OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Napa, California/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Planning Commission Meeting October 1, 2026: Byway East Design Review and Nuisance Continuance

City Council — Thursday, October 1, 2026
BodyNapa, California
SessionCity Council
DateThursday, October 1, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:06:46

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:28

Good evening.

0:29

Welcome to the October 1st City of Napa regular meeting for the Planning Commission.

0:34

I would like to call this meeting to order and ask Myra to please conduct a roll call.

Speaker 2

0:39

Commissioner EBOC?

0:40

Here.

0:40

Commissioner Masaro.

0:42

Present.

0:43

Commissioner Shotwell.

0:44

Present.

0:45

Vice Chair Myers.

0:46

Yep.

0:46

And

Speaker 1

0:46

Chair Owen.

0:47

Present.

0:48

And we will now rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Unassigned speaker

0:53

I

Speaker 3

0:53

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

0:57

And to the Republic for which it stands one.

1:00

One nation under God.

1:02

Indivisible with liberty and justice for

Unassigned speaker

1:05

all.

Speaker 1

1:10

The Planning Commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Ralph M.

1:14

Brown Act and pursuant to the city's rules of order for Planning Commission meetings, policy resolution 10.

1:21

Staff, are there any changes to the evening's agenda or any supplemental reports?

Speaker 4

1:25

Good evening, Chair.

1:26

Yes.

1:27

There were actually two supplemental memorandums that were forwarded to the Planning Commission available physical copies towards the rear of the chamber.

1:35

For agenda item 7A, staff's actually recommending to continue that item to a date certain of the November 5th regular planning commission hearing.

Speaker 1

1:44

Okay, great.

1:45

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

1:49

Can I get a motion to um item 7A to the November agenda?

Speaker 5

1:55

So moved.

Speaker 1

1:56

Can I get

Speaker 2

1:56

a second?

1:57

All in favor?

1:58

Aye.

1:59

Motion passes.

Speaker 1

2:02

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

2:11

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

2:17

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

Speaker 3

2:24

No.

Speaker 1

2:25

Consent calendar.

2:26

These routine items may be approved by a single vote.

2:29

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

2:36

This evening we are reviewing the Planning Commission regular meeting minutes for September 17th, 2026.

2:42

Is there a motion to approve the meeting minutes for the September 17th, 2026 Planning Commission regular meeting?

Speaker 5

2:50

So moved.

2:51

Second.

Speaker 1

2:52

All those in favor?

2:53

Aye.

2:54

Aye.

2:54

Motion passes.

2:57

Public hearings and appeals.

2:59

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

3:05

Applicants or appellants are allowed ten 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.

3:15

All other speakers will be limited to three minutes.

3:18

Tonight we have the following item item 7B, 4124 Byway East Design Review.

3:25

And may we start with Commissioner disclosures.

Speaker 6

3:36

I spoke with the project team twice.

3:39

And I also visited the site and I talked to staff.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Affordable Housing█████████████████████████████████████37%
Housing██████████████14%
Parking Management█████████9%
Transportation Safety█████████9%
Procedural█████5%
Design Guidelines████4%
Public Engagement████4%
Water And Wastewater Management███3%
Public Safety██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Planning Commission Meeting – October 1, 2026

The Napa Planning Commission convened on October 1, 2026, at 5:30 PM in City Hall. The agenda included a consent calendar, a continuance of a public nuisance hearing, and a public hearing for a 178-unit affordable housing project at 4124 Byway East. After extensive public testimony and commissioner deliberation, the Commission voted 4-1 to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council, accompanied by specific concerns.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes Approval: The Commission unanimously approved the regular meeting minutes from September 17, 2026.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Item 7A – 111 Berna Avenue Public Nuisance: Staff recommended continuing this item to the November 5, 2026 meeting. The Commission voted unanimously to continue.

  • Item 7B – 4124 Byway East Design Review: Six members of the public spoke, all expressing opposition or concerns about the project:

    • Mark Phillips applauded the need for affordable housing but criticized the design, stating it lacks staff analysis on massing, height, setbacks, and compatibility. He argued that six waivers suggest the project is too large for the site and that the parking analysis is inadequate, predicting overflow parking on neighborhood streets.
    • Jonathan Gottlieb (property owner on El Centro) strongly supported affordable housing but opposed the five-story height, reduced setbacks, and parking shortfall. He stated the project would create sightline hazards, increase traffic in an already congested school zone, and likely decrease property values.
    • Marlene Frappia (resident of Hampton Way) objected to the five-story height, traffic safety, lack of sidewalks beyond the site, and noted no notice was sent to homes past 500 feet. She compared the proposed height unfavorably to the three-story Caliber building across the street.
    • Rosemary Hamill (resident since 1987) highlighted narrow streets, absence of sidewalks on El Centro, and existing traffic backups during school drop-off. She questioned where additional cars from both this project and a planned 52-unit subdivision would park.
    • Patrick Reeves (resident on El Centro) supported affordable housing but expressed concern about density (68 units/acre), predicting 350 cars with only 182 on-site spaces. He feared flooding, inadequate public space, and long-term negative impacts on the neighborhood.
    • Michelle Long (tenant adjacent to the site) raised concerns about flooding into her yard and garage, traffic congestion making it difficult to exit her driveway, the five-story height overwhelming nearby single-story homes, and noise from gates and vehicles.

Discussion Items

  • Staff Presentation: Planner Angela Alvarez-Cendejas presented the project – a 178-unit multifamily building (110 one-bedroom, 68 two-bedroom) on 2.61 acres at 4122-4124 Byway East. The applicant (Cypress Equity Investments) requests a 69% density bonus (below the 80% maximum) and six waivers (height, setbacks, parking, open space, landscaping) plus two concessions (parking space width reduction from 9 to 8.5 feet, mechanical equipment screening). The project is 100% affordable (except two manager units). Staff determined it is exempt from CEQA under Class 32 (infill) and recommended forwarding approval to City Council.

  • Applicant Presentation: Emma Lois (VP of Development, Cypress) and Marie Delwich (architect, Resi Architecture) emphasized the project's design, pedestrian/bicycle connections, solar panels, and site drainage improvements. They argued that parking management (one permit per unit) would limit overflow.

  • Commissioner Questions and Comments:

    • Commissioner Myers asked about the Commission's discretion on concessions and waivers. City Attorney Dan DePorto explained that the city must grant concessions unless they harm public health/safety, and waivers are required if the applicant shows preclusion from density. The Housing Accountability Act limits the city to enforcing only objective standards. Commissioner Myers expressed strong opposition, calling the project a

Meeting Transcript

Good evening. Welcome to the October 1st City of Napa regular meeting for the Planning Commission. I would like to call this meeting to order and ask Myra to please conduct a roll call. Commissioner EBOC? Here. Commissioner Masaro. Present. Commissioner Shotwell. Present. Vice Chair Myers. Yep. And Chair Owen. Present. And we will now rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States for America. And to the Republic for which it stands one. One nation under God. Indivisible with liberty and justice for all. The Planning Commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and pursuant to the city's rules of order for Planning Commission meetings, policy resolution 10. Staff, are there any changes to the evening's agenda or any supplemental reports? Good evening, Chair. Yes. There were actually two supplemental memorandums that were forwarded to the Planning Commission available physical copies towards the rear of the chamber. For agenda item 7A, staff's actually recommending to continue that item to a date certain of the November 5th regular planning commission hearing. Okay, great. Commissioners, are there any other proposed changes to this evening's agenda? Can I get a motion to um item 7A to the November agenda? So moved. Can I get a second? All in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Public comment provides an opportunity for members of the public to direct 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? No. Consent calendar. These routine items may be approved by a single vote. However, any member of the public or a commissioner may remove an item for discussion during the public hearing portion of the agenda. This evening we are reviewing the Planning Commission regular meeting minutes for September 17th, 2026. Is there a motion to approve the meeting minutes for the September 17th, 2026 Planning Commission regular meeting? So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com