 20 years.
These were not restaurants.
These were places where people came together, shared meals,
and created lasting memories.
As kids, the three of us grew up in that world,
busing tables, washing dishes, doing whatever
needed to be done.
The restaurants were kind of our playground and our classroom.
We learned a lot.
We took that vision of our father in the 1990s.
We moved it forward, and we opened up
at 1548 Bonanza Hubcaps Diner.
And we were there for about 27 years,
in which later we transformed to Broderick, what it is today.
a few years later after taking hubcaps,
we ended up acquiring Mel's diner on Main Street.
And we were there for 25 years until we transformed it
to one of our concept, which is hot boys right now.
And lastly in 2022, we introduced Lita,
Latin Caribbean concept chef driven.
And we brought that to fruition.
It was really tough.
that during the pandemic and that was not an easy project. While each of these concepts
have their own identity, they all share the same foundation we built, commitment to hospitality,
quality and connection, people's connection. Although we have eateries throughout Northern
California, Nevada, and Indianapolis, Walnut Creek has always been home to our most cherished brands.
Throughout these decades, we've been more than business owners or property owners.
We are neighbors, residents, who deeply care about the fabric of this community.
And I truly mean that.
Out of all of our restaurants that we have, the ones that we cherish the most, are the
ones in this city, and this is why we continue to want to do more here.
This is home.
When 1555 became available, we knew it was our calling, a corner that has been our home
for 30 years. An iconic location, one that deserve preservation, but boy it needs a lot of work.
It's tired. The proposal we're introducing to you guys tonight is rooted with respect to the
Wanda Creek character. It's not a standalone development for us. It's a continuation of our
family long-standing commitment to the downtown core. We approach this design and elements,
We approach its designs, elements, and details with intention.
We view 1555 as a piece of downtown history that will support local
activity, honor old memories, create new ones,
and contribute to a thriving community. We believe this will be a defining
project for us, a chance to honor our roots, invest in
our community, and continue the legacy of our family began
all these years back. Taking this project on feels like
coming full circle. We're proud to have been we're proud to have contributed and
been part of this evolution of the restaurant landscape in Walnut Creek a
vibrant community that has become today. We value your feedback we appreciate you
guys take a look at this project and we look forward to doing a high standard
project that deserve that this community deserves. Thank you very much I'll take
any questions anybody has? Thank you, does anybody have any questions for the
applicant? Thank you. Speechless, thank you. Are there any public, I don't see
any, but are there, oh yes, sorry, no public comment, okay, you got excited, you
were moving. Hi, I'm Brandon Marshall, Fog Studio. Mike didn't show you these
images but yeah. These are some of their restaurants downtown. It's very clear
they they're very passionate and I think it's a special special bond they have
with the city. It's pretty unique. I was gonna go really quickly over the
changes. I don't know if that's necessary and these are just responses from the
RC. And in some cases we'll overlap with a couple questions that were
were asked, let's see if I can make this smaller.
Here we go.
One of the questions was a more technical how,
so the building is going to be clad in part
with a laser cut metal scrim.
It's going to, A, kind of add some softness and scale
to both the locust ambinanza sides,
but also protect the, there's a lot of glazing there,
protect it from the sun and allow potential vine creepers
to also soften.
The specific question was, how was it going to get attached?
Because it kind of bridges over the solid wall
and the curtain wall, the glaze wall.
So really, these details were providing a response to that.
Another question had to do with visibility of the rooftop
equipment and ducting.
And I don't know if you can see the cursor.
The main equipment is going to be
at the kind of the easternmost portion of the addition.
And then there's equipment that serves the existing building
that's already shrouded with a roof shroud.
The way that we designed the addition,
the roof slopes up to the high point
where the equipment will be.
And the roof plan we provided shows
there's not gonna be ducting,
which was the main concern of the DRC.
One of the other concerns was along
the restroom wall, walkway, and the ability
to see into those existing windows
and basically see people coming in and out of restrooms.
What we're proposing is a mirrored film
that kind of has a gold tint that
works within the pallet of the building materials.
And then finally, I think there were just
some nuts and bolts questions about how
the fig was going to grow.
It's going to be a little bit of a labor of love
and mold it but I think they're up to it given their experience with other other
restaurants in a similar approach. So anyway this plan was showing those areas
of concern. I just wanted to point out the couple questions on the planters. So
these planters here are in fact filtration planters and they're gonna
have a hardline roof leader that dumps water into them. So they're they're
actually doing work for us and that's how we're getting water there. The
permeable pavers that were brought up are actually reducing our impermeability,
it's bringing our number down and so that also is potentially gonna
allow the staff who are gonna be on the second floor, which is mostly offices for
their operation, some outdoor space in the back. There was a question about
about parking, one of the challenges when we came in
was getting the space is so constrained in the back
that it doesn't fit city standards for parking.
So the fact that it was striped
doesn't necessarily mean it was parkable,
at least legally.
So we struggle with that
and the approach is really gonna be
that this is all really for service access to the kitchen
and then employee pedestrian access
and not for public parking.
And so, yeah, I think that covered the high-level changes
or responses that have any other questions
I'm happy to answer.
Are there any questions for the applicant?
I like to hear that you're doing C3.
Yep, we don't have choice.
But it wasn't there before.
It wasn't there before.
It wasn't there before.
I mean, we haven't really dug in here,
but like Mike said,
they're touching every corner of this building.
we're rebuilding the entire rear lot area
because of the grading to try and get all the water
to drain properly because right now in that back,
this is gonna be filtration as well.
Right now all the water collects there
and they pump it out under the building
or that outdoor dining area to the street, problematic.
So, I mean, this is gonna be,
I mean, 50 to 75 year building when they're done with it.
It's gonna be a brand new building, which is kind of cool.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Oh, yes.
Just one question, and maybe this is more for you, Mike.
But in terms of the design, you talked
about sort of paying homage to the history.
And I was just wondering if you wanted
to talk at all about the way that you did the colors
and the texture and whether that's paying homage
to the yacht club in some way.
just come to the microphone so that anyone watching online or watching later can hear you. Thank you.
We looked at this building initially. It's very tired and we thought about scraping it
and starting over and you know Kevin and I have been friends for 30 years and we've had discussions
about this and part of the reason that we didn't do that is because we wanted to be homage to the
building and that's why we didn't touch the facade we kept it the same way as it
is and we added on to it because we felt that the art club was a very iconic
brand and it really had it touched a lot of people in the city and wanted to pay
homage to that and this is why we kept it in its existing condition of course
we have to change the glass and a lot of it is not really compliant to
standards so we're doing a lot of that but that was a reason that we kept the
whole facade is paying homage and there might be some stuff within our menu as
well that might be a little bit of that as well so so it'll be it'll be exciting
thank you well thank you so much I'm gonna close public comment take it back
back to the Commission for any discussions, a motion?
I'll start out, I won't make a motion,
but I'll say it looks like a great project.
Any other comments?
Commissioner Moran.
Yeah, I second that.
I just wanted to say that I think that
I speak for my fellow commissioners
that we appreciate the time and the care and the effort
that seems to have gone in,
because the Yacht Club was an iconic piece
of downtown Long Creek for many years.
I myself, I had my wedding reception dinner
there in the patio.
So it's fun.
Yeah, right?
Oh, so that was you.
OK.
OK.
So but I just wanted to say thank you to the family,
because I know that you guys are maybe
an underappreciated anchor of what
makes the downtown area special and vibrant.
And please keep up the good work.
and I can't wait to see the end result.
Thank you.
Commissioner Callan, I think you want to say something?
Yeah, I just wanted to say this is such a great example of when
you have people who really care, who live here,
who are part of the community, and build something.
It's beautiful.
It's just the design is gorgeous.
And I think it will be an iconic part of Walnut Creek for years
to come.
So I'd like to go ahead and make the motion,
unless there are other ones.
I think, Commissioner, I wanted to say something.
I still miss hubcraps.
I missed it.
And then super quick, I can't wait to see this building up because it's
interesting because you're right in front of Broderick and Lita. I'm curious to see
how those architectural elements are going to pull that in to what that is
because it looks very different, but the the towel is beautiful. So okay I
apologize. One more comment. Nostalgia is I used to go with air to Cafe Barbara
before Yacht Club. So we're expecting some very good memories there. Yes, can we
go down? Okay, alright. On that note, I move to adopt the resolution approving
design review application number Y25-099 for Oceana authoring the building
modifications to the building at 1555 Bonanza Street subject to the
conditions contained therein. Second. Roll call vote. Yes. Commissioner Count. Yes.
Commissioner Anderson. Yes. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Commissioner strongman. Yes.
Commissioner Kwok. Yes. Vice Chair Klop. Yes. And Chair Needing. Yes. Motion carries
and I'd like that tile in my bathroom. Yes, yes well thank you. So now on to any
commission considerations or staff reports or announcements. Chip you got
something good for us? I think I mentioned at our last meeting that the
planning commission agendas are not packed but they have items on them
through it through the first meeting in May and I suspect the second meeting in
May will be the same okay that's busy so we're gonna we're gonna make ourselves
worthy oh yes just just wanted to share with the team thank you for handling
last meeting without me because I was away at the Planning Commissioner's
Academy, which was fantastic. I highly recommend checking out any of the
resources if you haven't already. I was able to complete my required ethics
training while I was there for AB 1234, but also having access to the, and all of
this is available to all of you online, those of you who've been around it
already know that, but the Institute for Local Government Planning Commissioner
handbook, very handy resource. There's also workshops on planning resiliency
after wildfires, California housing law updates. One of the things they talked
about is the relationship between the Planning Commission, the City Council, and
the city staff. And I have to say in hearing from other cities around the
state and how some of them are engaged in many challenges in that area, I'm very
very appreciative of our city staff and our city council for the kind of strong
relationships and very effective communication that we have and the kind
of support that we're given as commissioners so I wanted to thank you
for that and yeah that's it thank you. Anything with signs or transportation?
No okay then we will adjourn at 8 27 thank you so much.