Good evening. I would like to welcome you to our Design Review Commission for
Wednesday, June 17th. My name is Karen Basting. I'm the chair this year. And if
you wish to address the Commission, please fill out a speaker card when
invited by me or staff to bring your card up. Please bring it up and hand it
to the Secretary and state clearly your name and address and whom you represent.
The purpose of a public hearing is to supply us with information that we can't
otherwise obtain, and so please limit your testimony to factual information
that will assist in the decision-making process for the topic at hand. In order
to facilitate an efficient meeting, please avoid repeating previous
testimony and observe the time limits so that everybody has a chance to speak. So
So again, welcome to you all.
I'm going to call the roll.
I'll do that.
Okay.
You're going to do that.
Chip's going to do that.
Secretary will call roll.
Commissioner Newsom?
Here.
Commissioner Prose?
Here.
Commissioner Case?
Here.
Vice Chair Riley?
Here.
And Chair Besting?
Here.
We have a quorum.
All right.
Do we have any items on consent calendar?
We have no items on consent calendar and staff doesn't, staff has no recommendations to move
any to the consent calendar. Okay does any member of the public have any
communication or comment that on an item that is not on the agenda that they
would like to speak with us about. Okay seeing none do any of the Commission
members have any of you had any ex parte communications? All right well now we'll
proceed with the public hearing. Okay good evening commissioners Simmer Gale
Senior Planner with the City. We are here tonight to gather Design Review
Commission's feedback on the proposed Center Place South multi-family
development that will be located at 1271 South California Boulevard. The
applicant Ed McCoy along with his team is here tonight to answer any questions
you may have after the presentation as am I. And just to quickly orient you with
the site it is has a general plan designation of general retail and is
zoned central retail. The site is approximately 1.32 acres and the existing
single-story commercial building on site will be demolished for proposed
construction and the existing site does abut the Alma Park and the surrounding
area consists of a mix of commercial and retail uses. Let me see if I could use
this. There are commercial retail uses along South California as well as
Olympic and there are residential uses behind the site and along the west of
the site. And these are just some photographs and a aerial just to show
you existing conditions on site as well as surrounding context. And this site is
located within the Alma Park specific plan area which does encourage high
density residential uses. And again I'll use my clicker just to show what the
surrounding context or area has. So what you see identified with the star is
the site area and all of the other uses are residential or multifamily that are
located behind this project site. And then there are office buildings along
Olympic yeah and then there's commercial buildings such as the habit burger and
other tenant spaces along South California. And the general retail
general plan does encourage or is intended for commercial development
however encourages ground floor retail activity. The general plan also does
allow multi-family residential uses in commercial districts provided they
comply with zoning requirements and applicable city codes.
And this site is zoned central retail,
which does permit residential development
when there is a adopted specific plan for that area.
So the Alma Park specific plan
does envision residential development.
And I did wanna point out that the specific plan
does not establish residential density
through a units per acre standard.
The residential intensity here is regulated
through a floor area ratio that does allow a maximum
of 2.0 if affordable housing is provided.
And both the general plan and the specific plan
regulate the development through floor area
and not the standard units per acre
that we typically see for general plan designation
density ranges.
Moving into the project, it is a 172 unit
multi-family rental development
and does include 26 affordable units.
Seven story building with a mix of a studio,
one bedroom and two bedroom units.
The units range from 582 to 1300 square feet of unit sizes
and 204 parking spaces are provided for the residents.
And there are 47 additional spaces that are reserved
for the adjacent commercial retail uses to the north.
and there's also a central open space area within the building which will go more into detail
when we review the floor plan. And 59 new trees are proposed as part of the landscaping pallet
and there are 30 trees on site that will be removed for project construction.
Frontage improvements include 10-foot wide sidewalks, street trees, as well as one new street
along Battello Drive. So tonight the Design Review Commission will provide
feedback and input on the design review, the tree removals, as well as the density
bonus and waivers, and that feedback will then be taken to the Planning
Commission for their consideration at a later date, where Planning Commission
will consider the project as well as the associated entitlements. Before I go into
the project details, I did want to highlight that this project is being
processed under several state housing laws the first one being the housing
accountability act which states that for residential projects the city's review
is limited if the project meets all applicable objective standards and if
the project were to be denied the city would need to make specific health or
safety findings and under Senate bill or SB 330 it essentially streamlines the
projects that meets objective standards and prevents the city from reducing the
residential capacity or density of the project. And as mentioned earlier the
general plan and the Alma Park specific plan regulate the development through a
floor area ratio rather than a units per acre. So in that sense the city needed
to determine the base density and under state law the government code section
65915 there is an avenue for that where you could determine the base density
through a volumetric analysis and that was performed for this site where it
takes the objective standards of the such as the maximum floor area that
would be allowed under without any waivers it takes that information as
well as the building height which is 35 feet and the required setbacks if you
were to build on this site and then based on that the maximum residential
floor area that would be allowed and established for the site is 86 units.
This project is also being processed under AB 1287 that does apply to this project as
the project is can stack density bonus bonuses when affordable units are provided in multiple
income categories.
In this case the applicant is providing 13 very low income units as well as 13 moderate
income units and for both of those they get a 50% density bonus increase
resulting in 86 total additional bonus units and taking the projects density to
172 units. Density bonus also allows waivers to the city's development
standards when it's necessary to accommodate housing or affordable units
onsite. And this project is requesting a total of 10 waivers. And here this is
also in the staff report and I believe the applicant provide an attachment that
goes into all of these waiver requests and the justification why it's needed.
But I'll just quickly touch on one. These are the 10 waivers that are requested.
Three of these are, sorry, two of these are from the central retail zone and the
The other ones are directly from the Alma Park specific plan development standards as
well as design standards that are being waived.
One such being the floor area ratio 1.5 is typically allowed, 2.0 is allowed since they're
providing affordable housing.
The applicant is proposing a floor area of 3.43 and that is allowed as the applicant
is entitled to the waivers as project qualifies for a density bonus under state law.
And the city did evaluate the waivers and based on the evidence that's presented in
the record it was determined that these would not result any of these waivers listed here
would not result in any health or safety impacts, therefore the city is supporting the waivers.
And here is the existing and proposed site plan and here's a closer look at that site
plan vehicle access is provided from both Botelho and South California Boulevard through
two separate driveways. A shared driveway along the southeastern property line provides access to the
residential units as well as the retail parking. These are separate garage entrances and then
there's a separate entrance on Botello that provides access to the basement which is again
for the residential parking only. The shared driveway here leads both to the retail and the
and the residential parking.
And here is just a closer look at all of the floors
and the parking levels through this section detail.
The basement level one and level two parking areas
do function as one integrated parking structure
that's connected by internal ramps within the building
and the residents could move between all parking levels
without having to exit the building.
And here again, I've highlighted access
into the retail parking garage.
This is for visitor parking, and it
is located on level one near the commercial building,
the habit burger.
And there is no gate, so you don't
need to go through any codes or anything.
You could just pull directly into that garage.
And here is the upper floor layout.
What you see to the left is the third floor.
And above this are the remaining floors that have units.
The internal courtyard is located there for amenity
that provides amenities to the residents.
I believe there's also a pool there
and other such amenities.
And here is the seventh floor.
Again, residential units are located on this floor,
but there's also additional amenities
such as the club room and the roof terrace that's provided.
And now moving into the project elevations,
this is the view from South California,
and it does consist of primarily the pedestrian frontage
and residential entrance, and the leasing,
this also shows the leasing office,
the meal room and the fitness center,
which do activate that streetscape.
And the design also includes large storefront windows,
recessed balconies, and building offsets.
And here is the view from,
It's at the corner of both Botelho and South California,
but essentially trying to show the view from Botelho.
And this accommodates vehicle access,
loading and service functions.
And I believe the applicants team has a presentation tonight
and they'll go more detail into the design concept
and the thought behind it.
And here is the elevation that's facing Alma Park.
As you can see, the residential units and balconies
on the west elevation overlooked the park.
And here is the North elevation.
And here's a closer look at the parking garage entrances,
again, for the retail and the residential.
And this incorporates residential units, balconies,
and parking access in this elevation.
And here's just a closer look at the color material palette.
And the actual color material palette
has also been provided.
and it is behind the Design Review Commission Secretary.
So if it needs to be passed around,
we can pass that around for a closer look.
But the project is utilizing a contemporary mix of stucco,
brick veneer, tile accents, and decorative metal screening.
And there's a mix of earth tone colors
as well as shades of white, gray, beige, and charcoal.
And it's complemented by brick and metal accents.
And here is the proposed landscape plan.
There are a total of 59 new trees, which range in size from 24-inch box to 60-inch box in
size and the species consist of coastal live oak, strawberry, pistachio, redbuds, and London
plain trees.
And two of the existing crepe myrtle trees along South California are also being preserved
as part of this project.
And again, the applicants team could go into more detail regarding the landscape plan.
just a quick look at the ground floor landscaping as well as the courtyard landscaping.
And this project also proposes the removal of 30 trees on site, which also includes eight
coastal live oak trees.
The arborist report that was provided was incomplete, so the applicant is working on
revised plans as well as the updated arborist report so the city arborist could review and
evaluate the trees as well as determine which ones could be approved
administratively and which ones will require Planning Commission action.
That staff does recommend that the Design Review Commission review and comment on
the site site and building design as well as all of the other associated
entitlements listed on the slide. And DRC's feedback or any members of the
public's feedback will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their
consideration of the project and the entitlements. That is all I have but I'm
happy to answer any questions for you. Any questions? I believe the applicant of
the presentation as well. Well that's getting set. Good evening, I'm
Madam Chair, members of the Commission. I'm Ed McCoy. I'm with Fairfield
Residential. Happy to be here tonight and I first want to thank Chip and Simmer.
So far it's been nothing but a professional process and we appreciate
that to get to this point and we look forward to continuing to work with them
in a cooperative manner. With me tonight also is members of Fairfield as well as
our architect who will be doing the presentation, Ed, who's behind me. We have
MJS, our landscape architect, as well as Will from CBG, our civil engineer, and
MGS. We have Dan Dell as well. Do we just push this button here somewhere? I'm just
going to do a quick Fairfield overview and then hand off to Ed. Fairfield is a
a privately held company, we're headquartered in San Diego.
We only do multifamily development,
we do rental housing and mixed use.
We're across the United States,
our footprint is from coast to coast.
We are a full service company,
we do our own site acquisitions,
we build our own properties, we manage our own properties.
My group here tonight is our development team.
Once we're done, if everything goes well
and we get approved ultimately,
we'll hand it off to our construction team,
we'll then build it.
Since 1985, we've developed
more than 100,000 luxury apartment homes.
And we currently manage over 40,000.
So we're very well known in the industry.
And anybody who does their homework on us
would see that we have a pretty good reputation.
We take pride in redeveloping sites like this,
infill sites that are underutilized in downtown settings.
So this type of a situation for us,
this type of a site is really in our wheelhouse.
And we look forward to creating something
that not only our company,
but that the city of Walnut Creek can be proud of as well.
Again, we're here to answer any questions
from the Fairfield side,
but since this is design review,
I'm gonna go ahead and hand off
to our very talented architect, Ed,
and let him walk you through the project.
Thank you.
Great, thanks.
Thanks, Sean.
Good evening, Chair, Vice Chair, and Commissioners.
Again, my name is Ed Kim with KTGI, the Project Architects.
And rather than repeating the project metrics
that Samar's been thoroughly explained.
I do wanna walk through what has ultimately
shaped the site plan.
The design decisions, the program placement,
and the coordination so far with city departments
and external agencies.
Our priority as a design team has been
South California frontage as our active facade.
The large arrow, I guess the golden arrow that you see on the south of this image or
the bottom of this image, indicates the residential entry off of an entry plaza and engages the
street.
The pink or the salmon color indicates kind of all of the active uses that we propose
along that South California Boulevard frontage.
Again, fitness, lobby, leasing, amenity spaces.
The red arrow, as Samar mentioned, off of South California,
solves the retail obligation for the replacement parking
on this site.
And so with a shared mutual access agreement,
residents can park through level one,
or retail patrons can continue and park
where the blue arrow shows for dedicated retail parking
spaces.
The right arrow on the left of this image, off of Botello,
again would be towards, or would be the entry point
for the subterranean garage for residents.
The smaller golden arrow on Botella also indicates
kind of a secondary lobby space for residents.
So there's access on both street frontages.
Botella Drive does do a lot of the heavy lifting
for this project in terms of back of house uses
and service and utilities.
Again, this has been coordinated with some direction
with city departments as well.
uses such as the non-passenger loading,
fire pump, electrical room, utility rooms
are all consolidated there.
And that's a deliberate design choice
to preserve as much of South California for active use.
So we approach this project like we do all projects
through the lens of city's regulations,
And in this case in Walnut Creek,
the city's design review standards and guidelines, right?
Not as necessarily a compliance checklist,
but really a design framework.
And so I'll get into the details in the following slides,
but our building design aims to achieve visual interest
through measures such as massing, articulation,
varied materials and a cohesive design aesthetic.
Again, all strategies explicitly outlined
and identified within the DRSG.
So some of the following key goals from the DRSG
have directly informed the building design.
At the residential entry off of South California,
this is a really cool feature that I'm going to try to do.
Yeah, right there, right here, is the residential entry.
And what it does is it creates this vertical massing
break that varies from five feet to up to 17 feet
from adjacent wall surfaces.
This allows us the architectural language
to transition between volumes rather than being expressed
as a single uninterrupted mass.
That recessed wall, right,
there's multiple things for this project.
It also creates a recessed opportunity
at the uppermost floor and a step back
to be able to provide kind of an outdoor terrace
for residents in the formative amenity there.
Per the DRSG as well,
Rhythm Facade is one of those elements.
And so an established rhythm and order
with the vertically stacked windows and the patternings,
as well as working in conjunction
with the minor massing relief with the balconies
that are about five feet deep and about 10 feet wide.
Again, the focus rendering on the right-hand side
the lower image there. It's shown at a slightly different time of day. However, the intent
is to show and demonstrate the goal of a double height, transparent lobby, leasing, and amenity
program that engages the entry plaza. We paid particular attention to this facade and the
things that we're intending and our goal here was to build variation through material and color
with each of the massing expressions and elements.
This facade showcases three different types
of premium materials at the ground floor.
That would be the tile at the pedestrian corner there
at the intersection, and two different types of brick.
So the brick would be at the kind of the brown
that you see in this location,
emphasizing a strong corner element
continuing down to the garage facade.
And then the second brick or the alternate,
the lighter brick that's in the materials board
in front of you continues and carries
through the pedestrian level kind of closer
to the shared, sorry, the resident subterranean garage.
Decorative screening would also be introduced
within the garage to provide visual interest
at the pedestrian level and also at the same time help
with limiting light spillage onto the street.
Window recesses per DRSG would be two inches
kind of throughout this project.
The Physical Materials Board, again, as you can reference,
the palette is oriented towards a timeless aesthetic.
Brick is, again, the key featured material.
It helps establish a residential scale
and is consistent with the number of existing buildings
kind of within the context in this neighborhood.
The total percentage of brick, just to kind of give you a big ball park number, along
the street frontage, along South California, were about 21% of that facade as brick.
So a premium material there.
And then 17% along Botello.
All together about 38% of the street frontages.
In addition to the brick, storefront glazing and tile, that happens on the ground level
the pedestrian level would contribute an additional 15% along the California edge.
And so we're really trying to exemplify as much transparency and premium materials at
the pedestrian scape, in the streetscape.
Again, no prohibited materials from the DRSG appear within this pallet.
Then lastly, building and landscape materials are working cohesively together across this
project.
Signage at this stage is conceptual, identifying potential location and sizing.
However, Fairfield does go through a much more focused signage and branding identity
package, and so that will continue to evolve and be explored in greater detail as the project
advances.
However, the current approach, just to kind of give a high level again, distinguishes
between pedestrian and vehicular signage.
Project identity and wayfinding signage for pedestrians would be illuminated.
And those that are more vehicular oriented or service oriented, such as the garage, loading,
and retail parking would not be.
The perimeter landscape is designed to enhance and engage the pedestrian experience.
The streetscape will be reinforced
with additional crape myrtle,
trees that match the existing street program,
creating a cohesive and unified character
along that street frontage.
South California Boulevard will feature
an expanded entry plaza anchored by a coast live oak.
So this oak tree and the proposed art piece
would be set within a raised planter
incorporated with integrated seating.
The plaza's modern, organic forms soften the edge
between sidewalk and the private realm,
encouraging pedestrian interaction and activation.
The pool deck, the pool deck here,
as well as the rooftop amenity,
provide a range of resident experiences
with California inspired aesthetic.
The plant pallet is a mix of climate appropriate trees
and water conscious shrubs
selected for long-term performance.
The overall character is, again, modern California,
incorporating a variety of forms, foliage, colors,
and textures.
The unique microclimates created by the building's mass
allow the palette to respond appropriately
to varying sun and shade conditions
while maintaining the project's low water use objectives.
The result is a resilient and dynamic landscape
that provides a year-round interest
and reinforces the project's identity.
In closing, the project, again, is designed to meet
the city of Walnut Creek standards and guidelines
while going beyond minimum compliance
where the design supports it.
The DRSG here has been a genuine design tool
and not a limitation.
We believe the building can have a positive contribution
to the South California Boulevard,
architecturally be compatible with its context,
meaningfully engage with the street frontages,
and be designed to serve its residents
and the community well over time.
We appreciate the committee's time
and we look forward to your comments.
Thank you.
Any questions of the applicant?
We got one.
Could you talk a little bit about the ALMA facing elevation,
what the logic and development of that was?
Yeah, here, let me see if I can...
Yeah, so from a volume standpoint, again,
we're still trying to limit the quantity
or the length of a parent face,
and so there are vertical recesses that are interjected
to be able to break the module up.
And so again, similar strategy
with the massing articulation and modulation,
that this isn't a long linear elevation.
We use those massing bricks strategically
to also change or alternate colors,
so it does feel like there's a series of volumes
rather than a single uninterrupted mass.
What about landscaping?
Would you do anything with landscaping
on that side of the building?
Yeah, so there is private balconies.
Let me see if I can get to a floor plan.
So there are, I don't know if I have a full plan
on this slide deck, but there are anticipated
private residences and terraces
at kind of that garage level,
or where you see the railing in there.
So there would be opportunity for planters and so forth.
Then how does your occupants access that park,
was that thought about?
If I could just jump in there, Ed McCoy again.
We had a neighborhood meeting last night at the property
and one of the neighbors identified that wall at the base
as being something that they didn't want to look at
because obviously it looks like a blank wall, excuse me.
So I thought it was a good comment.
We met with our landscape architect today.
And in regard to the landscaping along that base,
we're looking at potentially adding some cascading vines
along that edge to hide that concrete wall.
So that was a comment that, again,
that we will be addressing in our next iteration.
And I'm sorry, what was the next question?
I think you kind of answered it.
I mean, how do you soften that a bit?
So I think that's good.
Well, I mean, I guess that park is such a great amenity.
How do you guys plan on accessing it for your residents?
This property, years ago, was all one parcel.
It's been recently subdivided.
When it was one parcel, the access was located
next to the Schwab Building in a stairwell, if you will.
and that was acting as the access
from this overall parcel into the park.
So we don't have a direct access
from this particular building into the park.
We'll be using that.
And we have access agreements with the adjacent property owner
to allow not only vehicular,
but also pedestrian cross access.
All right, cool.
I mean, I'm not gonna comment about the density.
I know we've been through this a few times,
and I know there's not much we can do about it.
Maybe any other comments?
Yeah, I've got a few, please.
When I first opened this project,
I was reminded of some of my readings
from architecture's goal, and specifically
the location of the lobby.
And so I dug up this quote.
So in 1961, Jane Jacobs wrote in her book,
The Death and Life of Great American Cities,
which emphasized that corners are the natural mixing
points of urban life requiring distinct architectural framing
to support safety and socializing.
She wrote, the natural place for overlapping and mingling
are street corners.
Those nodes require a clear architectural definition
to anchor the eyes of the street.
I don't get that with this project.
The lobby has been moved to the center of the block.
If I walk out that lobby space, I see a burger joint.
I see a cross, I see a garage, for a parking garage.
So this schematic, this concept,
doesn't do much to belong to the urban fabric,
and I think that's opportunity for improvement
in this project.
The lobby space, as you point out, is large, grand.
It looks beautiful as it sits as an object.
But its location in the site, I think, is a missed opportunity.
And I think it better serve both the project and the city
as if it was anchored more at the intersections.
Because that part of town is ripe for future improvement.
And so this opportunity for this project
to kind of make a statement in the corner,
establishing this as a real node of a future hub of activity
in kind of that corner of the downtown.
You do mention that the Botello elevation
is more of a functional utility elevation.
Fair enough.
I get the needs for architectural.
However, I don't think that's far enough to address human scale.
Again, I think what we're coming up short
is in anticipation of what this block and this intersection
and this neighbor looks like in five or 10 years.
And I think that by adding some more scale to that elevation,
more pedestrian engagement, I think it's helpful
and would benefit the project as a whole.
One of the questions I look at the garage space
is where we live in a quickly changing world.
I don't have to own a car living here.
I can take an Uber.
I can get some place with Tabard.
I can get the city and take a driverless car.
So has the design team made any looks
or the ownership made any efforts
to study the impact of reducing?
I think by my quick calculation, unit square footage
and garage square footage, it's roughly a two to one.
There's an enormous amount of parking area.
Can that be reduced?
Can that additional square footage
be used for other uses in the building?
or not change the density, but make other uses
and make the building be a bit more presentable in terms
of what it may do to the city.
And I'll ask you to respond to that, me and if you would,
please.
And then back to Commissioner Newsom's comment
about Alma Park in relationship, I
would say it's the right opportunity to make access.
If I live in this building to leash up my dog
and walk out of a bridge that goes across that parking area
into the park, I think one that's engaging as a resident.
And I think for the people who live around the park
and use the park, see that as a, not just by use,
but as an expression of a welcome out to the building.
Hey, we're a neighbor.
Here's our stoop.
It becomes a way to kind of ingratiate the building
to the park and the community and not have this back turn
to it like I think it does.
I think it does at that point.
I hate to interrupt, but this portion of the meeting
for questions. Okay. And then we'll have comments. Okay. Thank you. I have a
question in the same vein. Was it considered to create a connection to
Alma Park and that it couldn't happen because of the parking or something? I'm
just curious if it was ever part of the design. It was. I think where we
ultimately land is because of the grade difference and the amount of soil
that we've got to retain, I think the the current thinking right now is that
the shoring would be mostly kind of restrictive of any type of connection,
but again we can we can analyze it, we can study it, I think those are good
comments and questions. And I think it might be slide 12, but I'm not certain,
it's a rendering that shows the Battelleho facade, because I had a question
about, it shows the space between the proposed Fairfield building and that one. So on the
left of the screen that kind of green passageway. What's the planned treatment for there?
So right now I think it would be the similar approach as what we would do with a garage exterior
for kind of what Ed had described,
whether it's vines or some type of landscape treatment.
The green that you see is actually property of Ivy Hill,
and so it would be off of our subject property.
And so not necessarily anything that we could kind of come in
and do ourselves, but again, the wall treatment
is something that we would explore.
How wide is that space?
Yeah, so it ranges at the kind of narrowest condition.
ranges I think about 20 to 24 feet and then as the building steps back at the
upper floors above the podium it's about 30 ish. So it could be usable? Yeah
potentially. And what is it right now? It's just a sloped landscaped edge.
Correct, it's graded yeah. Okay but it's wide enough that it's like there's
views in it's not going to become some gnarly Picky Alley. In the current
condition right now I think there are risers and stairs that lead up to Alma
Park. Is it there though? I could I could be confused. Yeah I'd have to I'd have to
double check to confirm but I remember somewhere along this kind of edge of Ivy
Hill there was stairs for access. Okay I think that might be further down but I
could be confused. Okay. And then my other question I realize that you're abiding by
the specific plan and it probably calls for it but could we consider and maybe
I'm asking my commissioners too if the street tree could be not a crepe Myrtle and maybe something bigger
So it feels a little more in scale with the building because I think when it was like a commercial
Site that made more sense. You could see what was going on. But now that it's a larger building
So I just wondered if that was something the design team would consider potentially. Yeah, I think it's worth considering
Right, like the platness having that there or something
Those are my questions. Thank you
So my question is if there has been a shadow
or light study for the park with this building placed here.
I didn't see that in the packet
and I know that there is some concern
about the light in the park.
So just asking if you have done a study for that.
We have.
Okay.
Yeah, and so we were working on that
kind of prior to today understanding
kind of what is the most shadiest condition.
in the winter, and I could probably jump to the diagram.
I think it's at the very end here.
Oh, oh, oh.
Okay, and so understanding that solstices
tend to have the kind of the longer shadows,
so we looked at the summer
and we looked at the winter as well.
And so with the summer solstice, June 21st,
the current condition right now
with the existing buildings casts about a 9% shadow
on Alma Park, and that's shown as
kind of the red outline with the dark hatch.
That's the shadow.
So that's the current shadow by the existing?
Correct. Okay.
Correct.
And then what you see here would be an additional 7%
during the summer solstice at 9 a.m.
that produces an additional 7% of shading on Tama Park.
Once we get to, the solar orientation of this site,
I think is one thing to consider as well,
because once we get to 12 p.m. and 3 p.m.,
there's no additional shade that's cast on Alma Park.
Right.
And so then the next study that we did was Winter Solstice.
Okay.
Kind of the worst case scenario
or the longest shadows cast throughout the year.
Again, this is not an average throughout the year,
this is kind of on this one day again.
But December 21st, 9 a.m., Alma Park
in its current buildings and the current configuration
is about 50% shaded.
With the addition of the proposed project,
oops, sorry.
This portion that's hatched with a diagonal line
constitutes but an additional 30% add on Alma Park.
That starts to taper off pretty dramatically.
So from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m.,
so within that one hour duration,
it drops from 30% to 22%.
And then from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.,
it drops even more drastically,
and we're only about 4% shade before it hits 12 p.m.
where there's no additional shade from our structure.
So if I'm looking at this correctly,
the where it will come into effect,
or where that shade would happen,
would be at the solstice from nine to 10 a.m.
Is that correct? Correct, yeah.
Correct, or within that range?
That's right.
Okay, so there is, so after 12,
there is no additional shade from your building.
Am I reading that correctly?
That's right.
Okay, all right.
Thank you.
Any further questions?
To what Commissioner Prosser said,
would you go through the access points
of the building one more time?
Would you go back to that?
Absolutely.
Sorry, let me get, give me one second.
Let me get Ollie to the beginning here.
So this arrow that you see here
would be the main kind of lobby entry, elevator entry.
We anticipate that there's still going to be entry points
or controlled access from the leasing lobby as well.
Fitness would be circulated internally to the building.
And so there is a grade delta between this entry plaza
and where we kind of zero out with the retail shared access
to the street corner of about five feet.
And so there is a substantial leveling off
happens here. Secondary access point to residential lobby to be able to get up
to kind of all levels of residence and garage happens kind of in this area
that's adjacent to then the non-passenger loading which would serve
for residential move-in move-out and so forth. Garage access for residents would
happen here in the first kind of red arrow and so and then to circulate
internally to level one and two.
Retail replacement parking, the 47 that's within the agreement,
would be accessed off of this garage.
The arrow here off of Patello would
be accessing the subterranean residential garage.
Residents, again, once in the garage,
can access all vertical cores and be
able to get to every level of the building.
So part of the parking issue that you had developing this
was you had to replace that parking and the retail
for the habit and all those other restaurants, right?
That's correct.
And the residents actually have two accesses then,
the one on Botello and then also the main one on California?
That's correct, yes.
Right, okay.
And like in terms of the corner,
Commissioner Pross talked about the corner a bit.
I mean, this building has a lot of corners, right?
So like, in terms of how you developed
and figured out where the entrances would be,
how'd you come up with that?
So we do know that, I mean, from a grading standpoint,
where the sidewalk ultimately meets the project
happens closer to the shared retail access point.
And so we emphasize that and highlighted that
as kind of the main approach.
And we imagine that all leasing opportunity,
kind of way finding happens kind of within that zone as well.
So for the retail patrons,
or for the residents and future tenants,
they will all be coming through that access point.
And so we kind of consolidated it
and condensed all of the front door
and access points kind of within that zone.
It makes some sense.
I mean, it's a, you know,
it's the strongest elevation,
and you've said so is California, right?
I'd say Patella is less so.
I mean, I think, do you, I assume you're meeting
the objective design standards in terms of breaking
the building up in terms of what's on Vitello?
Okay, thanks.
I have an additional question based on that.
Do you have any renderings of the signage
for the replacement public parking?
Sort of how's the wayfinding gonna be
so that people know that that's available to them?
Yeah, so, let me see if we have an enlarged landscape plan.
So, there is a, it's hard to see here without zooming in.
Maybe it's okay.
But the retail entry for retail patrons
are always coming in here to begin with, right?
There's no access point off of Patello
for the current retail patrons.
And so naturally, I think everybody understands
to come into the shared access agreement.
For residents, again, I think the public art feature,
or sorry, the art feature, the live oak,
this plaza becoming kind of an extension of the interior space
and becomes active, I think naturally brings visual kind
of concentration to that corner to bring everybody in.
So there's no planned signage to let people
know that in the back of this building,
there's public parking?
The signage would happen on building.
Not out, are you asking if it's out on the street?
So if someone's driving down the street
and they wanna go to the habit
and they're looking for a place to park,
there's no way for them to,
I wanna know how they're gonna know
that they can drive down that driveway
and park there to go to the habit.
Yeah, that's a good question.
I think I would have to understand.
I mean, the existing condition right now,
there isn't signage out there that specifically says
to enter into that shared access driveway.
Right.
And so we can potentially look at, yeah.
I just, as this building has a,
I know this is comment section,
but just making it clear that it could be there,
I just don't see it.
Yeah. Yeah, thank you.
I do have one additional question.
There was another waiver asked to not be followed
with the Rogan to Alma Park specific plan
regarding the hip and cable rifts.
And then the letter from the applicant,
it says that the, you know,
this roof form can't be done.
And so can you explain to me kind of what's preventing,
you know, addressing that,
or that, you know, that waiver being asked for, please?
Yeah, Ed McCoy again, thanks for the question
and thanks for bringing that up
because I did want to clarify one thing.
regarding waivers versus incentives and concessions.
This particular one is a request for an incentive,
a concession, because it clearly affects our ability
to financially make the project feasible,
and I'll explain why.
Excuse me.
If we were to do a hip and gable roof,
the height of the building would obviously be taller.
And according to the building code,
if you exceed 85 feet,
you have to go to a type one construction.
So in order to keep the same amount of units,
we had to go with a flat roof
so that we didn't kick ourselves up
into a different construction type
that would have made the project infeasible
from a financial standpoint.
Because obviously type one construct is much more expensive
than a type three construction, which we're proposing here.
Right, so this roof, you know, close up would not be visible.
You can use an overhang or an eave.
The roof form would be visible up and down the street.
But is it not possible to do, you know,
in front of the parapet, a slope condition
where there's a roof material, a tile or something
that kind of gave the implication of a roof,
that doesn't change the elevation
of your actual roof assembly.
Good question.
We'll take a look at that.
I don't know the answer to that, but yeah,
obviously a parapet's a parapet.
We can make it look like a lot of different things.
So yeah, it's a good one to take under consideration.
Thank you.
Any further questions?
Are there any members of the public
that would like to make their comments.
Okay, could you bring your speaker card up?
And you have two minutes.
Okay, thank you.
And thank all of you for serving on this.
I know this is a labor of love for you
and somebody's gotta do it and thank you.
I was on the board there and just by chance,
I left the board in the fall.
But I received, we were talking about this project
coming on and there was a letter that was sent
the group and it talked about the project that was proposed and there was a rendering
put out in October of 26, I'm sorry, of 25, October 25, which was a lot, not a lot smaller,
but it was 112 units rather than 172 and it was five stories rather than seven and it
It was versed in by Yimbee Yes in my backyard.
So they were all for it.
They thought it was a beautiful project.
I looked at it and thought, well, it is what it is.
Things are like this are happening,
and we're going to have to live with it.
But this has completely caught me off guard.
Not that I'm the only one interested in this,
but I do live there.
And I look out, and now I've got this, which was big, now
going to a lot bigger.
And along with that comes a lot more people
and a lot more traffic in the area and lots of other stuff.
So I'm just wondering, I know I went to the thing last night
and I was told that they changed ownership
at the end of December.
So the opportunity for someone to come in and increase
these sizes and also rent all these places,
it all is playing in.
But I'm a member of the community
and that's not my interest.
My interest is living there and I plan on doing that.
And also I wanted to say was, I just
I don't know why it went from okay to not okay in my mind.
So whatever that's worth and I'll fill out the card.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Anyone else have comments?
Neighbor over on Alma Park and it's very well utilized
by a lot of us and most of us bought there
because it's the only remaining green space left.
And could you give us your name please?
Oh, I'm sorry, Robin Newton.
Thank you.
So I think the impact on the park
really does need to be considered with this,
as well as the parking impact along Bardello.
I mean, it already can get very jammed up.
All the cars can get stacked up
even before it hits Bardello along California.
So I think those are two major concerns.
Also, you know, you've got 57,000 square feet
and you're building 127 units, that's a lot.
I mean, it's just to me, it's very over-designed
and it's really gonna impact the people
that are living there now.
So, and the design to me looks very commercial,
inconsistent with the downtown core.
There's no retail.
The parking that's gonna be for the retail in the back
is not gonna be utilized.
It's gonna be very difficult for anybody to park there.
So those are just a few of my comments.
I support Infield projects.
But this is really an overkill.
Thank you.
Can you hear me?
Yes.
Could you tell us your name, please?
Yes.
Thank you.
My name is Ruben Galvan.
I'm a field representative of the North Coast States
Corporations Union, Local 152, which
covers Contra Costa County.
I'm jumping in for my coworker, who covers this area.
So I just had limited time to jump into this project
and do some research.
I knew it was an SB 330.
And I was implanted and speaking tonight
and normally have something written down
so that it looks more professional.
But due to the fact that I just learned
that Fairfield Residential is a one-stop shop,
I do wanna raise a question.
And I brought it up to Ed McCoy just before the meeting.
I said, who did I talk to about labor standards?
And he directed me to Mr. Rob Salkovitz.
So I'll be reaching out by email
in the next 24 hours or so.
But my question is,
will there be labor standards on this project?
Strong labor standards.
Meaning protections for the workers
that are going to be doing this construction because SB 330,
you know it's a streamlined process.
Most likely, it's going to get approved.
That's how SB 330 is.
So we want protections for the workers, fair wages,
opportunity for apprentices coming
from state accredited apprenticeship programs,
meaningful labor compliance, health insurance benefits
so they don't have to make the decision of going to work
or taking their kids to the doctor.
Also, if there's no strong labor standards,
it leaves the door wide open for bad actors.
I don't know them, to be honest.
But it just opens the door for bad actors
who misclassify workers to avoid paying the benefits.
Am I out?
Oh my god.
Well, that's it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else with comments?
Hi, my name's James Wolf, I live around Alma Park,
and I know there's, I'm a fan of development.
I'm happy that we're increasing
residential units in the area.
I am concerned about how the building will interface
with the city at the street level, particularly traffic.
There are a lot of children, including my child,
who live around Alma Park,
and who walk that intersection of California and Botello
on the way to school at Los Lomas,
and they're looking at the designs.
there's very little visibility around that corner.
It's already a very congested intersection.
And with the amount of school children
who are gonna walk on their own through that intersection
now with, what, 177 additional units,
that creates a lot more risk and opportunity
for accidents involving minors in the area.
So I know that we're not gonna stand
in the way of development for this project,
but as much as we can ask the developer
to study traffic safety and increase traffic safety,
not just for this project,
but as a contribution to the community
that they're now entering.
I think that is a reasonable expectation.
Even if we can't oppose the project
under existing state law,
I think the way it interfaces with the city
is within the jurisdiction of the city government.
And that is something that we should expect them to do.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any more public comments?
Okay, great, come on up.
My name is Robin Wolf.
I own a condominium next door to this building
at a region on the park.
I've been there 20 years.
And we enjoy the park a great deal.
Walk there daily, bought the condo,
primarily because it was on the park.
And this project has facing the park a blank wall.
And I'm not sure if it's one or two stories tall.
It's in the drawings that you have.
We went to City Hall to get the architectural drawings.
So now it will be a walled park, at least on one side.
And the developers asking for the setback
to be not 10 feet, as required by the Alma Park Plan,
but three feet.
So three feet from the park will be a blank, tall wall.
I think that needs significant mitigation.
And I'm wondering why there would be consideration
of approval of doubling the number of units
that would be allowed for this project
under the existing city plan,
instead of the 80%, there's 100% increase in this plan,
instead of the 80% increase stated in the new state law.
So it seems to me that within that 20%,
you can, if you go back to just what the law requires,
you could have greater setbacks.
You won't have the school kids
up against a narrow sidewalk.
The 20-foot sidewalk is greatly reduced.
They're asking for a waiver.
As the previous speaker pointed out,
that's gonna make it hard to see around the corner,
harder for school kids.
It's also a setback from the park
that's being considered for a waiver.
Anyway, that's my concern.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Michael Wolf.
I live around Alma Park,
And my concerns for this project is,
first of all, regarding the traffic,
many, as my father pointed out earlier,
that many kids cross the crosswalks and stuff,
also elderly folks and handicapped folks as well,
and the increased traffic can cause a lot of safety hazards.
Another concern is a disturbance of people living
in Alma Park and surrounding those areas
I could disrupt routines.
And my grandfather actually sits by the habit, I think, daily.
And as my grandmother pointed out, it will block view.
And nature tends to bring people peace,
like that beautiful view of what's called Mount Diablo
brings me peace.
And I'm pretty sure it brings many of the folks in here
peace as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any further public comments?
Come on up to the microphone.
I was wondering, architecturally,
is it a lead designated project?
It seems like everyone's getting ready to go.
Pardon?
Our comments.
Our comments.
I'm now by, I'm hereby sorry, now closing public comment
And we'll proceed to commissioner comments.
Can we see if the applicant can respond to that question?
Can the applicant respond to the lead certification?
Thank you, Madam Chair, that was the commission,
Ed McCoy again.
We don't have an intention to go forward
with a certification of lead.
However, based on our building codes in California,
most of the things that we have to do based on the codes
get us to a very high degree of sustainability
within the building.
obviously motion lights, high-efficiency appliances,
low-flow toilets, all of the things
that would get you to a LEED certification,
we put into the building because, again, this is California.
So while not a certification, we will be highly sustainable.
We also have a, as part of our property management group,
we have our Living Green program,
where we provide recyclable bins for all of our tenants,
as well as on-site recycling.
So we are a very sustainable company internally as well
within our office policies as well as our ownership.
So we're very confident that it's gonna be
a very well sustainable building.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Commissioner, comments?
I got a few.
I mean, first off, thanks for coming to Walnut Creek.
We have a real desperate need for housing here.
We appreciate that.
I think, and thanks to members of the community who came,
I know it's really frustrating.
This is not the first meeting like this that we've had.
We've had a number of these regarding SB 330
and the other state housing laws
that are kind of forcing on to us as blunt objects.
And as design review commissioners,
it's frustrating for us because there's not much
we can impact on these type of projects
in terms of density, in terms of massing,
our hands are tied.
So I don't want you to think we're not hearing you.
It's just, you know, we've actually had people
leave the commission because of the frustration.
So, you know, we're gonna do as much good
as we can here for you today.
I'll say that.
I mean, I'd say that, you know,
looking at this, the first thing, you know,
I focused on was the objective design review commission,
which I was part of developing.
We put that in place here in Walnut Creek
because of these laws is we wanted
to have some objective standard
that would make sure that we didn't get a box.
And I think this design in many ways
is sensitive to that objective standard.
I mean, I think there's massing breakdowns.
doesn't, particularly along North, along California, it's broken down. It almost seems like it's
two buildings. And I think that's good. I think that, you know, I appreciate the applicant's
comment about, first of all, the right to have the number of units they have and the
cost of going to type one. I get it. This building is not particularly contextual with
the, you know, with the Alma Park properties and so forth. But I think, I mean, this is,
in terms of the finishes, I mean, there's a lot of brick on the buildings. It's broken up.
I think it checks a lot of box boxes for me. I think, you know, I think the California frontage,
I think it's fairly well designed. It's glassy, it's broken down. I think the issue for me is
mostly on the other frontages, like on Botello, right? That's how you pronounce it. I mean,
it's a two-story parking garage. And so the first comment I would have would be,
can we do something there to break it up more long lines of what we see? I know it's a parking
garage but can we can we get more glass or something in there to break it up and
and have it be more upscale and I'd say the Alma Park I think of course the
applicant said went to a meeting last night and said you know that that they
were gonna work to on the Alma Park elevation I think and we've heard heard
that from at least one or two of the residents there that you know that wall
concrete something has to be done there to to bring it to scale to to speak to
Alma Park. Now could that be false windows could it be landscaping
something to soften it I think would be would be really really good. The retail
parking clarity I underscoring crickets comment about that I think it's it's
gonna be really important with the loss of that parking. Right now there's a lot
of parking there that's underutilized and you know there's really ultimately
for the success of that retail development that that parking has to be
really clear so there has to be some better signage. May not it may the
concession might be it might not be appropriate on this property but you know
should be funded by the project to actually say this is where you park when
you go to the habit or the other things that are there.
For me, I mean, it's, in terms of the accesses,
I think the way it has been designed is it's been designed
so that the building has actually four or five corners.
I mean, it's been decided that the best location
would be kind of be more or less mid block
where there is a corner.
And I think it's clear enough there.
Yeah, I think those are my comments.
Thanks.
I'd like to also reflect Mr. Newsom's appreciation
for the applicant and one of their project in Walnut Creek.
I think it's great.
And I truly appreciate the design team's efforts
and the kind of level of detail that I'm seeing
in the run rings.
Much appreciated, you know, just an absolute level
of quality of the building overall in the street phase.
Reflecting my comments, I do strongly believe
that I think that the building needs to do a better job
of owning the corner.
And I think that based on some of the community comments,
I think that this is kind of,
there's a, let's just call it a double effort here.
We can open that corner up,
allow more through seeing from corner to corner,
and I think make a better civic engagement
between the building and the city.
And even though the building heights
is something we really can't do much about,
I certainly think there are efforts to work on
maybe efforts that maybe include
a little more horizontality,
reviews, some work on cornices,
other efforts that kind of bring the scale down.
I think that may help the community
and the park access as well.
I think are all things I think that I trust
that the applicant will be, you know,
work with the city to bring those things to fruition.
So other than the end, we have a successful project
that has a long standing path of reputation for the city.
Thank you.
All right, so I know this was mentioned already
and you gave valid reasons for it,
but I would love to just mention
for the planning commission
to consider some kind of pedestrian connection to the park.
And maybe it's not from the building,
maybe it's signed into something.
I just wanna say that out loud.
I also love the idea of larger street trees.
On the plant pallet, I've said this before,
the foxtail agave is beautiful.
It gets this weird neck,
so just make sure it's not like right near the sidewalk.
the mention of the corner resonated with me and then hearing from the community that that's a
popular access point for school makes me wonder if and instead of and instead of we do an and
because i actually like the lobby corner kind of near the retail being a frequenter of yogurt land
i was like i'd totally sit under that oak tree there but i think it might be nice to have some
version on the other side too if we're hearing that that's a really active corner but it may
mean relocating that fitness bit. I like the idea of cascading vines to help
with that wall. The interface of an Alma feels a little back of house and I do
think retail parking signage would be helpful. I go to the Walnut Creek TOD
often and they're starting to get retail and I think people are learning that you
park in parking garages when you're going to retail even if it's mixed
family so I think that's you know something we should think of but not the
end of the world that's it thank you so again things that have already have
been said just signage for the parking I totally agree with Commissioner Case on
larger trees and you even have some in your plant palate that you could switch
out like the sycamore or something like that make great street trees I know this
This is maybe, I don't know how this fits in but the exploration of maybe a crossing
guard for that corner, I know that financing for crossing guards are usually split between
the city and the school itself but if there's some way that the planning commission, I don't
know if that falls within the planning commission but it could be helpful if there is some exploration
of getting a crossing guard on that corner.
So that's all I have to say.
Thank you all.
I echo all of those comments, larger street trees,
and also some sort of, I don't know if it's a slight setback
on the corner glass on that corner,
where you have the busy intersection with the kids
crossing the street.
It's just something to give a little bit more of a sight line
there would be great.
I also had a question about the colors.
The colors in some of the renderings
look a lot warmer than the actual samples
that we have here.
So I just wanted to ask about that,
if these are, in fact, the colors.
And I would comment that warmer is better
with the surroundings and the existing,
you know, Walnut Creek, as it sort of is,
tends towards the warm rather than the cool urban but that's my comment. Let me
see here I also wanted to ask staff the comment that we heard from one of the
one of the members of the public about the law with 80% but they're getting a
hundred percent can you please explain that for everybody again as far as their
their bond their bond their density bonus it can staff excuse me staff will
explain please so this is directly from the staff report is on page 7 because
they're providing two separate density bonuses both one was 13% very low and
the other was 13% moderate income that's 15% for boats and combined they get a 50%
each so each one gets a 50% bonus so they're providing two separate ones so
they get a hundred percent bonus and we have very verified this with our city
attorney. Okay thank you I hope that helps you all so you understand where
that came from. Just to be clear it's two two different affordability levels.
Right and let's see here I think that's it from me thank you very much for
appreciate it. I think I've made a list okay and I'm getting there let me round
this out make sure I capture this correctly so it sounded to me as if
wayfinding signage was supported by at least three okay so we'll look at we'll
look at a recommendation for more wayfinding signage specifically for not
Not just for that building, but also for the retail section.
There was a mention to preserve the gable roof that's required in the specific plan,
and there might be a way to foul our way through that, as a suggestion.
Is there any support for that?
A show of hands.
Seeing none, okay.
the corner, and gauge the corner,
not quite sure what the recommendation
or the direction is there,
but I also heard a setback at a corner,
a greater setback, was that what you were?
I was just looking at that corner
as far as visibility for kids and others
that are crossing the street,
and that's a really busy retail section of town.
So I was thinking since they have clear glass on the corner,
maybe they take an angle off of it
so that there's a little bit more of a through sight line
there, that was just a suggestion.
Okay, so the concern is safety sight lines?
Safety sight lines.
Okay, great.
Thank you.
But there is also a move to engage the corner.
Yes.
Okay, so that'd be further development of that corner?
It is, yeah.
Okay.
With pedestrian priority.
Got it, okay.
Um, let's see, uh, look at the street trees, um, look for bigger trees instead of the crepe
myrtles.
Okay.
I will say that the Public Works Department does have a schedule for street, street trees.
Um, and it's, I don't know if it's a big, big from the menu.
I think it's more specific than that, um, and that they've, there is a plan.
Um, and I'm assuming that they're, that that would include Botello as well, but we will
make sure that we look at that and if not they might they likely have a bigger tree.
Yeah and I think that's valid. I just think it's a change in use right because it's not a
general commercial anymore and now it's a high density residential so maybe there's
reason to be like it doesn't need to be a crate mortal anymore.
Let's see and then also address the big wall at Alma Park and it sounds as if the applicant's
already aware of that and they're working on that so we'd like to see it at the planning
commission level it sounded as if there was landscaping was was a good method a
good solution but there's also potentially some foul architectural
treatments maybe both yeah okay yeah and I think also pedestrian access to the
park from the building yeah and that's there was a pedestrian access from the
park or to the park from that new development study that or address it or
say why you can't do it. Okay. Okay I think that's all I have is there did I
miss anything? Oh and also the colors rectify the colors, warmer would be
better. Sorry just clarifying that what is shown in some in some of the prints
is a little bit warmer and the discussion was browns and there's a
lot of gray there I just wanted you to take a look at that in the context of
Walnut Creek and Mount Diablo.
I think that would be supported.
Yep. Great.
Okay. Wayfinding, engage the corner,
look at the larger trees,
address the wall in Alma Park,
fix the colors, rectify the colors,
and address the access from the new development
to Alma Park.
Okay.
I think we've got a list.
We have a recommendation.
All right, thank you.
I don't know, it's very anticlimactic.
That's it, we don't vote or anything, sorry.
Sorry.
Thank you.
Are there any commissioner considerations
that anyone wants to bring up?
I will not be available on the 25th
for the general plan update.
Okay.
I'm curious, I'm gonna wanna hear about it
so somebody's gonna have to tell me what's happening.
All totally vote.
Okay, I'm sure, I'm sure.
What meeting is that?
Thank you all.
with the joint meeting that we have.
Yeah, okay, I think I've got your note on that.
Or if there's a recording, something,
because I just am curious about that.
Well, we'll give you a report.
Perfect.
And are there any commission member reports
or staff announcements?
I have one announcement.
I don't know if you've met Mayle Sheehan yet.
Hello.
Have we?
Hello.
She really is our new, what are you, Assistant Director?
Yeah, whatever, Chip's okay.
Assistant Community Development Director,
and she's doing a great job,
and she will be acting as the Secretary
to the Planning Commission.
That said.
Thank you.
Thanks, Chip.
Well, Chip is talking about me,
but I'm standing here to talk a little bit about Chip.
So if you weren't already aware,
Chipp's last, this is his last DRC meeting
because he is retiring.
I don't know if he's been keeping that to his chest or not.
But so, yes, I know.
For what, the last 15 years,
you've been a dedicated member of the city of Walnut Creek.
And in my very short time here,
I started at the beginning of May.
Chipp has been nothing but welcoming
and an amazing resource for me,
really helping me get my feet here.
He is knowledgeable, he's professional, he is efficient,
he's funny, which is really nice.
It's lovely to have a funny coworker.
It's really no surprise that his team respects him so much,
they really adore him, and you will be very missed.
It is impossible to replace somebody like Chip
who has put so much heart and dedication
into this community, and of course with all the work
that he's done with you guys, so I just wanted to make sure
that I put into the formal DRC record some recognition
for Chip and say thank you on behalf of the CDD.
I'll miss you.
Thank you, Maylea.
Ms. 15 years has been the best professional years of my life,
and I love the city.
I've enjoyed working with the commission,
specifically the Design Review Commission.
It's been very good.
It's a very worthwhile commission,
and your work is so much appreciated.
Thank you.
So is yours.
Thank you.
I miss you very much.
Yes, we will.
And who do we get in your place?
And I was leading to that.
That said, I believe Simmer Gill will take over
the role of secretary to the designer view committee.
Thank you.
Big shoes to fill, but I'm definitely going to try hard.
And again, I'm going to miss Chip a lot as well.
But I'm very excited to be able to work alongside all of you.
And I have a lot of respect for the work that you do.
and it's a hard job, but you guys do a great job here.
Thanks.
Thank you guys.
Thank you.
Thank you all.
Yay.
Yay.
And I think the paper.
Noted.
Oh, boy.
That's exciting.
Wow.
I'm excited.
Do we have any further commissioner comments?
Okay, then we're adjourned.
All right.
Thank you.
Yay!