Ryder, are you ready?

Good evening and welcome to the August 21st, 2025 City of Napa regular meeting for the Planning Commission.

Roll call, please.

Commissioner Ebach.

Present.

Commissioner Masaro.

Present.

Commissioner Myers.

Yep.

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, which is one nation under God, indivisible regularity and justice for all.

The Planning Commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Ralph Milton Brown Act, California Government Code Sections 54950 at SEC.

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

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

The only change I could identify is that the Wilkins Town Homes parcel map that was on the original agenda has been moved to a different meeting.

It's already been re-noticed, so there was no action required by the commission.

It's already on its separate track.

Other than that, there's no changes to the agenda.

We did receive one public comment for item four.

Um it was an email communication from Sophie Wassaff.

Great.

Thank you.

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?

Okay.

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 7th, 2025.

Do I have a motion to approve?

I'll make a motion to approve.

Second.

Okay, thank you.

All in favor?

I agree.

Aye.

We have no consent hearings this evening, so we'll move on to public hearings and 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.

Tonight we have the following item.

Item 7A, Hilario's wheel, entire use permit and design review permit at 2601 Solano Avenue.

I'll start with Commissioner disclosures.

Commissioner Myers.

Vice Chair.

No disclosures.

However, the last time it was on the agenda, I toured the property and met with the applicant.

Oh, great.

Go ahead, Commissioner Masaro.

Um I talked with staff and I drove by the site.

I drove by the site.

Uh I am familiar with that.

I too did a site visit at the last meeting, and I spoke with staff recently and read through the correspondences.

So uh we will now hear a report from staff.

Alrighty.

Good evening, planning commission and those in attendance.

Tonight I'll be chatting with you about the Hilario's Wheel Entire use permit and design review project.

So just to recap what the project is requesting.

They're requesting a use permit to establish the minor motor vehicle repair use at the site, as well as a design review to authorize the design of three accessory structures at the property.

Uh the property owners and applicants are Ilario and Maria Aguilar.

They are here tonight, as well as their authorized agent Marco.

Just to refresh your memories, this project would be along Solano Avenue between Waverly Street and Uglett Avenue.

The project site is highlighted in red.

To give you some context about the property, it's about half an acre.

There's an existing commercial building on the site, which was constructed in the early 60s, and originally this was a service and gas station.

This started this use began when this property was still in the county.

So there was no use permit on record authorizing this use.

So it was considered non-conforming.

As I mentioned earlier, this property is located in the Pueblo neighborhood, located directly off of Solano Avenue.

And the general plan designation is general commercial.

We did find that this conflicted with the existing zoning, which is residential, and due to our requirements from the interim zoning ordinance, there was a requirement to make a best fit determination, which was completed prior to the last time that this item was taken to commission.

So that was determined that the most appropriate zone was local commercial.

So therefore, this project was processed with those standards in mind.

Just to recap the requirements, the commercial uses section does require that minor motor vehicle repair obtain a use permit in the local commercial zone, and then also non-residential accessory structures or structures are required to have a staff level review.

However, because this use permit is before your review, these two items were processed concurrently.

So they are under your discretion as well.

Just to give some more context to the project, this did result from a code enforcement case.

Originally, the code enforcement case was based on a few issues, including signage and cargo containers on the site, excess outdoor display, all which were remedied by the owner and applicant.

The only outstanding item to resolve this code enforcement case would be to permit the accessory structures and have them go through the proper channels to legalize them.

Once again, the use permit would be for the use of automotive repair, and the design review would be just to authorize these structures in their new amended locations.

To give you more information about the business, they operate during typical business hours, 8 to 5, Monday through Friday, 8 to 3 on Saturdays.

They're not open on Sundays.

They only do minor automotive repair, no body work, no painting.

That would require a separate permit, which is not being requested at this time.

And all repair services would occur indoors.

The changes are primarily being made to the accessory buildings, A, B, and C, which were noted on the site plan.

They would bring the structures into more compliance with setbacks, provide an additional buffer to the residential properties on either side, and that is meant to remedy the code enforcement situation.

Other site improvements that they're doing are reducing the number of on-site parking spaces.

Currently, they have 22 parking spaces on site, while they're only required to have 12.

So they, you know, reduced this area dedicated to parking to provide more area for landscaping and just kind of integrating the site better into the neighborhood.

The new landscaping area would total nearly a thousand square feet, and they plan on, you know, installing mulch and troughs with different drought tolerant species, which we would review at the time of building permit submittal.

Furthermore, the good neighbor fences between this commercial property and the residential property would be repaired as needed, just to address any deficiencies there.

There are certain policies in the general plan that would support this project, primarily those that support a mix of land uses in appropriate settings, you know, ensuring economic vibrancy, particularly by addressing local business needs.

Furthermore, there are other general plan policies that are meant to retain local businesses and also maintain a wide spectrum of uses in the city, you know, thereby ensuring that people don't have to travel outside of the city or generally, you know, outside of their neighborhood area to receive these services.

These use permit findings that are required were detailed in the staff report, and staff did make all of the findings that were required.

Same thing with the design review findings.

Staff made those findings, and these were detailed in the staff report as well.

There are certain findings from the interim zoning ordinance that are still applicable, and these were also addressed in the staff report.

Um, with regard to the environmental analysis, we found that sections 15 303, class 3 exemption, and class 32 exemption were appropriate, and none of the exceptions to the exemptions were present at this site.

So we felt these were appropriate.

And with that information in mind, uh staff recommends that the planning commission adopt a resolution approving a use permit for the minor motor vehicle repair and the design review permit for the design of the three accessory structures at 2601 Solano Avenue and determining that they are exempt from CEQA.

That is the conclusion of my presentation.

However, the applicants and their authorized agent are here today, and I'm happy to answer any questions as well.

Would the applicants like to speak?

Yeah, I think that you know the statement that they submitted today would be sufficient.

All right, yeah, so um I'll need to open up public comment.

Staff, do we have any public comment?

I did not receive any public comment cards.

Is there anyone from the public who wishes to comment on this item?

Please come on up.

Welcome.

While they're walking up, I want to identify there was a late communication that was submitted to the commission uh regarding this application.

You should have that in your packet.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name's Tom DeGitano.

I live on Waverly Street in close proximity to Hilario's.

Um, I want to start by saying I have no issue with having an automotive repair shop in that location, as that is what the location has been used for for decades.

Um, I do have some questions about uh zoning regulations and how they've been met.

Uh I question the planning commission's uh exemptions based on uh California Environmental Quality Act section 15332, which in particular states the project must be consistent with applicable general plan designation and all applicable zoning designation and regulations.

I don't believe it complies in that respect today.

Some of what your presentation said would seem to alleviate some of that concern, but I also have public safety concerns in relation to both the locations of the structures.

Currently, I have some photos that I'll submit.

Uh currently, one of the structures on the site is within six feet of a neighboring structure on a neighboring property, distance of my arms.

Uh, and that is just too close when you consider that fire safety is a big deal in California.

Um tires which are not by the in and of themselves hazardous if they catch fire, produce an extremely hot fire, an extremely toxic smoke.

Proximity of the uh storage of tires to the other buildings in the area uh presents an extreme fire hazard, in my opinion.

Um, and again, I don't deny the businessman the opportunity to run his business.

I would say at a minimum, due to the flammability and the potentially toxic nature uh of the smoke from such a fire, that um suitable fire hazard mitigation and fire suppression should be included as part of the design review permit process.

And I have here a copy of section 15332 and several photos of the site indicating those, which I can leave with the commission.

Thank you.

Yes, so I don't know if you'd like staff to address some of the comments.

Absolutely.

Okay, should I first close public comment unless there's another member of the public who would like to speak?

Welcome.

Good afternoon, dear commissioner.

My name's Maria Aguilar, my husband is a LARIO, and we respectfully submitted this comment in support of our use permit and design review permit application.

We are proud to small business owners.

We have worked hard in Napa since we arrived here in the United States in 1989.

For many years, we worked in vineyards and restaurants, saving carefully until 20 2017.

We were able to open our first location, our tire shop at 1162 Jordan Lane.

We have two businesses here in Napa with uh also adding the 2601 Solano.

And now after dedicated too much work, Srac and paying our taxes and contribution members of this community.

We have finally been able to purchase this property on Solano Avenue or Dream is to conciliate it or family wheels, entire business here, creating stability for employees or children and our customers throughout dedication, long hours and help our family.

We have grown to employ nine local workers across two locations.

The Solano Avenue properly has previously been used for this same purpose, but the priory right to operate the use half expired.

So we are simply asking for approved to our continuous service in Napa for the same service that we are providing for the years.

Legally responsibility with our care for our neighbors.

We kindly ask for your support and approving our use permits to design review permits that we are can continue building in American Dreams in Napa, supporting our local families and jobs and contributing to the local economy and responsible paying our taxes.

And we will consider doing any repairs that would need to be done for both shops, especially for 2601 Solano.

We want to work hard and get everything so we have our neighbors happy.

Thank you.

Thank you for sending that letter, as well as expressing this tonight.

Thank you.

If there are no other members, may I get a motion to close public comment?

Oh, seems like a one more.

Okay, come on up, sir.

So I'm working with Hilario.

I just to respond to the neighbor.

Please speak into the microphone, sir.

Okay.

So Ilarios and Maria are committed to being good neighbors, maintaining a clean and safe property, and addressing any concern direct directly.

So they store on site.

Tires are new or reusable.

No waste tires in they are kept and organized racks inside the buildings to avoid any hazard.

They are they are committed to comply with fire safety and storm water requirements.

In the use permit conditions, will ensure ongoing compliance.

Thank you.

Would anyone else like to come up and speak?

Okay.

May I get a motion to close public comment?

Make a motion to close public comment.

I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

So at this time, I'm sure we'd we'd really love for you to respond to uh that first public comment.

Yes, are there any specific questions that you the commissioners have for me to answer?

I can respond to the questions.

With regard to the separation, three feet, the six-foot separation.

Uh the requirement for accessory structures is three feet.

The the transition standards for the commercial sec portion.

They they're required to mimic that of this of the rec of the residential adjacent.

So there's no there's no violation with the simple fact that each building is three feet away from the property line is six feet total.

That's not a hazard nor is it a building code violation.

So that's nothing that is violating anything.

Uh with regard to the zoning, as as uh planner uh Angela had mentioned to you earlier.

The the zone the current zoning is residential, but the city when it adopted an interim urgency ordinance after adopting the general plan, we adopted several zoning designations that would apply to properties like this that don't have the appropriate zoning as of yet.

So that was done with the determination that was uh determined by the community development directory, it included your staff report.

So the zoning that is applied to it is is actually a commercial zoning.

So everything is as Angela pointed out, it is consistent with the commercial zoning.

So it's not in a violation of any zoning or general plan laws.

Therefore, it is it is eligible for the uh determin the sequel determination exemption that we spoke to.

Um those are the two big issues I thought I heard.

Um, the tires uh well, of course, yeah.

All the as the the applicant actually specified, there are state and regional uh agencies as well as our own local agencies that do require uh safety requirements, like Cal OSHA.

It also it has been conditioned to comply with our building and fire codes.

So there will be fire suppression requirements, and there will be safety step stacking and storage where they where the tires will be stored.

So all of those potential concerns for hazards have been addressed and conditioned, and this would be no different than any other tire store the city has.

And to this date, I'm unaware of any fire hazards that have occurred at tire stores.

Thank you.

Any additional questions of staff uh regarding the public comment portion?

Okay, all right.

Um now we'll move to actual just questions of staff or the applicant.

I just have one um the photos that we were provided by the public comment.

What what date were the photos?

Today, okay, thank you.

And I'll to tie on to that.

Um, do you have the plans available to project?

Yes, from those photos.

I'm just trying to figure out what that white building structure, whatever it was, because I didn't see it on the plans.

I believe that they may have a box truck on site that they use to transport waste tires.

Got it.

Um it's not a permanent structure, but yeah, so that may be what's visible on the photos.

But as for their accessory structure, they would be moving it an additional two feet over.

And also, you know, with keeping in mind the fire suppression requirements and having to meet those codes, it may even result in a greater distance or just fire suppression in the proposed location.

We've called we've closed public comment.

Why don't we get through we'll get through our own questions and we may end up asking something that would help you?

But at this, we did close public comment.

I have a follow-up question for staff.

Absolutely, I just wanted to make sure everyone's clear on that.

Okay, absolutely.

So my follow-up question to staff is just to be clear, all of the structures, A, B, and C, are going to be unbolted and moved.

And the plans that are submitted are going to have to go through building department review to comply with the code for this commercial business.

Exactly.

Both in fire and in building.

Yes, so the way that the site is right now is not going to be the way the site is going to be forever.

Exactly.

Correct.

Yes, what's currently there is not what's being approved.

With the proposed plans, they are moving the buildings over, they're creating a buffer zone between the residential properties.

Um, and then as I'm as you mentioned, it would go through a further uh building permitting review.

So the design may even change from that.

Yeah, okay.

Any other comments?

We're we're were any of the proposed design um discussions that were just brought up at the last meeting, other than the setbacks where any of I mean we were taught Gordon was here.

This was maybe in October of last year.

Right.

Um, you know, we were talking about softening some of those facades.

Was any of that integrated into this proposal?

So they did choose to change the paint color to a more neutral paint color, and that is also something that can be conditioned.

Um, besides that, you know, they provided the additional buffer zone, they are increasing the setbacks, reducing the parking, adding additional landscaping.

So in those ways, staff felt that they addressed um some of the comments while remaining practical to the use of the buildings in the site.

Do you do you have the part of the plans where the materials are represented not only where like the colors, the material what that was in our packet?

Um let me take a look.

There is the um project description document.

And part of the plans also specified neutral colors or something of the sort.

I apologize, Commissioner.

In the future, we'll ensure that all of our PowerPoints have elevations and site plans when it's a design view application.

You primarily should be looking at buildings and site and design, not findings and words.

We'll make sure that happens in the future.

Absolutely.

I'm I was rather I'm rather surprised that we're not actually looking at the plans, and especially for the public and anyone who's viewing uh from either a device or their television or computer.

So the materials were were addressed in the plans.

So the materials were not changed.

They're still going to be metal buildings.

Um the actual color scheme was.

Yeah, they're getting rid of the red.

They're gonna be using a gray, and I believe another tone that tone down the appearance.

So that was a big factor because the bright red was kind of distracting and and actually in our code it actually discusses that we should prohibit or or or seek to minimize bright garish colors, and so that that was that's the big change, which really softened the appearance, but looking more gray muted, kind of a metallic-ish, almost uh blue carbon fiber, a blue and we were we had asked for neutral colors, colors that blend into, you know, like just that just blend instead of so even if you're we're saying blue, it would be nice blue can be in so many different forms uh or shades, and so in the color palette, so it would be nice to actually see well, you do have them in your packet, just so you're real aware.

We have them, but yeah.

Like I said, we're gonna make sure those are in our PowerPoints.

They should be.

I apologize for missing that.

All good, okay.

Can I move on to that too?

Absolutely.

Um, in addition on the materials list, they showed like the metal troughs for plantings, um, drought tolerance, but I didn't see any landscape plan showing how they were gonna soften the edges and where they were proposing these.

I don't know if we have that information.

We do not have that information at this time that would be reviewed and approved at the building permit stage.

Okay.

And my apologies, I I had the project description, but I'm not able to locate it at the moment.

I'm still locating it.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Eboch, do you have anything that you would like to comment on?

Um my questions involve the project plans, so I may pause until we can pull those up as well.

Okay.

Um, but I I might just while we were have working on those, uh, just comment that um I uh for the applicants uh as a as a planner it's always frustrating for me when I hear about folks that purchase a property um and they think that what they're buying is permitted, and so um I'm sorry that you're having to go through this process.

It's it's really on your realtor to check those things for you, and it always makes me sad when folks have to come and ask for an approval, um, because someone else, not not planning staff here, but the folks that handled the commercial transaction didn't provide you with that information.

So hopefully we're able to talk this through and get this made right for you all, but I um I apologize you're having to go through this process in unfortunate when that happens.

Thank you.

Yes, and just to clarify the paint colors are up on the screen.

Great.

And what about the um the stone facade on the main building?

Well, what is the plan for that?

It's already painted, so they plan to paint it, but it's at your discretion if you'd like to ask them to just remove the paint and you know, paint the accessory structures.

So at this time, they're not proposing to remove the paint.

They're just proposing to repaint it to match the accessory structures.

Okay, thank you.

So that is something we could condition.

Yes.

Great.

Anyone go ahead.

Do you want to have another project plans?

Yes.

No, thank you.

Okay, so we're all waiting for the plans.

Yes.

So these are the plans that I was showing.

They don't really contain too much detail.

It's just a basic overview of, you know, the simple metal buildings.

So the project description really speaks to the colors that will be changed.

Right.

Um could you identify where the landscape buffer is located?

Yes.

So the landscape buffer would be added to the Waverly Street side.

So there would be an additional buffer to Waverly Street.

And then they would, you know, um redo the landscaping that's existing facing Solano Avenue.

So they would add some more.

Okay.

And that's intended to be like a granite rock fill, or is there going to be like landscape material?

Yeah, I believe that, you know, the it would be overlaid over mulch.

You know, they would plant the troughs with drought resistant plants that they would be proposing at the time of building permits in middle.

Um but there are no additional like bushes or trees um that would provide that softening that we're that we have images of at this time.

Not at this time or details.

And one issue along the Solano Avenue frontage is they do have some um distribution lines.

So there are limitations in planting certain trees there.

Um there may be limitations closer to the Solano Avenue frontage, especially at the corner, but there would be a requirement to comply with the water efficient landscape ordinance by the state, which does have stipulations to the type of plant materials that they do install.

Um all of which will be reviewed by both planning and the utilities department.

And has there been any discussion about I know that the the applicant is um going to replace the good neighbor fence, the wood fence were um adjacent to the residential properties, but is the uh the metal fence with the um vinyl is that intended to stay on the front?

Yes, so they're the both neighbor good neighbor fences would just be repaired as needed, not necessarily replaced, okay.

But yes, they would they're not planning on installing new fencing per se.

Yeah.

Okay.

I don't I really don't love the the vinyl fencing um on the front there.

I'd be interested to know if the applicant would be willing to swap that out for something.

The the vinyl fencing would be um between these two properties, between the residential property north of the site.

So it's not necessarily um at the front of the site, and you know, it because it's a good neighbor fence, we're not sure who's specifically is in charge or owning it.

Sorry, I'm speaking to the um the metal fence that has the the vinyl hanging.

If it is of interest to the planning commission, I mean this is a discretionary request, and as part of the request is the design review permit.

So you do have the ability to um, should there be concerns about the existing fencing to impose a requirement about the type of fencing that is installed.

Keep in mind some of the fencing as it gets closer to the frontage may have to be reduced in height, but you do have the ability, should you be interested, and it's more than reasonable to if you feel appropriate, ask the question of the applicant, but it is a discretionary permit.

So you do have that authority.

Fantastic.

And in doing so, we would generally have a condition stating that the the planning commission is requiring a better fencing, but it should also be caveated that also we in concurrence with the adjacent property owner.

Typically fences are are you know they're they're good neighbor fences where they're really the the obligation of both property owners, but in the case of this applicant proposing this project, the commission can put that burden on the applicant, but we would still want to ensure that the applicant reaches out to the neighbor and the neighbor is amicable to whatever change there would be.

If the commission required this, it would not be the adjacent property owner's financial burden, it would be on this applicant.

Sorry, I think I need to clarify what fence I'm talking about.

I'm talking about this one here, the secure lot fence with the gate.

Are you able to pull up the street view?

So it wouldn't be the the shared fence with the neighbor.

Yes, I can pull up the street view.

Sorry, I should have been more clear on that.

The metal fence with the vinyl.

And you shouldn't be too sorry.

We should have photos of the site.

And while and while you're pulling, we have photos of those.

And while you're pulling up those photos, I just wanted to mention that those stainless steel uh troughs, they uh they are really if you're putting whatever plants you're putting in them, they're they actually create more heat and require more water.

They're they're it I hope you haven't purchased them yet because there may be alternatives that are more natural, uh either wood or not those stainless steel.

They really go they're a detriment, honestly.

They're better for water watering troughs, not plants.

Okay, planner boxes would be more sustainable and more environmentally friendly, and probably less expensive.

So I believe that the fence um that Commissioner Ebach was referring to was actually the screening fence for the outdoor storage at the tire site.

It's not necessarily uh a part of this current request, but again, um, as they mentioned, you you may condition the project.

Is that an operable one of their operable gates?

Yes.

And I will clarify that our code does require that the outdoor storage be screened, so that is why there is that um that covering on there.

Yeah, and I understand that, and often when you see those covers, that is what they're for.

Um it's it's trying to you know make a metal fence meet that requirement.

Um I guess I I would be interested to hear what my um other commissioners think about the the fencing material as well.

I'll pause on that for now.

Can you show us all of the photos that you have on hand?

Um and the other re the other question I had was you're they're going from 22 parking spaces down to 16, they're adding 999 square feet of landscape.

But to get a better idea in terms of where those areas are and what parking will be eliminated, um if you had if you have it in photos, it would be so these are the photos that I've got of the site.

So some of the landscaping would be along this part of the property along Waverly, yeah.

And some of these parking spaces would be removed in this area, which you know can be seen on the site plan as well.

Got it.

Um understood.

I did see that on the plans.

I just thought since we've got the photos of pictures worth a thousand words.

Yes.

So here's a closer view of that, and then Sir.

Public comment has ended, but um uh we I may give you an opportunity here at the end of our um deliberation.

Thank you.

Yes, and then there's also this view from Solano Avenue.

As you can see, there is a portion of that automatic fence uh for screening that faces Solano Avenue.

Um this is a further view of the parking lot.

One of the accessory structures nearest to Solano Avenue.

Another view of this accessory structure.

And so they're on these concrete slabs.

We brought this up at the last meeting.

So how do buildings get moved when you have the concrete slabs?

What happens with the concrete slabs?

They will have to do a new uh a new we don't we're not sure that those are even building code certified fine foundations.

They are gonna have to do provide a foundation that's acceptable to the building department, which will then, of course, be have to be relocated.

So these buildings are gonna have to be picked up and moved.

And they'll have to be put back down in compliance with the California building code.

Got it.

Whatever, but that requires them to do more concrete.

That's just what will have to happen.

That's the problem.

What happens when someone does something before getting approvals?

Got it.

Wonderful.

Okay, um, I'll start with Commissioner Myers.

Do you have um we're just we'll go I feel like we're taking turns?

Sure.

Could could I see the um view looking west from Solano again, please?

Sort of the front, the whole front front edge.

That's great.

There it is.

Um couple of questions.

Is the um is the printing along the roof line to remain?

Our sign code does not necessarily speak to these incidental signs.

I know that it's not a part of the request.

If they came in for a signed permit, we may address it, but it's not yeah, it's not necessarily in compliance.

We can work with them to remove it.

Okay.

And like the banners, like the big vinyl banners, same sort of thing.

Yeah, those are allowed on a temporary basis.

But they're not allowed permanently.

So to answer your question more clearly is yes, we're gonna require them to comply with our sign code, those signs on the building will have to be removed.

And they can look at what we what is allowed.

There's a certain amount of area.

The location could be permissible, but to have signs completely surrounding the was probably more than this allowed, right?

That's something I was looking at today, and and it is a little inconsistent with the neighborhood, you know, so it might be nice to minimize some of that um signage.

And then the um I don't know the building letters.

This this building here on the on the right, is that A?

Yes.

Last time we we had also talked about that eastern wall of building A where the um banner is.

You know, there was some talk about maybe trellising and climbing plants to sign sort of soften that up.

Has there been any conversation about that?

They have not proposed that at this time.

Um and and I do agree that it would probably be um consistent with with the neighborhood and and a good design policy to recommend or maybe require a more uh soft in terms of aesthetically pleasing fence covering for the for the shrouding of the storage area.

I know that the black um you know screening is accessible and and functional, but it it's really um pretty ugly.

Those are my thoughts.

But also thank you for you know the the work you've put in to address the setback issues, the paint.

I think it's gonna look really nice.

So those things are are very are very pleasing, and um, you know, it's not my goal to put up further roadblocks here, but a few things could be done to to further improve the aesthetics of the site.

Thank you.

Yeah, it is it is in the residential, you know, it's right, it's adjacent or right there mixed in to residential, so it's it's I think it's reasonable what we're requesting.

Uh Vice Chair Owen.

I don't have too much to add.

I appreciate them taking all of our feedback from the last meeting um and addressing it.

I do want to express my sensitivity similar to Commissioner Myers on that eastern edge of building A.

Um, that's one of the first things you see as you approach from the north side.

Um and it's just so close to the street.

Some type of softening would be great for you to um address that.

And the planting, we don't quite really have that plan yet.

Um, so I really just stress that I would love to see more softening of the plantings around the perimeter edge.

Otherwise, you know, the colors, they're good.

Um, I'm fine with it.

Great, thank you.

Commissioner Masaro.

Thanks.

Um first I want to say uh thank you to the city staff for I think allowing this business to get through their code enforcement issues.

Um so often in other jurisdictions and things you you run against some hardline, you know, um city staff.

And so it's really great that they worked with this business owner and kept this business owner in business so that their business can grow.

Um the I went back and and um watched the December meeting where this um, in fact, I think I was here live watching it.

Um and um some of the things I noted um that I would like to see included in this plan, um, is maybe doing a little bit of exterior lighting um around the entries and the doors.

What that does is it helps blend that in to the rest of the surrounding neighborhood, right?

And it doesn't take that much um to put a couple little light fixtures up um up around there.

You have kind of a you know um rural looking rustic looking um space, and I'm sure you can find something that would complement that.

Um colors um I like the red, but I I understand uh the need to soften those colors, and I think the colors you've picked out are very nice.

Um the landscaping areas that you've chosen, I think just a little bit more thought needs to go into those landscape areas.

We talked a little bit about that east section, and I know you're gonna be creating a uh a little bit better landscape area right there.

So it would be nice to stair-step your um stair step your vegetation in there so that you create sort of levels and it sort of increases that um set back into that into that position of that east building.

Um I agree that um it would be nice to find a different type of covering to go over that metal fence, or maybe even looking at a different type of metal fence um to go back to your secure area that complements your structure much more, kind of ties it in and makes it, you know, much neater uh there.

Um you've got some corrugated metal back there.

You could use easily make a sliding corrugated metal fence, and it would look just as nice, it would look actually nicer than what you have right now.

Um and then there was a question about the stone on the building.

When was the last time that building was painted?

Was it is this the first time it's been painted?

I do believe that this was the first time that it has been painted.

Okay.

Well, it's been painted several times over the years.

This is the first recent time.

The stone that used to be there, I I can share with you, looks like 1960s lava rock.

Right.

It's not exactly aesthetically pleasing stone, but that's what that's what it looked like for many years until it was painted recently.

Right.

So um I from for me, um, if we're gonna go with colors on the site, then I'd I'd like to see all that be consistent with the with the um with what is there now.

And I think that that is my last comment.

I'm very favorable on the project.

Thank you.

Commissioner Epoch.

Um I will follow up on my previous comments on the fence and appreciate um your uh input on that.

Um I think I'm in support of this project, but I want to be sensitive to the neighbors in the residential area, and so I would really love to see either a metal corrugated fence or um a different type of material over the existing metal fence.

Um and should the should they decide, should we decide to just require a different material, um, I would like for us to add that no like advertising that that area is not used as an additional signage space, that's just some additional type of of screening, whether it's vinyl that looks better or something else, uh, but I don't want that to become like the bulletin board for the banners there.

Um but otherwise um I'm in support of this project and uh good on you all for working with staff and coming in and getting this up to compliance.

So thank you.

Uh the roll-up doors to the bays, will those um remain white?

Yes.

They did not plan on changing the color of those.

Because those it's very stark, and I feel like if those doors were black or brown or gray or that they would blend in more.

When you look at if we don't mind, you may want to keep that photo up of the of what we're talking about, just so we all have a turn here.

Um I think about any it doesn't matter what color unless it's all white, which we certainly do not want, and therefore it would look like that storage building that we unfortunately approved across from Van Winden's.

Um but the the these white doors or whatever maybe they're metal.

Are they metal?

They look white to me from here, and I've driven by it and it just feels like they're very stark.

They are metal, yeah.

So they're metal made of metal.

They're just metal, they're not painted white.

It's just this, it's just the way this photo is displaying them.

Okay, so they will blend in better to a gray and blue.

It it actually will help that the the buildings are not red, since those are the natural, they looked white from here.

Okay, great.

So everyone I has um conquered all of my thoughts and even my accolades to the to the family, and I appreciate all of your years of support and what you've done to the com for the community, our workforce, and um I too am just very grateful that you have persevered and you haven't given up and I know that we're gonna get there and you're we're everyone's going to be happy, and I know your business will be super duper successful.

It's a great location, better than the is it Jackson, Jackson Jordan, Jordan, right?

Jordan, right?

I pass by it all the time.

Um that's a complicated area for uh traffic, let me tell you.

So um if we have no other deliberation, do we yes?

Does the commission have a series of com conditions they want to add?

I've taken some notes.

I don't know if you want to take a stab, or would you like me to run through some of the conditions I've heard of your concurrence from?

Well, first off, the project shall uh the project shall comply with the sign code for all signage and shell prior to occupancy, and submit it submit a sign permit.

And we do have some conditions drafted if you want us to you've got them all cover for this, um not the signage, but everything else.

Well, I was gonna go through everything I heard today.

You do you want to take the right ahead?

We we do have drafts available for the paint colors for the lighting.

How about the lattice work on building A?

If that's of interest, that's what I was going through right or I was gonna go through everything I've heard here and we'll see if they're all the concurrence with that.

So if you've got those, feel free.

Yeah, I mean, we can we can take a stab at the the paint color, the accent lighting.

So the applicant shall paint the existing and proposed buildings with a neutral paint color, which shall be subject to the review and approval by the planning manager prior to the issuance of a building permit.

The building shall be painted prior to a certificate of occupancy for the proposed accessory buildings.

Um that condition would resemble it, it gives enforcement ability and directs the planning manager to be able to make that decision, tells them when they need to be able to propose that paint color by the lighting by would resemble the same format.

So submit lighting plans subject to the review of the planning manager incorporating accent lighting along the walls of existing proposed buildings, same prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy in which those should be installed.

Um if you have an accent, if you want to include the trellis as part of it, which I don't know if that was ever determined to be something you did want, it would resemble the same thing, so included in plans, subject to the review and approval by the planning manager and installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

Um I did the one thing about the neutral paint color is I did hear there was interest in the paint colors that are proposed in the project description.

There was also interest in more of I think an earth tone neutral color.

I feel like the commissioners, the majority of the commissioners are fine with the with the colors that they've chosen.

It and it's also a matter of the uh the stone facade, whether it also be painted or brought back soundblasted to its natural flint stone-ish um color scheme.

So can we get a ruling on that if the commission as a whole wants to see the stone back to the original flintstone, or do you want to see it painted?

I'm not big on that.

Okay.

I would leave it painted.

Um other comment is I'm afraid if we leave them open to still provide a paint color, we don't know what we'll get where we're all comfortable with the colors, so I think that's what they should have to paint.

And and so the the color, the m the main, so all of the stone will be blue or will it be gray?

Well, the the project description right now shows a gray, yeah, a blue grayish color.

Okay, to match the other accessory buildings as well.

So if that's the color, we could say neutral paint color consistent with attachment to project description, or is it attachment?

Two or three.

Okay.

And then I also heard that there was uh a desire to see the uh a lattice work with some landscaping put on building A.

Is that a condition that the commission would like to add?

It's more a recommendation, but not a condition.

In my opinion, I don't think it's a condition.

If you recommend it, it won't necessarily happen probably.

And it did have one.

And then there was also the condition about the changing the fence materials.

Do we want to see the fences the fence material maybe used as corrugated metal rather than the uh the uh chain link fence with the vinyl I don't I don't know if we say corrugated.

I mean you could do like a really tight woven mesh on one side, which could be beautiful if it's black, you know, just it would really screen it and looks like I don't know.

I'd something other than what they have, but I don't know if it needs to be corrugated.

That one I would say we could leave in the discretion of the planning manager, right?

Improve the fence subject to the discussion of the planning manager.

Okay.

Yeah.

Do you want excuse me?

Do you want to put parameters on the discretion of the planning manager?

And not uh I mean if there's a range of types of barrier, then you could state those and he would still have the discretion to I would say.

When you say, sorry, sorry, when you say range, do you mean like um solid material versus tightly woven material?

Uh I'm I'm saying I don't uh I don't know what you're thinking, so I I don't know how to express that, but I'm saying if you have three or four ideas in mind, you could just explain those and then if you know the planning manager would have the discretion to approve one of those.

It's not uncommon for the commission to just leave a condition stating that that the fence shall be redesigned uh to the satisfaction of the view review and determination of the planning manager by by throwing out several options that makes it much harder than then it becomes a debate about what the what three are those, who are they?

I wouldn't recommend that myself.

I would just recommend that that the fence be uh enhanced beyond its current status statute with uh as as a corrugated, I mean a chain leak fence uh with to the review and and satisfaction with the planning manager, and we'll make sure that they do a fence that's aesthetically pleasing.

We've got to be careful.

If they do a wood fence, that might seem good at first, being a wood fence is over time, don't look so good, they start warping, and next thing you know, they're not really hiding anything any longer.

So I don't know that I would recommend just doing a wood fence.

So it might be a matter of the working with the applicant could work with staff to come to a satisfactory fence uh fencing plan that we will ensure is a a better design than what they have now.

I like that, and I might add if if not already covered by the sign code that the fence is not to be used for display um or advertiser.

I think it's probably covered by the sign code.

To be honest, just stating that that all signing has to comply with the sign code that says that because it's not allowed with the sign code.

Yeah.

And that's why but I mentioned that that all signage shall be submitted for a sign permit, since there are none, and they shall be in compliance with the sign code.

Okay.

That will ensure that what you're saying doesn't happen.

And if they do, then we have code enforcement because we have businesses that put they put banners up all the time.

We have to go after them every day as they do.

So this the fact that we're stating it has to comply with the sign code that says you can't have banners.

Awesome.

Thank you.

And and I can further clarify it just to make the recommendation just to summarize everything all together, and then you can reference what's been stated on the record if it makes it easier.

Okay.

So is to modify the conditions related to the fencing, lighting, and paint color, as previously stated on the record, and we can modify condition one, add A, B, C to address that.

We can modify condition 13 to further clarify that any and all sign in shall be subject to the sign ordinance as well.

And what is the um deadline for all of this to take place?

How long do they have to make these changes to be to come to become compliant?

It will be prior to occupancy.

That's what that's the big hook we have.

They need to get building permit occupancy for those buildings, and if they don't do that, then we enforce we initiate code enforcement because those buildings shouldn't be being used now.

They need to be they need to have an occupancy, and they don't have that.

So that's the biggest hook the city has is everything has to be done prior to occupancy.

If they don't comply, then they can't use the buildings.

Okay.

And Ryder, as I understand that that's the reason why we would tie these other conditions to condition one, because that is the one that is the condition that has the parameters in terms of when those different miles would need to be made.

It speaks to the project moral, and in being that there is active code enforcement without acting upon the rights granted in this use permit.

Should you move to approve it?

Um that code enforcement case still exists.

So code enforcement expectation on it is to timely process permits.

And so code enforcement does weekly monthly check-ins to ensure that the applicant is working towards designing plans, submitting for building permits, and performing the work that they're authorized to do.

I just want to clarify the added conditions of the commission is proposing to put out, it doesn't matter what number we're assigning those to or what what code any condition that you want to add will get added to the resolution, whatever the number we come up with.

So you're saying that they so okay, prior to occupancy, which means that they are currently not able to occupy and run their business.

They they currently do not have building permits to occupy those two of the buildings.

The main building has been been there.

It's the other two buildings that have been added, the three buildings that have been added, those were added without permits.

So yes, technically they are not supposed to be using those buildings.

So do I feel like if they are using those buildings, then they're they're out of compliance.

Well, there's a co-active code case going on, and this action is part of rectifying that.

So this is their step, they couldn't get the building permit occupancy until they get approval of the use permit and design review.

So this has to happen before.

And yes, to your point, sure, in a perfect world, they'd probably be withheld from working.

Uh but that's not always.

What I what I want is to make sure that all of this actually comes to fruition and that because this has gone on for so long that it really is rectified in all of these improvements.

And as Ryder was explaining, there was a code enforcement case going on.

The code of forcing case has to allow the opportunity for remedy.

This is all going through that process.

So if they if after they get approved and they don't comply, then code enforcement goes after them and and will seek retribution.

I mean use reward retribution, but they will seek you know remedies.

Uh and also the building department would also at this point after having been approved.

The building department can't issue an occupancy to a building that hasn't been approved through designer view.

So it's kind of a process that has to happen.

This step has to happen.

And yes, if if there is non-compliance uh after over a period of months, then then we're gonna have to enlist code enforcement and building code, and that's when we can take action.

But we have to give this opportunity to remedy, so therefore, this design review and use permit had to be approved before we can really continue on with that.

Fantastic.

Thank you for the clarification.

So we got fence light and paint.

Yes.

Softening.

Sounds like you would like to make the motion.

No.

Uh I'll make a motion that we adopt staff's recommendation as displayed on the screen in addition to the conditions that were addressed in this hearing that have been so dutifully recorded by Mr.

Dilly.

Second, do I have a second?

I'll second.

All in favor, aye.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

All right.

Administrative reports.

Administrative report items include reports and recommendations from city staff that do not require a public hearing prior to action by the commission.

The commission may take action if the agenda item, if the agenda description provides for it.

Only the planning commission may authorize public comment public input for these items.

Tonight we have item 8A, the vacancy rate determination, and item 8B, the quarterly development report.

We will now hear a report from Michael Walker.

Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the commission.

As stated, actually, hold on.

We're up.

We're up and running.

Good.

This is the item for the vacancy rate determination.

This is a survey that we do every year in accordance with the zoning ordinance section 1752 800.

Requires us by September 1st to do a survey of all apartment communities of at least 20 units in size and that have been open for at least six months after uh final occupancy.

This year's survey was completed uh the week of July 21st through 25th, and we had 52 responding communities, which uh accounts for 97.6 uh percent of the qualifying unit.

So this is the best year we've had in my 10 years here uh overseeing this.

So it was definitely uh a lot of good work put in by our staff, Myra and Emma, uh, to get us uh these great results uh in one week.

So what we found is um the current vacancy rate is uh 4.3 percent, which is a percent and a half higher than it was last year.

Um, because it is still uh uh under 5%, it is considered a uh severe rental housing shortage, and therefore no condo conversions would be permitted per the ordinance uh for the next year through August 31st of 2026.

Uh so final action by the commission this evening is to adopt a resolution determining that the 20 yeah 2024 multifamily rental vacancy rate is I don't know why this is we must have grabbed an old version of this.

This is adopt a resolution determining that the vacancy rate is 4.3 percent um and uh for the for 2025, and I apologize for the uh screw up on this last slide here.

The recommended action in the staff report is correct, and be happy to answer any questions you have.

Any questions of staff?

No, no.

Oh, I just wanted to comment, shout out to Myra and Emma for getting almost 100% uh response rate, which is awesome.

So uh do I would anyone like to make a motion to adopt this resolution?

Um I move that we determine that the current multifamily vacancy rate is 4.3 percent based on the analysis provided by staff.

Second, all in favor, aye.

Motion passes.

Now we have the next agenda or next administrative report, the quarterly development report from Michael Walker.

Thank you again, Madam Chair members.

The commission uh attached in your uh uh agenda report is the quarterly development uh report for the second quarter of 2025.

As you will see, uh outlined in the information, there's uh a couple residential projects that came in uh in this last quarter, two parcel maps and four design review uh admin permits.

We had five use permits and a design review permit for non-residable residential projects and four uh certificate of appropriateness uh applications for uh historic property alterations and our building permit data for the second quarter, eighty-one residential building permits uh issued this quarter, and that includes 56 single family and townhome permits as well as 25 ADU permits.

So happy to answer any questions you have on the information provided.

Uh there's no action required on this item, it's just a report out to the commission.

Any comments, questions?

Sure.

How does the 81 permitted units compare to the previous quarters?

So if you look at the year-over-year trends graph.

I'm sorry, it's in this report.

Yeah, so looking at residential permits, um, that which is the red bar, it is um a little bit higher than the second quarter of last year.

Uh is is the highest we've had since 2022, which was when we permitted most of the Braden uh community, which was a lot, uh a couple hundred, so that's kind of what skewed that one uh in 2022 up over 200.

Um, but yeah, it's it's one of the best years best quarters we've had in the past couple years.

Okay, great.

Thank you for that.

And where are um primarily where what area of Napa are those ADUs being built?

Really everywhere.

Um, there's there's not really a uh a concentration of them.

Um, you know, as we we are fortunate in that we have a lot of single-family zoning with relatively large enough lots to accommodate uh ADUs so you know we are seeing them in pretty much all um all aspects of the city.

Great wonderful.

Well, thank you.

Does anyone else have any comments or on that?

Okay, thank you, Michael Walker.

So now do I have any uh does staff have any additional comments?

Staff has no additional comments.

Commissioners, any additional comments?

Well, I just wanted to say um we're on Sundays the Quake Mosaic unveiling um on Action Avenue Sunday afternoon from two until six, live music, food trucks, and the unveiling of the Quake Mosaic.

So I highly recommend and kids are welcome.

It'll be a really fun event.

Uh that's it.

And so let's see here.

We're going to adjourn, and the next regularly scheduled meeting for the planning commission of the city of Napa is September 4th.

Oh, my dad's birthday next 2025.

That's so funny.

We're adjourned.

Great.

Well, cheers to your dad.

I know that