Santa Rosa Planning Commission Regular Meeting - June 25, 2026
Santa Rosa Planning Commission Regular Meeting - June 25, 2026
The Santa Rosa Planning Commission met on June 25, 2026 at 4:30 PM in the Council Chamber. The meeting included approval of minutes, public comments on non-agenda items, and two public hearings. The Commission voted to deny an appeal of a 15-bed community care facility (Pham Assisted Living) and approved a major conditional use permit for a market with alcohol sales and extended hours (MD Market).
Approval of Minutes
- The draft minutes from the May 28, 2026 meeting were approved as submitted. Janice Karrman commented that she was not listed in the minutes despite having spoken at that meeting.
Public Comments & Testimony (Non-Agenda)
- Janice Karrman spoke about lack of representation in Rincon Valley, concerns over development east of Melita Road, and the recent removal of Councilmember Diana from commissions.
Discussion Items
11.1 Public Hearing – Pham Assisted Living Appeal (PLN25-0206)
- Background: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit for a 15-bed community care facility for the elderly at 631 Benjamins Road. The project is located in a RR-40 zone and is CEQA-exempt. The appellant (named Giles) raised five grounds: hardship criteria, special privilege, neighborhood incompatibility, use of the rear SB9 lot, and insufficient findings under Gov. Code §65906. Staff responded that no variance was required, the use is residential and compatible, and all standards are met.
- Appellant’s Argument: Stated the SB9 lot split was fraudulent because the owner, Kim Pham, signed an owner-occupancy affidavit but never lived on the property, constituting perjury. Argued the MUP cannot be granted on an illegally subdivided lot.
- Applicant’s Response: Peter Stanley (architect) noted the appeal only listed five issues, none addressing SB9. Kim and Hal Pham (owners) described their local family background, experience in senior care, and intention to build and operate the facility themselves. They stated the project meets all zoning and building codes and addresses a growing need for senior care.
- Public Testimony:
- In favor: Mari McCormick (supporter of Hal Pham for 25 years), Mel Fagone (shared need for residential care), Chin Nguyen (chaplain vouching for applicants’ character), Anne Fam (15-year caregiver, argued traffic/911 calls are minimal).
- Opposed: Fred Seitel (neighbor, said applicants are real estate investors, requested scaling to 6 beds), Lindsay Lawson (neighbor, cited parking and visitation rights issues), Sherman Wong (traffic concerns), Mike Faria (traffic, asked for 6 beds), Rich Gardner (applicant misled neighbors about scale).
- Staff Responses: Traffic Engineer Dan Hennessy stated trip generation would be low and similar to a single-family home. Assistant Fire Marshal Mike Johnson said evacuation plans and fire sprinklers make the facility safe; sprinklers reduce emergency responses. The parking requirement (5 spaces) is met per code; the condition requiring visitor appointments is permissible.
- Commission Deliberation: Commissioners found the appeal lacks merit; the SB9 issue was not part of the appeal grounds. All five commissioners made findings to deny the appeal.
- Vote: Motion by Commissioner Cisco, seconded by Vice Chair Duggan, to adopt Resolution PC-RES-2026-019 denying the appeal and upholding the ZA decision. Passed 5-0 (Commissioners Carter and Pardo absent).
11.2 Public Hearing – MD Market Conditional Use Permit (PLN25-0495)
- Background: Request for a Major Conditional Use Permit to allow alcoholic beverage sales for off-site consumption and extended hours (6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., seven days per week) at 1995 Sebastopol Road, in the former O’Reilly Auto Parts building. The applicant, Harman Dhillon (MD Market), will transfer an existing alcohol license from a nearby location and close that store. The project includes minor interior improvements and is CEQA-exempt.
- Staff Presentation: Senior Planner Sheila Wolski reviewed project history, surrounding commercial uses, and evaluation criteria. Police had no concerns. Alcohol license density and calls for service were within acceptable ranges.
- Public Testimony: None.
- Commission Discussion: Commissioners noted the transfer of a license, improved building layout, and the potential for redeveloping the existing MD Market site into multifamily housing. Commissioner Cisco amended an ex parte disclosure about an emailed question (asked about plans for the old building; applicant confirmed future mixed-use redevelopment).
- Vote: Motion by Vice Chair Duggan, seconded by Commissioner Cisco, to adopt Resolution PC-RES-2026-020 approving the major conditional use permit with findings. Passed 4-0-1 (Commissioner Sanders recused due to personal relationship with applicant; Commissioners Carter and Pardo absent).
Key Outcomes
- Denied Appeal for Pham Assisted Living (15-bed community care facility) – Resolution PC-RES-2026-019 (5-0 vote).
- Approved Major Conditional Use Permit for MD Market – Resolution PC-RES-2026-020 (4-0-1, Sanders recused).
- Approved Minutes from May 28, 2026.
The meeting adjourned at 6:02 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Assent Commissioner Sitzko here. Commissioner Horton. Here. Commissioner Parter is also absent. Commissioner Sanders. Present. Vice Chair Duggan. Here. Chair Weeks. Here. Let the record reflect that all commissioners are present with the exception of Commissioner Carter and Commissioner Pardon. Thank you. The second item is remote participation, which we have none. Third item, approval of minutes. We have one set of minutes from May 28th. Are there any changes to that to those minutes? Can you please wait a moment? Thank you. Are there any changes to the minutes corrections? Okay, then with that. If you are in the chambers and wish to make public comment on the minutes, please make your way to the podium, state your name for the record, and you'll have three minutes for your comment. Good afternoon to the board. I happen to look over the uh minutes and I wasn't on them. And uh I remember uh you know what I spoke about uh and at the minutes, and I don't really want to give it all away today because there was something that I said there that was related to uh what was what was uh on the minutes, but uh but it I I was ignored. I just don't seem to have gotten on the minutes. Um I'm quite sure I was there because I spoke about the topic, so just that usually it says something, you know, and if they don't say what you talked about, because often they do, it depends on which board or which meeting you're at, then they will say something like you oppose the project or you objected to the project or something like that. But I wasn't on it, so that's what I object to. Thank you. Any other comments? Okay, so with that, um the minutes will stand approved as submitted. Um, and now we move on to public comments. Um, we're now taking public comments. This is on non-agenda matters, and this is time when any people, any person in the audience may address the commission on matters within the purview of the commission, but are not on the agenda. And if you're in the chambers, please make your way to one of the podiums and you'll have three minutes and you'll see the countdown timer. Go ahead, Ms. Carmen. Thank you. Janice Carmen here, and we'll start over. Uh I um I wanted to say that um I was um present at a meeting, and that the meeting turned into mayhem uh before the meeting uh ended, and a person at the meeting, this is a city of uh Santa Rosa meeting, was uh attempting to make an allowance for a lack of parking by having the people agree that they would have any visitors calling ahead of time, and I tried to keep my feet on the ground and before. Ms. Carmen, I believe the c the item you're speaking on is on the agenda tonight, so and like you have it. But this isn't on the agenda because it had been adjourned. The meeting had been adjourned, and this was happening after the meeting, and I'm reporting on it. Okay, excuse me, please, but the item. I believe you are speaking on is on the agenda tonight. So if you could please hold your comment till then, okay. Well that's interesting. Okay, so I'm going to go to another topic, and that is that when Diana uh had uh Terry Saunders who sits before you now uh appointed to your planning commission from district four. He lives on McDonald Avenue, and uh we live in district three. Diana was in charge, and now she's more of a lame duck since she can't go to meetings, she can't, she's been stripped of all of her meetings, she's been stripped of her commissions, and uh Terry is still on the planning uh commission, and I just want to bring the public's attention to this that Rincan Valley has a lot of problems.
openpublica.com