Welcome.

And good evening.

We are going to now begin the September 4th, 2025, City of Napa regular meeting for the Planning Commission.

Roll call, please.

Commissioner Ebach.

Present.

Commissioner Masaro.

Present.

Commissioner Myers.

Vice Chair Owen.

Present.

And Chair Shotwell.

Present.

Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God.

The Planning Commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Ralph Milton Brown Act.

California Government Code Sections 54950 et sec and pursuant to the city's rules of order for planning commission meetings, policy resolution 10.

Staff, any changes to this evening's agendas or supplemental reports.

No changes to this uh agenda tonight and the reports that you've received earlier today.

The late communications are early supplemental reports.

Thank you.

Commissioners, any proposed changes to this evening's agenda?

No.

No.

Public comment.

Public comment provides an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the planning commission on items of interest not otherwise noted on the agenda.

Each speaker's comments will be limited to three minutes and will comply with the rules of order for planning commission meetings.

Do we have any members of the public who wish to provide public comments on non-agenda items?

Consent hearing oh consent calendar.

These routine items may be approved by a single vote.

However, any member of the public or commissioner may remove an item for consideration during the public hearing portion of the agenda.

This evening we are reviewing the planning commission regular meeting minutes for August 21st, 2025.

Is there a motion to approve?

I'll make a motion.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion passes.

Consent hearings.

These are items that are required to be noticed as a public hearing, but the city is not aware of any interest from members of the public to comment on the item.

However, any members of the public or commissioner may remove an item from the consent hearing calendar, and the item will be considered during the public hearing portion of the agenda.

Tonight we have item 6a, the house plant tattoo use permit at 1541 3rd Street, item 7B, 101 South Coombs Street, Suite J use Permit.

Item 6C, Wilkins Town Homes Tentative Map and Design Review.

Is there a request from a commissioner or member of the public to pull this item from any of these items from the consent hearings?

I do.

Can we pull six C absolutely?

Okay, so for item 6A, the House Plant Tattoo use permit and item 7B 101 Comb Street Suite J use permit.

Do is there a motion to approve those consent hearings as submitted?

I move that we present or that we approve those consent items as presented.

Could I just make one correction?

It's actually six C A and six and B.

Use seven B.

So you're pulling No.

Which one do you which wish to I was just correcting you that you addressed six B as 7B?

Oh seven so it's six B.

It is six B.

That's incorrect with the GB.

So this is incorrect.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

I move that we approve items 6A and 6B on the consent agenda.

I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All right.

Public hearings or appeals.

These are items that are formally presented to the planning commission and provide an opportunity for members of the public to comment.

Applicants or appellants are allowed 10 minutes to present testimony at the beginning of the public hearing.

And if needed, five minutes to present rebuttal at the end of the public hearing.

All other speakers will be limited to three minutes.

So tonight we have item 6C, Wilkins Town Homes, Tentative Map and Design Review, and Item 7A, Elite Public Sports Pavilion Use Permit 100 Coombe Street.

So we'll start with why don't we start with 6B 10?

I'm sorry, 6C Wilkins Town Homes.

Tentative map and design review.

Commissioner disclosures, please.

Driven by the site, I've uh spoken to the applicant, and I've also spoken spoke to staff.

I drove by the site.

I received some correspondence from Chris Craker on this issue.

I am familiar with the site.

I spoke with staff.

I was and I did uh read the communications as well.

So we will now hear a report from staff.

Thank you, Chair members of the commission.

Again, this is an application for the Wilkins Town Home Project.

Uh the request does include a tentative subdivision map, a use permit, and design review permit for an 11-unit residential condominium development.

The project is located on the northwest corner of Shetler Avenue and Wilkins Avenue, and the site is immediately adjacent to a multifamily development to the west and single family residences across Wilkins Avenue.

There is uh some history to this project uh is further detailed in your staff report.

This project was originally submitted back in 2022 as a 10-unit condo project on one lot uh and a design review permit was ultimately approved back in January of 2023.

What brings us back before the commission this evening is the applicant is uh requested to divide the parcel into 10 lots and a common lot, which does require city council approval upon recommendation by the planning commission.

In addition, uh the NAPA 2040 general plan also went into effect, increasing the density requirements for the parcel.

So, in order to uh meet the density requirement uh requirements in the new general plan, an 11th unit was added by creating unit 10A and 10B on lot 10, and unit 10A is also conditioned as a deed restricted low-income affordable unit.

The requested entitlements before the commission include a tentative subdivision map for condominium purposes, a use permit for modified parking standards, and a design review permit for a 10-lot, 11-unit residential condo development.

The exterior of the building is predominantly the same as what it was what was approved back in 2023.

The primary facade facing Wilkins Avenue provides variety of building planes, stepbacks, and building materials, including board and batten, stucco, and lap siding.

As you can see in the exhibits, the property does rise as it goes to the north, and the townhomes were set uh in pairs that rise along with the change in elevation, which also provides additional relief to the roof planes.

There's a view of the uh townhomes from the uh from the rear on the top elevation and below is a view from Wilkins Avenue.

Um, and then this is a view the north elevation on the top there and south elevation below.

The site plan does show the variation in building stepbacks with each pair of units being offset by two feet.

Uh the project also meets the requirement for required backup space from the parking spaces at the rear of the townhome units.

Uh the ground floor uh floor plans for units one through nine are in mirrored pairs.

Unit 10 A is the ground floor affordable unit with access through the front porch, and unit 10 B is access via the garage and exterior door at the rear of the unit.

The second floor units one through nine include three bedrooms and two bathrooms, and unit 10b on the upper level includes three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and an open living plan.

Uh the staff recommendation before the commission this evening is to forward a recommendation to city council to approve a tentative subdivision map for condominium purposes, a use permit for modified parking standards, and a design review permit to subdivide an existing.6 acre parcel into 10 condo parcels and a common lot, which is lot A for an 11-unit condominium development on property located Wilkins Avenue and determining that the project is exempt from CEQA.

That concludes staff's presentation.

Staff did provide supplemental communications to the commission prior to the uh this evening's meeting via email and hard copies were provided to the commission at the dais as well as additional hard copies on the table at the rear of the council chambers.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have, and the uh applicant and their team are here as well to answer any questions you have.

And um one more disclosure on my part.

I did also have communications with the applicant's representative, their team.

Okay, so um, do would we like to ask questions of staff or uh ask the applicant if they would like to come up?

Any okay, okay, great.

Would the applicant or their representative like to present thank you?

I'll be brief, Chair Shotwell and Commissioners.

Thanks for your time and consideration tonight.

Uh want to start with uh uh introducing the ownership team, um Lydia Fong, Joshua Fong, Frank Chu, and Chris Chu, and most importantly, the architect Alfonso Philon is here tonight, and I expect that he might come in and answer some of your questions.

Um just in brief, this is about dusting off an entitlement from a few years ago, creating an ownership opportunity, but also bringing it current to the new general plan, which required more density and found a way to offer an affordable housing unit in so doing.

So uh we're just here to improve the entitlement, make it make it more buildable uh in today's world, and uh we're hoping for your uh your support tonight.

But with that, I'll just uh stop and um as questions come up, either myself or Alfonso can come up and address them.

Thank you, Ryan.

Thank you.

Uh are there any questions at the moment?

I think it's a great good plan.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So um why don't we go ahead and open up public comment?

Is that does that work for all of you?

Okay, great.

Um staff, do we have any public comment?

Chris Crager.

One of you.

Chris, welcome.

Welcome back, Chris.

Um wow.

Okay.

We yeah.

We've changed.

Yes, uh, I'm Chris Craig in town here.

Uh you know, I usually don't get involved in these kind of projects.

The last thing I want to do is uh been be uh uh um uh down on a project that comes into the town, but this project's terrible.

It really is terrible.

And I know you're seeing this for the second time, so in a lot of ways you're saying, well, it's already been approved, but it's not.

You still have the option to be able to in uh to improve the project.

Yes, the tentative map deserves to be uh approved, but the architecture is substandard.

It is really something that should never have gone this far.

I don't know how it did.

It's got it's got stand it doesn't meet the city standards in the least of ways.

I do a lot of projects in town.

There's no landscape plan.

The setbacks in the back, the backup spaces are 40 feet when you know parking requirements is 45.

Um the floor plans, you've got eight foot bedrooms.

Come on, give me a break.

You're not gonna get approve a project with eight-foot bedrooms.

Um, you know, there's the the plans themselves are substandard without having sufficient information on them.

There's no landscape plans, there uh there's uh there's no roof plans, there's no material pallets on it.

How again, how I brought this far, I don't know.

Now, architecture is very subjective, of course it is.

Um it it can change and accordingly to who is looking at it.

But here's something that you don't want to tell your neighborhood, tell that neighborhood we don't care.

You don't want to tell all the people there we don't care.

This project deserves to be better, and it can be done better while still approving the the tentative map.

So I'm simply asking you to take your time, ask for them to come back with more information and provide the planning commission with a better palette to look at.

That's my two cents.

Thank you, Chris.

Do we have any other members of the public who wish to comment on this item?

Okay, uh, seeing that we don't, do I have a motion to close public comment?

So moved.

Second, second, all in favor?

I okay, so um commissioner, would you like to begin?

Sure, since I was the one who pulled it.

Um actually Mike, you answered my question in the presentation when we talked about the entry into 10A and 10B.

Yeah, so from what I understand, there's no there's no common area between the two units.

Correct.

There's a delineation of ownership.

Um there in 10A and 10B because the 10A is entrance in the front, 10B is entering in the back, right?

Okay.

And then my second thing is on the material board.

Um the materials look look good to me.

They're very sustainable, adorable materials.

But what I don't see, and I discussed this with the applicant representative too, is the type of windows that are there.

And I know Title 24 um handles our energy efficiency and all of that.

However, I would like to see a better standard of window here, and I'll just suggest to the owner to not use vinyl windows to use some other type of window, a fiberglass window that allows for a thermal break between the building that is not vinyl.

Vinyl is just not a sustainable material in my mind.

Those are those are my two.

And oh, and just to address one thing, I do we know what the code is for the smallest bedroom you can have on a uh small and per the building code, I believe it's 70 square feet is is the is what's standard in the building code.

I don't know if they get into dimensions, but uh 70 feet is pretty small.

So yeah.

Okay, I just wanted to.

I don't think we have any thing we could do about that, but thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Uh anyone else.

Okay.

Sure.

Um, can you speak to the setback issue that Chris raised?

Chris Cracker raised.

He suggested that there's a 45-foot setback required for vehicles backing out of the driveway.

So in the uh 7054, there is regarding uh spaces backing into uh at a 90 degree angle is 25 feet, which is shown oops on the plans here is a 25 feet from that back area.

He's also talking about a 45 foot standard, which isn't in our code.

The the code is is regarding backup space um and a into a drive aisle, which is that, but even so the plans uh I can show you here uh the plans even show that as a 45 foot dimension from the back of the or the the face of the garage to the curb on the uh uh drive aisle behind.

So even even so uh it's dimension as 45 feet.

Okay.

Um and then the the lack of the landscaping plan, is that a requirement?

Landscape is shown on on the site plan.

Uh will require full landscape plans at the time of of bill and permit.

Okay.

Thank you.

I don't really have anything in addition to Commissioner Masaro and Myers.

Um I'm fine with the eight-foot-wide bedroom after living in the city many years.

Some people might use it as an office, and this high density living, I think that's fine.

And I'm assuming the roof as well as asphalt shingle, just based on the rendering.

It was difficult in the beginning having no design plans when we reviewed the application.

There we go.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Ebok.

Um I don't have a whole lot.

Um, I think that my fellow commissioners covered a lot of what was on my list.

Um, I will say that I'm pleased to see uh front porches added to these um units.

I'm very big fan of that as opposed to some of what we see like garage entry.

Um I wish they were a little bit larger, but understand that um we're working with what we've got, so glad to see that.

Um I do see that some of the existing trees on the site are to remain and that landscaping will be handled at the time of building permits.

Um it doesn't look like there's a whole lot to be added, but again, as a suggestion, I would love to see some additional trees added where possible.

Um, but otherwise I think it's a good project and it fits the site well.

And I agree with everything that's been said um by my fellow commissioners.

I I like the you know multi-layered textural facade, and I'm I'm a fan of the color palette.

I am wondering though, by approving this tentative map and design review, that does that lock in this color palette, or do we need to condition it that those colors that this is what we're seeing, this is what we expect, and this is what we'd like for it to be.

I guess I'll speak to that uh commissioner uh shot well.

Uh typically the city does not regulate colors.

So certainly within your purview to require the colors to be as as proposed with the approval.

But once they're approved, any homeowner can paint them however they want, and there's no regulation that requires the city to enforce colors.

Okay.

Thank you.

I'm confused.

At the last planning commission, didn't we condition it with the colors?

Is this this particular type of why is this one different?

I don't recall that, but you could condition this project to be painted as you've seen it.

But once it's been sold, you can't enforce uh you know a deed restriction that the homeowner has to continue to paint it that color.

Sure.

Okay, sure.

Understood.

Well, I think that when we approve items that we're approve when we're approving a design review, that I think that it we are expect expecting that when we see it built that we be that we are proud of our decision and that the public doesn't come back and say, wow, look at this stark white building with um you know metal corrugated metal roofing or something.

So my expectation is that it will look like this when it's built in terms of the colors and materials and we can ensure that when it's approved when it's being built that we it will match those colors or that we'll be gonna what we can make sure is that they match the colors uh swatches that they provided for us.

Whether that color looks like you see it in that rendering, we can't regulate that.

Right.

Uh certainly if they change materials, yes, we would definitely enforce that.

You mentioned corrugative.

If there's any material changes, we require them to be the materials you see.

Okay, it's the colors that gets a little more ambiguous.

Got it.

All right.

I have nothing else to add.

Do I have a motion?

Make it out like a cheat sheet.

And there's one up there as well.

It's the same, right?

Yes.

All right.

I make a motion that the planning commission forwards a recommendation to the city council to approve a tentative parcel map for condominium purposes.

Use permit for modified parking standards and design review permit to subdivide an existing approximately point six acre parcel into 10 condominium parcels.

And common lot A for an 11-unit condominium development on property located at 2005-2069 Wilkins Avenue, and determining that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Equality Act known as CEQA.

If I could clarify uh Commissioner Masara, you said tenative parcel map, it's tentative subdivision.

And that's an excuse.

I mean, it's a mistake you could have made because we did make that mistake in the agenda, but we clarified that in a memo to you in advance.

Great.

I just was reading up the golden rod, so I do amend my comment.

Thank you.

My motion.

Thank you.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

All right.

Item 7A.

Elite Public Sports Pavilion Use Permit at 100 Poom Street.

Commissioner disclosures, please.

Epoch.

Um I have uh driven past the site.

So I am familiar with the site.

I drove past the site and met with the applicant.

No disclosures.

I am familiar with the site and I spoke with staff.

Okay.

We will now hear a report from staff.

Good evening, Planning Commission and those in attendance.

Tonight I'll be presenting the elite sports pavilion use permit item.

So just to go over the project, um, the project is at 100 Combs Street.

The use permit is specifically requesting approval for the use of an indoor recreation facility in a portion of the existing industrial building.

The applicant, Tasha Resor, is here in the audience and will be available to answer any questions following my presentation.

So the property is on Coomb Street between the Napa River and Coomb Street.

So there are other tenants at that site.

But this would be facing the Coomb Street.

It would be nearest to the public street.

A use permit is required to establish a commercial recreation facility in the mixed-use tannery bend zone.

Um that use permit is subject to your approval this evening.

To give you some more context on the site, it's about a three-acre site.

There are existing buildings on the property, including the industrial building as well as an office building towards uh facing towards Coombs Street.

And there is an on-site parking area at the rear of this building.

Um the industrial building on the site was formerly used by Sawyer Tannery and has been used by other um manufacturing and warehousing uses since that time.

The industrial building on the site was formerly used by Sawyer Tannery and has been used by other manufacturing and warehousing uses since that time.

Just to give you a visual of the site, this is what the site entrance looks like at Coomb Street.

This is their northern driveway.

But this image also shows the office building that's at the front of the site.

And it's not necessarily it won't be used for the sports pavilion project, but there would be restrooms located in this building for attendees to use.

So this on-site parking area would be used by visitors.

Once again, the proposal is to establish the commercial recreation facility in that 12,000 square foot portion of the building.

As part of this request, there would not be any changes to the exterior of the building.

However, there would be some minor site improvements, such as improving the path of travel from parking to the building entrance.

As for the interior changes, there are going to be some tenant improvements.

That includes the installation of the sports equipment, including batting cages and a sports turf, and then as well as safety netting to ensure that the activities don't, you know, encroach on each other.

There would also be modifications to the existing office within that space to make it like a check-in area.

So that would be where the equipment and other files are stored.

It would be the point where people would check in and get escorted to their area.

This is a proposed floor plan showing how the space would be laid out.

It is mostly dedicated to the actual activities, but there is that common area at you know, towards the south, I guess, of this site plan, which could be used by folks when they're waiting on the reservation.

Just to kind of break down the floor plan, the green would indicate the field, and then the red color would indicate the batting cages, the blue would be the office, and then that orange would be the common area where visitors could, you know, roam around while they're waiting for their facilities.

As for their operations, they propose to operate Monday through Saturday, 9 to 8:30, and on Sundays with limited hours closing at four.

Their indoor facilities are available only by reservation, and these reservations would be for a period of one hour.

A membership isn't required, but it would provide people with more benefits in terms of making reservations and ongoing coaching would not be offered as a service.

It would purely be these reservations.

However, there are seasonal camps and clinics that are planned.

These seasonal camps and clinics would be planned for you know periods where there are a lot of use looking for these sort of activities, summer breaks, you know, other breaks, school being off.

These camps would be held for approximately three to five days, and the regular reservations wouldn't be offered while these camps are in session, just to avoid any conflicts with the facilities.

So the project provides a unique commercial use to the site that's formerly been industrial, you know, not very open to the public, although it is perfectly within a residential neighborhood.

So the fact that it's able to be indoors and kind of limiting any conflicts with a residential neighborhood in terms of noise.

There's on-site parking, so there wouldn't we don't anticipate any spillover onto the public street, that sort of thing.

So overall, the project does meet the intent of the general plan and zoning.

Just kind of going into how the use would be compatible with the neighborhood.

There is limited clientele, those reservations kind of build in that limit, and the one-hour reservations could help stagger visitors.

There are other uses at the site, however, the times that these uses are operating are kind of offset from the peak hours of this use, which you know, if kids are in school, it's more likely that they'll be frequenting this in the afternoon.

The uses also on the site would not operate on weekends, which gives more availability to on-site parking for this use when it's more likely that they may have more visitors.

Furthermore, as I mentioned earlier, there wouldn't be any new construction to that building, so it would kind of limit any short-term impacts to the neighborhood in terms of construction.

Um the business hours are you know pretty similar to the typical business hours.

In terms of the environmental analysis, we felt that the class three exemption was appropriate, which um you know exempts projects consisting of the location of new small facilities or structures and no exceptions to this exemption were identified, so we did feel that it was appropriate for this project.

And with that, we do recommend that the planning commission adopt the resolution approving the use permit, which authorizes the use of the indoor recreation facility at 100 Coombs, and for you to determine that the actions are exempt from CEQA.

Happy to answer any questions, and as a reminder, Tasha is here as well to answer any questions.

Thank you.

And did does Tasha wish to come and speak before?

Yeah, she does have a presentation prepared.

Um, I do know that there are also members of the public who would like to speak.

Got it.

Yeah.

Wonderful.

Well, would would we like to hear from okay?

Great.

We welcome you to come up.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Uh in early good evening after late afternoon.

Um, thank you for giving me the opportunity to present to you today.

Uh, my name is Tasha, and I'm the founder of Elite Sports Pavilion.

Um, while tonight is really we're talking about a little bit more than just the sports facility and the documents that you have there.

It's a project designed to give active adults and families a safe year-round place to come, connect, play, and grow, while also aligning with the city's broader planning goals.

So I'd like to get into that a little bit more about the facility.

The facility is designed to serve our community all year.

It's indoors, so training and practice wouldn't be canceled because of weather.

It's a place for youth and adults to train across multiple TURF sports and is built with the ADA accessibility safe and community friendly in mind.

So let's look at that space a little bit more.

I know you're familiar with this site plan, but have some visuals to give you a little bit more idea around how just how flexible the space actually is.

Over here, the large turf area will be able to be divided into a half or full fields.

If you're familiar with soccer, you'd be able to play a 5v5 or two 3v3 games or scrimmages in there, and multiple trainings could be going on at the same time.

The batting cages over in the back here will have a live cage as well as an automatic pitching machine equipped to handle both baseball and softballs with limited change.

You just put different balls in.

So it makes it really user-friendly and easy to use when switching between guests.

The track uh the machines track the ball speed, the ball exit velocity, and offer game-like experiences for athletes.

But the facility, again, is not just about the sports equipment, it's about what provide what we can provide in the face of big challenges.

So, according to the latest uh mentus report, um, right now about 50% of NAPA's 11th graders have said that they feel sad or hopeless, and 19% seriously consider suicide.

At the same time, NAPA currently lacks dedicated multi-sport indoor turf facility.

This gap prevents consistent year-round athletic development for our youth, leaving them without modern training spaces.

And because of this gap, local athletes are forced to travel to Vaccaville, Fairfield, Vallejo, and Santa Rosa for quality training.

That creates significant time and cost burdens on our families.

It is compounded by frequent weather-related practice cancellations.

ESP solves all of these challenges.

It supports youth mental health, provides modern trading space, and reduces the need for long commutes.

But it goes beyond just the field.

We know that sports improves mental health.

We also know that it also helps better school outcomes.

It teaches leadership, teamwork, and communication, which are all life skills that carry into adulthood.

From the city's perspective, this directly supports the general plan by promoting youth recreation, public health, and equitable opportunities within Napa.

And that's why our goals for this facility mirrors the city's own.

It's simple.

Year-round access to training, scholarships, so no kid is left out because of cost, mentorships, so all kids, not just elite athletes, have role models, and an inclusive culture that welcomes everyone.

These goals align directly with the city's recreation and equity priorities.

And as we know, we can't achieve this alone.

It takes partnership.

But at its core, this project is also a partnering with the city of Napa.

We're taking an empty warehouse and transforming it into a community asset.

One that fills a gap in Napa that has been far too long, needed to be filled.

So before I close, I'd like to briefly address one item specifically in your staff report.

I've worked closely with this city on the staff report, and I truly appreciate the collaboration.

Angela's been wonderful.

There is one element in the resolution I'd like to bring to your attention.

If you have the document in front of you, I'd ask you to turn to page four number 12, which states that prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the planning division shall ensure by an in-person inspection that all 72 spaces are free from obstruction.

I know that the plans in front of you and that have been submitted are clear of the obstructions.

I do have plans here that you guys can look at.

I don't know how to give them to you guys.

That illustrate the said obstructions.

And it seems inappropriate that for this permit to to be the forcing function to clear all those obstructions across the property when they aren't part of the ESP facility.

The WT trans parking study that was provided in your supplement materials shows that even with the obstruction of these spaces, there is still ample parking, in fact, surplus parking on both weekends and weekdays that support the ESP's operation.

It's my request that this item be removed or revised.

If the obstruction are in fact a violation of the city code, which I am not the expert on, so I'm not sure.

I do request that the city work directly with the property owner or the code enforcement to resolve them.

But even as things stand today, with the obstructions, there's more than enough parking for ESP to operate successfully.

Now with that addressed, I'll close.

ESP is more than a sports complex.

It is truly an investment in NAPA's future in health, safety, and growth of our kids and our community.

We've designed it to be safe, accessible, and sustainable.

I respectfully request your approval of the use permit with the amended or removal of number 12, so we can bring these benefits to Napa.

And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

If you have any questions on the architecture side, I do have Tim Nystrom, who is the architect on this project here in the audience as well.

Thank you, Tasha.

So okay, um, do you have a question for Tasha?

Okay, great.

And let me ask you this.

Does anyone have any questions for staff as well as the applicant?

Okay, so you might need to.

We'll start with the questions then for the applicant.

Okay, and then we'll go move to questions for staff.

Great.

Great, thank you.

Hi, Tasha.

Hi.

Um, can you speak to you outlined the number of obstructions that are in the parking lot?

Are they all there's a mixture of tenants there?

Do you know whose obstructions those are?

I don't know who all the obstructions are for.

I think the bigger ones that are in question are shipping containers, um, which are the property owners, um, and those are used as outside of storage.

Um I think that maybe there was a miscommunication between property owner and the city, I'm not quite sure.

She was under the assumption that she was able to have them and she got approval.

Um when I spoke with uh the city about what types of approvals were done.

Um there is another obstruction that's a little bit larger, so it's kind of like a pop-up shed storage item, and that was in fact approved by the city.

We found the documentation for that.

Um, but in terms of any of the other obstructions in there, all we did was note that that parking space was not available, and we asked WTRANs to take that into consideration when drafting their survey so we can understand with them there and as well as without them, but I'm not sure what the other tenants own and are storing, or maybe they're renting like an outside storage unit as part of like supplemental of what doesn't fit into their space within the warehouse that I'm not sure.

Great, thank you.

Commissioner Myers.

Um yeah, do you have any plan for bicycle parking?

We got some correspondence from the bike coalition and um yes, there's um a bike rack already there, and I don't know if it's the building permit that would sign off on like location and where that is, there's plenty of space at the entrance of the building to put one in, and I think it's like the code is two, but you could easily fit four there.

I don't see it being a problem.

So that's something you're willing to do?

Yes.

Great.

Thank you.

And uh Commissioner Ebok, if you're ready, otherwise I can move to Commissioner Masaro.

Um thank you.

Um since the applicants raise this question of staff, can you explain the condition we have for clearing the 72 spaces?

Right.

Yes.

So there are, you know, in an in-person visit, we did observe that there are different obstructions in the on-site parking.

Um there are requirements for how much outdoor storage can be permitted, and it's actually no more than 15% of the site can be used for outdoor storage.

So that is possible.

Um, but you know, generally speaking, on-site parking shouldn't be obstructed by stored vehicles or shipping containers.

Um furthermore, shipping containers are only really allowed for contractor storage when there's an active building permit.

Um there's not technically an active building permit at this site.

Um that was the our reasoning for imposing that requirement.

But isn't that more of a um property owner issue rather than a code enforcement?

Then a code enforcement issue rather than something that would go into this applicant.

I'm looking at right or so the use permit is applicable to the property.

And so in order to actually enforce well, allow for the vested rights of this use and um the demand that the parking, you know, especially with this such intensive use, these spaces do have to be free and clear.

Um obviously, yes, there is an ongoing code code issue being that there are metal storage containers, no active building permits associated with those containers, so there is an active issue with it.

However, in in order to actually act upon the rights that could be granted under this use permit, it would need to be resolved prior to occupancy.

So, as I understand what you're saying, is because this is a use permit and it's goes with the land, not necessarily your business.

That the only real teeth that the city has to enforce it is to impose that on the property owner through the use permit.

Not the only teeth, but it is an active entitlement it has to address those issues.

So I so for for for you for you, Tasha.

What I understand is because you're applying for this use permit, this code enforcement issue is come up.

And the property owner is going to have to do something about it before your business, depending on what we do here, can act can um can activate as a business.

Is there an opportunity like I guess for me is there's a plenty of parking both on-site and off-site for my business to operate.

Is there a way to revise the statement to make it clear for if there's a certain number of parking spaces that is required for my business to operate?

Because we did the entire parking survey, and so while it maybe it's more intense than say the art colony in terms of traffic, there's plenty of spaces both on site and street parking with the obstructions.

And so I don't know that I fully agree with the city's position on this because I don't believe it's the only way that they can get the property owner to comply.

I just find it really hard to believe that this is the only way.

I think this might be the most convenient and easy way to do it, but I don't necessarily think that our community, so I don't know because the permit of occupancy does not get issued until it's already done.

This project is very expensive up front.

So I'd be out a lot of money come time to open, and if not granted the bit ability to do that with something that is out of my control, it's gonna be a no-go for us on this project if we don't revise or remove this parking stipulation and have the city approach the property owner directly on another way to get them to comply with the code.

If I can respond to that, so the city won't be sitting and waiting for the the applicant to necessarily be the only one to act upon this existing code issue.

The city will be actively pursuing this this code issue outside of the request in front of you tonight.

There's an ongoing code violation.

This this will need to be addressed regardless of the use permit tonight.

However, it's typical most of the time where there are existing code issues that we don't even process entitlement until those code issues are resolved.

So there's flexibility being offered tonight that still moving forward requesting approval of the use permit.

Um but with that said, like I mentioned earlier, that this isn't the only mechanism to do that.

However, the the request acknowledges a shared parking model.

This assumes that those spaces identified in the model are free and clear and available to the public.

The range of use is on the site.

So those spaces do have to be free and clear.

Um city will still be actively pursuing where there is a ongoing code enforcement issue.

Um this isn't the only means as to address this issue.

However, prior to occupancy, we definitely need the spaces to be available to the public because of the share of uses.

With that said, I mean there is the ability to to clarify where there's responsibility.

However, so it additional clarification could put responsibility on the property owner, but it would still assume that the property owner would act upon that code enforcement issue in order to give um a certificate of occupancy.

So the the correction still needs to be addressed.

And if I could add to that, um the Napa municipal code has a section in the code that where there was a code enforcement violation, no active application should be acted upon.

So we're really being generous by allowing this to move forward and having a condition requiring it to be resolved.

Uh like as you heard already, the use permit runs with the land.

So if they should move, it's it remains on the property.

So the property owner really is the sole uh proprietor of the use permit.

So it's it's incumbent upon that property owner.

If they want to rent to these beautiful use, they better clean up their act.

And that that's so that this is this is an act that unfortunately it falls upon them that they're they're waiting on that.

But uh, if the applicant, which was the former Lixit, uh there was an approval to have a tent there.

That was a temporary approval for one thing.

They were always gonna move their building and build the new one.

We approved a pr a large building for them, they never built it.

They've kept the tent there.

The city just hasn't done anything about it for years.

It's not approved for permanent use there.

That parking lot is required to be parking, and there are other uses there.

So, as Ryder said, there is there could be a lack of uses, especially given a use that's gonna incre increase the parking greater than it's ever been in that location.

We want them to be successful, we want them the parking lot to be full with them.

But this is an opportunity for the city to say you need to clean up that parking lot up.

And unfortunately, for the applicant, this is really a burden on the property owner if they want to lease this property and collect that rent from this tenant.

Right.

So just to continue, sorry.

Absolutely.

Um sorry.

Um okay.

So what is your timeline for beginning your construction if you were to get your entitlement?

Uh we would have to go through the building and Napa sanitation process.

Um and we would be prepared.

Obviously, if there's like there's the 10 days, um, we'd be working with them, we would submit as soon as possible.

And ideally, construction would begin in October, November, hoping to open in mid-Q1 of 2026.

Okay.

So if again, the parking is gonna be I just find it hard to believe that the city, I mean, there have been storage units on there since 2009, and the city hasn't taken an opportunity to enforce the code.

Sure.

So when the way code enforcement works typically is someone's got to report it.

It was reported.

Oh, okay.

Well, that's on us then.

When when it it doesn't it was reported and they were also notified in 2023.

Okay.

Well, then again, but it is still I mean, I'm I'm not the attorney or or my argument could be we should not even be processing the Hughes permit, and given that exactly this is an opportun as as the state of the awkward.

And I'm not aware of the actual if there has been code enforcements for the parking in the areas.

Uh the city has turned a blind eye a lot to that property.

We now have an application that's you're seeking to really vitalize that and bring in a lot of uh traffic.

Uh this is an opportunity for the city to say this needs to be cleaned up.

It's been it's gone on too long.

Uh again, this is all the burden on the property owner.

Even this use permit is this she may be the applicant, but the property there is a sole uh owner really of the use permit when it's all said and done.

So it really behooves the app, the property owner to to clean up the parking lot if they want to allow other uses to come into that building.

Most of the uses we've seen over the years have been something that's no more intensive than what's existing.

This is a new animal for that site.

It's all been usually light industrial uses of the small manufacturing.

So this is a whole new environment where there and there's gonna be the opportunity for a lot of people to come there, a lot of children specs at that point.

No, I think it's clean up.

I I agree, and I think it's gonna be it would be a fantastic project to have.

It's just you have this one hurdle that that we all have to get through.

I might suggest if the commission was so inclined, uh, because timing is an issue for them, it may be that we modify the condition that that we don't say prior to occupancy, but that either within a certain date that it has to be cleaned up, and if not, then the the use permit can be brought back to the commission for consideration of revocation.

So give them some time to do it, knowing that it has to happen.

Okay, um let uh let's hear from Commissioner Ebach.

Um okay, a few things here.

Um first one being that um based on your timeline, if you're wanting to open mid-Q1, the city has the ability to process concurrently throughout this process, um, code enforcement uh enforcement, right?

Um and under the law, they uh I might have to defer to the attorney here, but the exact time when that this could get done.

But likely this code enforcement action could be processed to the extent to which you almost maybe even get to the city's abatement, likely before you're looking at opening.

Is that correct?

I mean, typically you get a 30-day window to respond to a notice of violation beyond there, it can be elevated.

Um I would be surprised with this conversation occurring at a public hearing and this property owner hearing about the violation on their property, it getting this level of attention that they are not wanting to quickly resolve this because it is putting a spotlight on the issue, whereas there hasn't been one before because it was an industrial area.

Um I would be pretty confident that they will want to work with the city, and if not, there would be mechanisms for enforcement to get this done quickly.

I Molly's approaching uh anything could happen.

Um Molly Radigan, uh NRM director of community development.

Dan, I don't want to cut you off if you have a thought um to say first uh as our attorney, but I do also oversee the code enforcement division here at the city of Napa.

So um I I actually really liked Mike's suggestion about maybe a date certain after the fact.

We can get code enforcement on it as soon as tomorrow.

I I'm not aware I don't have access to the code enforcement system to see if a complaint was actually filed in 2023, but we can follow up on that tomorrow.

Um but code enforcement actions do not happen super quickly.

And if someone to I I agree with you, Commissioner Ebach, that if somebody opted to if if I heard this about my property and things, I would it would be a signal to me.

But uh, you know, if they don't uh as we've seen in other cases, you know, it can take upwards of a year to get through the court process and uh you know mediate and re- an abate.

Uh it's a very expensive process, so I would hope that the first uh notice would would take um be taken seriously.

But uh I liked uh Mr.

Allen's suggestion.

Um happy to get code enforcement working on it ASAP because I do realize that this project is important to the city as well.

Thank you.

That is extraordinarily helpful.

Can I ask a follow-up question to that conversation?

I don't know, Molly or Dan.

I know Mike, you you referenced um the municipal code section.

So is it is it accurate that we cannot as a commission approve a use permit if there is an outstanding code enforcement action?

No, that is not accurate.

It isn't it isn't that you cannot it recommend it in the code, it gives the community development department the uh the ability to not process an application.

It does not say you cannot process an application.

So we're already processing the application.

The code does not say we can't approve the application and take that action to remove that condition as a commission.

Uh the commission could do so.

That would not be staff's recommendation.

Okay.

And then the second question I would have on that same line of of discussion is what is the actual parking use requirement of this space?

Because I know that in the past we have allowed offsetting of parking demands based on time.

And presumptively the other occupants of this space might be more busy during traditional business hours, but this space is probably more busy outside of traditional business hours.

So even if the parking lot were ostensibly reduced by 10, theoretically, we could be allowing the offset if the parking demand exceeds 62.

And that's a valid argument.

However, the issue really isn't the lack of parking, it is the fact that the parking lot is not intended for use of storage.

It is a parking lot for parking vehicles.

So we're trying to alleviate this non-conformity.

It's not not allowed nonconforming use that's been going on for many years.

And what I heard was we've turned a blind eye to this for quite a while.

I think it would be a real shame if we leveraged something really valuable for the community because we have an opportunity to when we've let some unknown use language with this for eons, and yet now that we have something great, we're gonna hold it up because of the same thing that we've just been kind of letting go.

And I would respond to that by saying that it when I when you heard the term turned a blind eye, uh, as you heard from uh deputy uh plant deputy city manager Molly Radigan, code enforcement cases, we don't go looking for code enforcement cases.

The city doesn't go out looking for violations.

If the city did, that's all we would be doing, sure.

So it's it's they're they're on a they're on a complaint driven basis.

So whereas yes, many many city staff are probably been aware there's been things about that.

There's never been anything drawing us to us.

I'm unaware of the code complaint that I've heard.

Okay.

Uh there may have been one or two for something, but not so necessarily for everybody everything in that parking lot.

Uh so this is an opportunity when this application came forward, it was brought to the city's staff attention that is a lot of a lot of equipment out there.

This is the opportunity when we do take these actions.

And that is in the code, like as I said before, that we that we are supposed to rectify code enforcement cases before processing or proving any other entitlements.

This entitlement brought this to light.

I see.

We haven't just been ignoring what's going on there and decided to pick on these these people.

I don't mean to say that the city themselves staff have not been doing their job by any means.

That uh hopefully it wasn't the underlying message that was conveyed by my comments.

Um okay, sorry.

I please.

Just follow-up information and and I'll defer to um Dan, our attorney, on what the purview is of the commission in terms of removing conditions and whatnot.

But uh it does appear uh from what writer was able to pull up uh that there was a code enforcement action reported in 2023.

Um it looks like it was last acted on in April of 2024 and closed at that time.

Unfortunately, we don't I didn't work in this department at the time, so and I don't think we were involved in it, so we don't have any of the details, but just in terms of providing uh transparency and in what happened, um, it is correct that it was reported in 2023 and that it was closed in 2024.

So I don't know if they were removed and returned, if it just wasn't determined to be a significant health and safety issue at the time.

Can't can't speculate on that.

But maybe uh Dan, if you can answer the question that that Commissioner Myers had on what they can and can't do in terms of removing a condition.

Our job is to make recommendations, their job is to finally it's well.

I I have no reason to dispute what Mike said about the commission's authority here, and this is not a code enforcement body, obviously.

Um I would be curious, and apparently, Ryder, what you were able to uncover just now didn't doesn't provide the basis for the closure of that.

So um that seems to me to be an important fact that because if it was closed for some reason that would impair the city's ability to reopen it, that would be a problem.

Um, probably clarify that because the question I have is this is a site that has multiple uh suites in it.

Do we know that code case is specific to the equipment in the parking lot?

There's gonna be multiple cake cases on that site.

Could it have been another business in that you know, you that had a storage unit or a container um and they removed it, and that's why they closed it.

Or could it have been an entirely unrelated code violation?

Right, or we're no it we're all speculating.

Yeah, uh the photos we were pulling up all the pictures, but the photos indicate uh accessory structure illegal accessory structures uh in the backyard.

Um and then the letter we're looking at that was posted uh indicates the same thing.

Um but yes, uh unfortunately we don't have the details available to us right now of what what caused the closure or what business it was.

I have a quick question.

Um Angela, did the applicant approach you with these questions while you were working on this with her?

Yes, and I did provide her with the specific code sections of why we would require the on-site parking.

Um as I mentioned earlier, only 15% of the site is supposed to be used for outdoor storage, it's supposed to be screened.

Um, you know, the storage shouldn't encumber parking spaces permanently or even temporarily, really.

And we're also, I mean, forward thinking if this is going to be a mixed-use area, there may also need to be room for parking for these additional uses.

Um so that I mean during this process when an applicant is working with staff.

Did you happen to reach out for more information on the code enforcement just to see if you could we could get ahead of it and before no?

I no, I did not specifically so thank you.

Uh Commissioner Ebach.

Um I I feel like here we've got two separate issues, right?

We've got um a use permit and and looking at park parking and the appropriateness of the number of parking.

And um, I think um Commissioner Myers actually asked this question earlier, but it would be very helpful from if staff could provide a breakdown of what the required parking is for this use as well as the other uses, because I know that it says that there are 37 spaces required per the study for peak hours of this use.

Um but but I'm a little bit confused in terms of what number of stalls are required for the other existing uses on the site.

Um my initial reaction when I looked at this site plan was actually that I think there was is too much parking, um, and that some of that should be replaced with uh bicycle storage, but that's a completely separate issue.

Uh and then over here we've got this this co-enforcement issue with the 15% uh storage.

I think um I think that the the storage issue needs to be abated, and we can rely on staff to handle that in my opinion, and we can move forward um with our conversation about the use permit separately um and have those discussions because I don't I don't know that we have the information that we need to discuss the code enforcement piece here today.

But the part that's attached to that is that one condition that could kill her at the end of the sure sorry, so maybe amend it.

I mean advocating text in that or remove it.

Should we because we could amend it saying sorry, so um why don't we move to public do let's just go ahead and open up public comment.

Um and then we may we may have more questions for staff and the applicant.

Um and just a reminder to those of you who wish to speak.

If you haven't filled out a card yet, please do so there in the back.

And then you're limited to three minutes each speaker.

And um, and also if someone before you has already mentioned all of the things that you were planning on saying, try to come up with something new or just agree with them and and because we would like you know to hear from everyone.

That's the most important thing is that we'd like to hear from everyone.

Uh so let's let's get this party started.

I received uh eight comment cards.

Um, I can just call them perfect, all at one.

Uh Nasser Ali Musa, Lindsay Schrader, Cassandra Islani, and Don.

You guys can come that one at a time, um, but you can come up in the order that Myra is announcing your names.

Don Wethrall, Kristen Teckle, Susan Tretchard, Craig Hefner, and Alexis Jessa.

Welcome.

Hey, hi, everybody.

How are you?

Uh ladies and gentlemen of the planning commission.

My name is Nash Ally Musa.

I am a parent to two youth athletes, athletes, a member of our community, and I am the president of Napa Little League.

I got my proclamation from you guys the other day.

If some of you guys were here.

Um I've mentioned this before, but I represent almost 18, 800 kids, 75 special need individuals, 1600 parents, and we have been in our Napa community for over 42 years.

Uh, I'm here to show support for Elite Sports Pavilion and Tasha Reaser.

I'm here to show support of any business wanting to help our youth today to find constructive, healthy ways to develop the our youth talents to build friendships and promote healthy minds and bodies.

Napa Youth Sports is a massive collection of kids and families.

And to name a few that I am representative with Napa Little League, Napa Junior Girls Softball, Napa United, Napa Saints, and our newest football team, Napa Bulldogs.

Napa Little League fields are used every day during our seasons of spring and fall, and we even contract with the school district to rent fields and training facilities.

This is still not enough for Napa Little League due to rain situations, overcrowding of the kids.

We're trying to never turn a kid away from playing baseball or having a facility for our kids to play during rain delays, during extra practices and any other development we can with our kids.

Our kids deserve the best available, and I believe Elite Sports Pavilion will help with that.

Establishments like Elite Sports Pavilion will bring out the finest results of our youth that they have to offer.

And we should embrace that, not hinder it by not having these training facilities available to them.

Names like Gibson, Pruddy, Blanton, Buckner, Boyette, Allen, La Chappelle, and our newest arrival, Brock Bowers have all trained in Napa.

They're Napa residents and their NAPA athletes.

Let's give our next round of athletes like Bush B.

Weatherall, Baldock, Coleman, Richardson, Nystrom, Donaldson, Perez, Prooch, the same opportunity to achieve their goals.

We at Napa Little League, we encourage you to protect and develop our kids at all costs, and please approve the elite sports pavilion.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello.

I'm Lindsay Schrader.

I grew up here in Napa, and some of my best memories came as being part of a local sports community.

Now I'm raising three three kids here, and I see how much they need those same opportunities.

But the truth is Napa is lacking safe, positive places for kids to go.

My boys play soccer in last season, the majority of their practices were actually canceled because of the rain delays and the weather of the outdoor fields.

Like many families, it leaves us scrambling to find the next field.

Families shouldn't have to drive out of town to find a reliable, safe place for their kids to train and play.

While also uh giving kids somewhere positive to hang out, celebrate their birthdays and connect with friends.

It's more than just sports, it's about giving Napa's youth healthy outlets and keeping them engaged in our community.

This is the chance to invest in our children and give them the same opportunity I was lucky enough to have growing up here.

I respectfully ask you to support Elite's Sports Pavilion so Napa kids can thrive and make memories and build a stronger future right here at home.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Good evening, Chair Shawell, and good evening, Councilmember Commissioners, pardon me.

My name is Cassandra Islami, and I'm a Napa County resident and a mother of two young girls who play club soccer with Napa United.

I also am the Napa County Behavioral Health Director.

And I'm here to ask that we imagine a place where every child in our community has a safe and positive space to play, grow, and belong.

Right now that doesn't exist year round.

And an indoor youth sports complex would change that.

This isn't just about sports.

It's about keeping kids off the sidelines and definitely out of trouble.

It's about teaching discipline, resilience, teamwork, and it's about giving families a hub that builds pride in our city.

And also about building on children's health and resiliency, well-being, and positive impact.

September also marks National Suicide Prevention Month.

And I'm here to also share that the most recent data from the California Department of Public Health shows that California has a 10.8% completed suicide rate for every 100,000 residents.

However, Napa, that percentage is 11 per 100,000, putting us over the state average.

These types of facilities are super important to our community to help build community pride and have a safe place for children.

For the cost of doing nothing, we risk higher health issues, less community connection, and fewer opportunities for our youth.

But by investing in this facility, we invest in healthier kids, stronger families, and a brighter future.

This is our chance as residents and citizens of Napa to step up and support this endeavor.

Thank you.

Well, if I had known about the parking situation, I would have written a completely different presentation.

First, I just want to thank you for the opportunity.

My name's Don Weatherall, resident here, Napa Little League board member, two kids that both play sports.

I just want to say Napa is known around the world for wine, food, and beauty, but it's heart, it's community of families who want the very best for their children.

Right now, our kids don't have a professional level, safe, dedicated place to train, compete, and grow.

Elite sports pavilion would fit that gap.

Organized sports, keep kids healthy, build character, and teach teamwork and leadership.

Napa leads in agriculture, wine, hospitality.

We do not lead in kids' activities.

As a 23-year resident, father of two, I can tell you finding constructive, fun tasks to challenge our kids on a daily basis is difficult in Napa.

Not sure if you've explored some of the fields that we play on.

Napa Little League and different club sports rent fields from the Napa Valley School District.

If you've ever been to some of those fields, I can tell you they are not up to par.

The elite sports facility would help that.

Currently, right now, my son plays at Harvest Little League Field with his team, which comes out of our own pockets as parents to rent that field.

The field is filled with garbage, broken glass, and is actually quite embarrassing.

I challenge you all to go out and take a step and see what's out there for the kids.

Here we have a local resident with an ambition to provide a place for our youth to prosper.

We can do this in a way that truly benefits the whole community.

I see no other option than improving this plan for our kids and community.

I respectfully ask for your support to move this vision forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Planning Commission.

My name is Kristen T.

Kell, and I'm here to express my strong support for the Elite Sports Pavilion project, not only for youth, but for another group of our community members, active adults.

I've played soccer my whole life, and at 40, I'm still in the field twice a week, but I can't do that in Napa.

I have to drive to Vacaville and sometimes even all the way to Alameda just to play.

That's time and energy leaving our community because Napa doesn't currently offer the facilities we need.

This project changes that.

It creates a place where adults can stay active, connected, and mentally strong, and opportunities like this matter.

Physical and mental well-being directly contribute to the longevity and how we show up and the roles we play.

Whether it's someone like me who helps feed kids in our schools, someone working long shifts in vineyards, or someone greeting visitors in a tasting room.

When adults are healthy and connected, the entire community benefits.

Leap Sports Pavilion isn't only about baseball or soccer or any other youth sport, it's about creating a safe, structured, inspiring place for the next generation.

A place where my daughter and every kid in Napa can grow with confidence, teamwork, and pride in their city.

I know this project is not designed for adult soccer leagues, and I respect that.

And at the same time, I hope that is something Napa can consider in the future.

What this project is designed for is training, development, and community connection, which is exactly what we need right now.

It fills a critical gap in Napa and lays the foundation for future growth and recreation and wellness.

This is momentum.

It is a clear investment in the health and future of Napa, not just for kids, but for working families, retirees, and everyone who calls this city home.

I urge you to move this project forward.

Let's stop exporting our time, energy, and talent to other cities.

Let's build something right here that we can all be proud of.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, members of the planning commission.

Suzanne Truchard on Thomson Avenue.

I will be brief as several of my sentiments have been echoed today.

But I'm here before you as a community member, fellow board member of Napa Little League, but also a mother of an 11-year-old baseball fanatic, nine-year-old soccer aficionado.

As has been stated, there's a paucity of resources and activities for children of all ages in both the city and county of Napa.

When I learned about the Elite Sports Complex from Tasha, its thoughtful design with a multitude of activities for kids, I was immediately on board.

What's more, the location could not be more perfect.

It is an excellent opportunity for continued revitalization of the South Coombe Street uh corridor and the Tannery Bend area.

Not to mention a much needed resource for Napa youth sports.

As a land use uh and zoning attorney myself, I can say this could not be a more perfect use.

In addition, I think we can all agree that providing another opportunity for our kids to get off their screens and stay active in sports is one of the greatest remedies to preventing mental health crisis in our youth, as has been stated.

I love Napa as we all do here, and I want it to grow thoughtfully and remain vibrant and diverse.

We can only do that by ensuring resources for the next generation.

For these reasons, I urge you to accept staff's recommendation with the obstruction language removed, which you do have the ability to do.

And thank you, staff, for the excellent analysis.

You should not penalize an applicant for something that has been a lingering issue for so many years.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Craig Hafner.

Um I am a 14-year resident here in Napa.

I would just like to echo the sentiments of uh all the other folks that that came before me and expressed my support for the Napa Elite project.

Uh I coach uh majors it for the Napa Valley Little League.

I've done that for two years.

I've been on the board of directors there for two years.

And I have uh two kids, 11 and 8, that participate in the in Little League.

And I'm not gonna rehash everything, uh all the valid points that everybody made.

I would just like to I would just like to say I'm I've been sending uh kids on our team that we suggest that they go out of town, you know, to utilize training facilities in other towns.

And I personally, as a Napa resident, would like to see the money spent here, and it would be it would help everybody, you know, because when you do have kids, uh there's a lot of time shuttling kids around, and we would it's much easier for for uh for them to make use of stuff here in town.

So uh I would love to see that uh this facility approved and uh here in town.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh hello, my name is Lexus Jessup.

I probably gonna repeat almost everything that has already been said.

I want to speak on the side of soccer.

I grew up in Napa Plain Soccer in 2003.

My parents founded a very similar facility in American Canyon called Pacific Sports Center.

I've experienced what a place like this can do for the youth, and it is so important for us to take this opportunity and make this a reality.

Uh both my daughters play club soccer, and as Lindsay said, probably 50% of our spring practices had to get canceled because there was nowhere to play.

And the other thing about soccer on the girls' side, I want to say there's a 99% return rate each year, more players playing.

And we have the Napa Bulldogs, the new football team or the new football league, and the sports in Napa is growing, and we need to grow with it, and providing a place like this will be so instrumental in doing that for our youth.

So I really urge you to approve the permit and let's get this going.

Thank you.

If there are any other members who have not filled out a card, that's okay.

You may just uh you may still come up and speak.

Thank you.

Hi, Carlota Sainado, program manager with the Napa County Bicycle Coalition.

I just want to thank Commissioner Myers and the applicant, Tasha, for clarifying the bike parking situation.

Um when we reviewed the documents, we didn't see anything about bike parking, and we're glad to hear that there is a space we think or a rack for two spaces.

Um we think that is fair for the use, and it seems compliant with what the municipal code would require, as far as we are familiar with the municipal code.

Um and I want to emphasize just the importance as I'm hearing a lot about the importance of the accessibility for youth of this facility.

Um just that so many youth can't or don't drive or don't have access to a car or parents work.

Um that's why we bring up bike parking as an accessibility um an accessibility tool to help make sure that all youth in the community have access to resources like this, especially um with the good location in a neighborhood near a TK through eight school.

Um so I just want to clarify that given our uh written comment and um just wanted to also offer that the Napa County Bicycle Coalition is always happy to be a resource to both commissioners staff and as well the applicant.

Um, if ever you any folks want to have a conversation about bike parking guidance.

If the applicant um ends up needing more bike parking, we're always happy to provide input and guidance on that and how to make it best accessible for um youth and adults in the community.

So thank you for clarifying and glad to hear that um bike parking is already there.

Thank you.

Thank you for the letter as well.

Any other members could please oh great, come on up.

Just one quick thing.

If anybody's ever been to Mastery of Sports and seen the parking situation there, I know they're very concerned about parking spots, but it's a nightmare driving through there, and we do it on behalf of our kids because we all want our kids to have more.

Um, and I just really hope that we can find a way to move this project forward without halting something that could be great for the whole community simply because of something that the landowner has avoided for so many years.

And I hope that you'll find a way to make it work.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Kathy Martin.

Um, I'm also a Napa native, currently live here, parent of a six-year-old boy who I'm getting into sports.

I'm also um one of the administrators at one of our middle schools here in town.

So I do work with uh middle school age students.

Um, I think it would be an absolute shame if we did not approve something like this strictly because of 10 parking spaces.

Um I'm sure there's a way to work around it because this is what our youth needs.

I can guarantee you right that I can guarantee that.

Um I work with them, I'm with them every day.

I love them.

But um, this is what our community absolutely needs, and um, I think it would just be a total devastation if 10 sparking 10 parking spaces was the reason that it didn't get approved.

Thank you.

All right.

Going once, going twice.

Do I have a motion to close public comment?

So moved.

Second, second.

Okay, all in favor.

I all right.

Do we have um additional questions for staff?

Anyone?

I still would like clarification on the parking count if we have a yeah.

Well, um, before we get into the parking count, um, in you know, in consultation with our legal team, it is within the commission's purview to be able to remove that condition and city staff in light of record tonight, not ignoring and ignoring the issue that does exist, but acknowledging light of record tonight.

We would move forward with a recommendation to remove condition number 12.

Like I said, it is within your purview to remove it.

Umledging the shared parking model.

Um the WTRANs report is presented in a way where it obviously assumes peak hours of uses, right?

So it it not only conveys uses the existing uses and the parking demands is required per municipal code, but um commercial and recreational uses require submittal of a parking study, right?

But um commercial and recreational uses require submittal of a parking study, right?

Because there's there's nuance to the demand that that's kind of perceived and required as of these uses.

So a parking study was submitted the way that those part the parking study concludes its recommendation, it does list off a balance of of peak demand.

Um but the conclusion was that 72 based on existing uses was adequate.

So that's the recommendation that moved forward is that 72 spaces was adequate.

If you look into the table, it does identify what peak demand is based on the different hours, weekdays versus weekends.

The conclusion of it though is that 72 spaces, including this use and existing uses is adequate, but it's subject to planning commission to be able to make that determination based on that the information provided.

Thank you.

Also to provide additional clarification, because I think your question was specific to what the current uses require.

Um as noted in the W Trans report, the warehouse would require 43 spaces, and the detached office towards Coomb Street would require 14.

So a total of 57 spaces required, not counting the the proposed use.

Thank you.

That's very helpful.

Chair, if I might.

Yes, please.

Consulting with staff.

Uh the recommendation to proceed and remove the condition uh makes sense to me.

Uh but I would suggest that uh that be based on uh the applicant's acknowledgement that there is an ongoing enforcement action against the use permit that while albeit remote does pose a risk to the ongoing validity of the use permit.

And it so there is some uh I guess there are no guarantees.

There are no guarantees, right?

We that's very important for us to all realize that we can remove the condition, but it doesn't remove the problem, and the problem still exists, and it and hopefully we've got Edward Booth here.

I'm sure there will be a delightful article written and a lot of shame.

Uh so you know okay, let's see here.

Thank you.

Very helpful.

Uh why don't we anyone else with do we want to uh do what can we make a motion?

Let's do that.

Who would like to do the honors?

Well, first our recommendation.

Do we agree that the recommendation is to remove oh 12?

Yeah, yes, yes, okay.

I'll go ahead and do it.

The planning commission would like to recommend and adopt a resolution approving a use permit authorizing the use of an indoor recreation facility located at 100 Coomb Street and determining that the actions authorized by the resolution are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and removing condition number 12.

Second.

All in favor, aye.

Yes.

Excuse me.

All right.

We have no administrative reports.

Any comments by commissioners?

I have a question of maybe Dan.

Um I'm probably the last person that would typically ask for uh an informational update, but um, I think it might be a good idea because I know it crossed my mind and probably other commissioners' minds today and in other recent hearings if we had a refresher course on the discretion of the planning commission in reviewing design standards of residential applications and where are our limitations.

It if that's something that might be valuable, uh, could we maybe get something on the calendar sometime, maybe spend 15 minutes talking about it?

I think that's probably a question for for staff.

Oh, okay.

And and I can I can really answer very quickly with that with you know it in accordance with new state law until the city adopts objective design standards.

There was really very little we can the commission can do with regard to design review of residential properties.

Commercial still open.

But maybe we could even just be briefed on what our existing design standards are.

I can tell you right now, we have done.

We have design guidelines, those are what we've always used, but those no longer count.

We have to adopt objective design standards, and we don't have them yet.

So we really are like a lot of cities.

We're up even three more hamstrung than I knew.

Yes.

Yes, really.

So that's why we're working on our updating of our our zoning code.

Uh uh Commissioner uh Owens is on that good on that committee for the uh design standards.

So we are working to actively come up with some because right now we really have nothing.

And that's just you know, every city is like that now.

So there's that's a simple of it.

I there's no need to have a you know, yeah, it's that we're we're we have nothing.

The ad hoc presentation was very effective.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So does the zoning code have to be finished before the design standards committee?

The objectives it does not, but it's they're they're going concurrently with it in and for to have these objective standards, they have to live somewhere, and they're likely gonna live in the zoning code.

I don't see that we're gonna I'm not I guess I'd look to Dan for this.

I'm not sure how we could we could I guess we could adopt design standards in advance, but that's just not probably what's gonna happen.

We're we're in the we're underway with our zoning code and update right now.

And we're in our zoning code is still projected to be finished, completed and ready to by next spring.

Yeah.

So that puts us in a really tough position here.

It does for the next six months.

Now, is it true that in historic districts those standards can vary?

I would look to you for that.

I believe that I thought I believe the secretary the secretary is I just read just recently the state just adopted the secretary of interior standards do count as objective design standards, so yes, those would still apply.

But there are also yeah, there's also been recent legislation applicable to ADUs and junior ADUs where uh historic design standard, the how do I say the exception for cities to be able to apply historic design standards was removed.

So the um cities have lost the explicit authority to do that.

When were they removed?

Because I still have this planning commission staff report that I carry with me from December 21st, 2023, residential design guidelines discussion, receive a report and provide feedback on areas of interest and desired outcomes as it relates to future modification to the city's residential design guidelines, and they're and they're all here.

My understanding.

So they removed it the last legislative cycle.

Oh, there's been several July 1st, actually.

Unbelievable.

There have been so many laws promulgated just in the past four years and just and just in the past year, every year, there are several new laws that come out that we have to quickly learn about.

Right.

So it's hard to keep up.

Understood.

Okay.

So at this point, we're just making suggestions to through the design review, just like we did tonight with putting better windows or you know, those things.

For residential properties, yes.

Commercial properties, you still have design design.

We still have more design control, which is why, which is why we were able to tell that commercial property owner we want those colors.

Yes, because it was commercial and not residential.

Correct.

Okay.

I think uh I have suggestion that going forward until we adopt those objective design standards.

I think it would be very helpful to have maybe some kind of boiler point boilerplate sentence in the staff report for the public to understand, because I think it's difficult when we um we get pushback on some of the design design recommendations we make that we are effectively not able to comment on through the design review process.

Uh that's a very good point.

I will I would I would address you to uh all of our most of our staff reports in the future do say that we do have that in there.

You didn't see them with this project because this was already previously approved that they were just coming in for a tentative map.

That does not alleviate the fact that that report should have said that.

But uh the design was was kind of a forethought from the project planner because it had already been approved and they were just now coming in that the subdivision map.

Uh we had to we had to re remind ourselves that the tentative map does reopen everything.

So there should have been that brother plate in there.

We'll make sure that it is in the future.

But I I I can't share with you.

We have been putting that in our more recent residential projects where we do say that.

That's great.

And I think too, if that is the case, and we do have a residential project, it might be helpful during the presentation for staff to mention that as well, so that um the guests here understand and because they might not read the whole staff report.

We will take that and advise it and make sure we do that.

Thank you.

All right.

Any um comments from staff?

Yeah, I would like to mention, and this is for informational purposes only, so not really for discussion tonight since it's not an item.

It's uh on August 22nd.

We did hold the first street NAPA phase two design review subcommittee with Vice Chair Owen and Commissioner Myers to discuss the design review permit for um obviously NAPA phase two um redevelopment.

Um a lot of attention was drawn to not color materials and consistency with the design guidelines as approved by city council.

Um vice chair and commissioners had a lot of feedback as it pertains to the the public realm, right?

So Brown Street Corridor, the new plaza, and they they did they did get into uh a very productive discussion with the applicants team about the improvements, the walkways, the the use and functionality of the public realm and kind of Brown Street Corridor, especially, um, and offered suggestions that were productive.

Um as previously mentioned in in prior meetings, that that feedback was directed to our city manager Steve Potter and is for his consideration in approving the design review permit at a date undetermined.

Thank you.

Very helpful.

Um great.

All right.

Well, we did it.

Um the next regularly scheduled meeting for the planning commission of the city of Napa is October 2nd, 2025.

We are adjourned.