Welcome to the March 26th 2026 Planning Commission hearing.

Can the staff please call the role?

Thank you, Chair.

Commissioner Anderson here.

Commissioner Moran.

Here.

Commissioner Cound.

Here.

Commissioner Strongman.

Here.

Commissioner Quok.

Here.

Vice Chair Klopp here.

Chair Needing.

Here.

We have a quorum.

Beautiful.

I don't believe there's any items on the consent.

Oh, sorry.

I don't believe there's any items on the consent calendar.

Well, there is nothing currently on the consent calendar, and staff has no recommendation to move anything to consent calendar.

Perfect.

Are there any um disclosure of exporté communications?

I'm seeing lots of shaking of heads.

Um for public communications, what I do want to say that there's two um options, two times when there is public comment.

There is public comment on items that are on the agenda, which is done prior to the agenda item and during it, and then items that have nothing to do with the agenda item.

So is there public comment for items not on the three agenda items that we have for today?

I'm seeing none.

So okay.

Um I'd like to then open up the public hearing portion.

The first uh item that we have is the safety element update recommendation to City Council, and it looks like staff has a presentation.

Thank you.

Do you have to see if that works?

Okay.

Good evening, Chairperson Nighting.

And members of the Planning Commission.

Tonight's item is a general plan amendment to the safety element.

I'm Crystal DeCastro, Principal Planner in the Community Development Department, and I'm here with Darren Newfield, who's our city consultant from Harrison Associates.

Staff is requesting that the commission approve a resolution recommending that the city council adopt the safety element.

This evening I'll briefly cover what the safety element is, why it's being updated, the planning process, and the key changes.

So let's start with making sure this pointer works.

Let's start with the general plan and the role of the safety element.

I don't think this is charged.

So thank you.

Okay.

So the general plan is a state mandated framework guiding the city's future development.

The safety element is one of the required elements and addresses risk from hazards such as wildfires, floods, droughts, earthquake, climate change, and other hazards.

It integrates safety into land use and transportation planning to reduce the risk to life, property, and the local economy through policies, goals, and actions that support preparedness, emergency response, and long-term resilience.

So why is the safety element needed?

The current safety element was last adopted in 2006 with the 2025 general plan.

Since then, the housing element was adopted and certified in 2023, triggering a concurrent safety element review.

The local hazard mitigation plan or LHMP was adopted in 2025, aligning with state and federal requirements such as PhenO FEMA requirements.

New legislation as listed here, also expanded requirements to address flood hazards, wildfire hazards, climate adaptation, evacuation routes, and the extreme heat hazards.

Together, these factors make an update necessary to stay consistent with current data, evolving conditions, and the state laws.

So let's go over the safety element update process.

The city initiated the safety element update process in 2022 alongside the housing element update.

It included data collection, hazard identification, community outreach technical analysis, and drafting updated policies, goals, and actions.

The process paused temporarily while Contra Casa County updated its LHMP and the state revised its hazard severity zone maps.

Because both of those were critical to the safety element update.

The process has now resumed and incorporates these updated resources and new requirements.

Community outreach was also key.

Community outreach included two community workshops and an online survey.

Participants identified these their top concerns, which included wildfire, extreme heat, and drought.

Residents emphasized the importance of fire mitigation, including vegetation management and removing dead trees to reduce fire risk.

They also highlighted the need for public education, emergency preparedness, and evacuation planning, noting that many households felt unprepared for extreme weather condition or power outages.

This feedback helped shape the safety element update, ensuring it addresses the hazards most important to the residents.

The safety subcommittee also guided the update.

A cross-departmental team with partner agencies and the city's consultant.

They provided technical guidance throughout the update process.

The subcommittee ensured the plan aligned with the city's vision and existing policies, including the sustainability action plan and the LHMP.

They also reviewed the draft and the final documents to ensure it's consistent with the city's policy, state law, and community input.

By combining the technical experience with public feedback, the update is both data-driven and responsive to the residents' priorities.

So let's review the key updates.

The draft update continues to address the core hazards.

The major updates focus on emergency planning and preparedness and climate adaptation and resilience.

With the emergency planning and preparedness, new goals were added to improve community readiness, reduce vulnerability to climate hazards, and to strengthen evacuation planning.

Climate adaptation and resilience also added new sections addressing climate change impacts on vulnerable populations and preparing for extreme heat, heavy precipitation, and drought.

Other updates include stronger wildfire and vegetation management policies and expanded public education and outreach.

So we'll move on to the environmental document and the draft element.

An environmental document was prepared according to the California Environmental Quality Act.

This was an initial study and the negative declaration.

And the draft safety element, they were all uh circulated for public review from February 9th to March 11th.

And the environmental document found there were no significant environmental impacts.

No comments were received during the public review for the environmental document, although five comment letters were received for the draft safety element.

None of the letters required major changes.

Although one of the comment letters were received from the California Geological Survey, then they recommended expanding discussions on slope instability and incorporating earthquake hazard maps.

Both have been updated in the safety element.

And one more recommendation they were that was that they wanted updated was related to updating a hazard fault map, and they're currently revising that map, and once it's available, we'll incorporate it into the safety element.

And they expect that to be completed by May and November.

So these informational updates from the California Geological Survey will not affect the goals, policy, or actions in the safety element.

It's purely informational.

So to conclude, staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt the resolutions to approve the negative declaration and adopt the safety element update to the general plan.

This concludes the presentation, and staff and the consultants happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you so much.

Very concise.

So thank you for that.

Does anybody have any questions for staff?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Just for clarification, this assuming the city council adopts this.

We will not have to redo it when we do the next general plan.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

And that likewise the housing element?

The housing element, we foresee that the next cycle would probably occur after 2030.

I believe this cycles from 2020.

Probably right.

So we would probably start the RFP and update for that around 2028.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sure.

Any other questions?

Um on page four, it talks about um how there's a state incentive for cities to adopt the local hazard mitigation plan into the safety element.

Can you just um elaborate on that?

Explain it a little bit so the public understands.

Sure.

So regarding the LHMP, um that is required because if there was an event that the city can then apply for state funding for recovery and assistance for any uh hazards that may have occurred in the city.

Great, so that helps us financially accepting these things.

Wonderful.

Um and then uh there was just one other thing I was curious about.

It's okay if you don't have the answer today, because I just thought of this, but on page 40, um, it talks about the lessons learned from some of the uh previous drills that happened in the Lakewood area um as well as Rossmore.

And it talked about interoperable interoperability of radios between fire and law enforcement being an issue, and I was just curious if that has since been fixed, or if that's something that the city's been working on.

Okay.

I'm gonna refer to Captain Slater for that question.

I think he was part of that uh and here he comes.

Thank you.

Good evening, planning commissioners.

And this is uh Jeff Slater, your operations captain for the police department.

That is an excellent question.

At the time of those studies and um scenarios, we did not have the new e-bricks system, which is the new uh updated way of having the best way of connecting all of our resources under basically one platform.

So I'm happy to say that we are live with that system and it does work, but um we do need to be a better uh training our own staff as well as our neighbors to make sure that we are proficient in the use of those, and that's ongoing.

Um, but rest assured that the communication issues have been resolved with this new system.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

So technologically we have we have the right systems in place.

And we'll just continue to do the training.

Correct.

Okay, fantastic.

Thank you so much.

Oh, sorry, I just came out.

Go for it.

Sorry about that.

Um so uh thanks to everybody for the work on this and uh the research that uh backs it up is really helpful.

Uh finding my little street yellow is like a little but anyway.

Um the um question I had is this uh safety plan exists in the context of multiple city plans um and uh it addresses physical safety issues, um, and there are other ones, other safety issues, health pandemics, cybersecurity, etc.

I assume those are all on the docket for the general plan uh that those kind of safety issues would be addressed in that context.

You want to take that uh vice chair.

So those issues were actually addressed in the recent local hazard mitigation plan which is incorporated by references.

Okay, um thank you.

Uh thank you, Crystal and Steph.

My my question just is more for maybe the people watching at home and just somebody who jumped in here and is maybe a little unclear about what exactly this is.

And it's my understanding this is a planning document, and that's a hard stop.

But the implementation of what is in this document comes later.

Is that right?

We're not deciding what goes where and where the money is spent exactly.

This is just a larger framework.

Yes, that's right.

Sure, that's an interesting point to make.

And it is important that this is a long-range document.

The implementation would be the LHMP or uh sustainability action plan and um working with mutual aid with other cities and counties.

So this is really just the overarching kind of policies and goals that will help then guide the implementation process later with the specific plans and the specific implementation policies.

Got it.

Okay, thank you.

Sure.

Oh, go ahead.

Yes.

So essentially, uh following up on his question, is it's more aspirational?

Slightly.

We we want to do this, but it's it's more of our vision and our guide.

Okay.

It's it's our direction of where we want to go.

Okay.

Thank you.

I I think that the best thing for me was the eight-page document where it says goals, policies, and actions.

I thought that was it synthesized everything about it being a future um guideline for that long range planning.

It's interesting because when I was reviewing the goals, policies, and actions, one important thing is that I saw the different relationships of how it's trying to specifically almost create an objective standard for different laws.

Can you speak about how sometimes housing legislation, because this particular commission sees a lot of housing legislation projects, how this ties to the various things and actions and recommendations that we're doing?

Sure.

You know, this is a perfect question because Darren was also our housing element consultant.

So I know you could do this really well tying the two together.

So come on up.

Yeah, our um our firm did the housing element.

Um so uh the question was how does this element um just sort of inform and tie into the housing element and everything?

So the the it's it's very closely related, mostly closely related to land use because we have to um when we're creating our land uses and planning for our city, we have to take all these hazards in mind.

So you don't want to build housing in very high fire hazards.

So very zone if you can uh if you can help it.

Um so this acts as a guide in in sort of like conversation with the housing element, so that we're citing our projects, um both housing and and implementing all our housing element um actions in a way that's responsible and doesn't put our members at risk in the community.

Um did is there more or that no that that's perfect because it it's um to commission commissioner Moran's point, sometimes it's such you know it it's so complicated and it looks like what what is this for?

Like is it is it just for all things, you know, safety, but when you start realizing that it it is helping to inform an objective standard for how several things are done, and sometimes it's a guideline, and so I think that it was beautifully synthesized in that eight-page document about goals, actions um and recommendations, and so I think this is great because we've had a lot of recent um we are um the recommending and approving body on a lot of items, especially state density bonus law, right?

That there is um preemption over public health and safety, and so this is beautiful because the city of Walnut Creek takes great care in being able to provide that objective standard to then subsequently review those laws, which I know my fellow commissioners like we all do our homework.

So thank you so much.

Yeah, and then to Commissioner Moran's point too, where the city can um commit to these actions, so like fire reviews for private development and the things we can control.

Um the other things where there's a you see an encourage or work with there are things you know for existing the existing environment and built environment things we can't fully control.

So um we took care to kind of structure it that way too.

Perfect.

Any other questions?

Oh, yes.

Um so uh because I just got back from the planning commissioners academy, which was fabulous.

So thank you to everyone who recommended uh that I go to that.

Um one of the things that they talked about was uh being able to incorporate lessons learned from recent California wildfires like um Santa Rosa and Palisades.

Um and so is that something that we've already incorporated here, or that would be uh a next step as in our planning.

Um I think that that's been incorporated at the state level.

Um so there's a lot of state actions and a lot of California Forest Stream Fire Protection Board actions, um, lessons learned from especially Paradise and then previously in Santa Rosa.

Um so a lot of the legislation you see coming out of the state is geared towards that um stuff.

The things here I think that are most relevant are Senate Bill 99, where we have to look at the single egress routes really for policy purposes so that we know where they are and we can identify actions to try to make those communities safer.

So I I think you see that that's why you see a lot of the state law coming out of the legislature in response to a lot of those recent devastating wildfires.

Yeah.

Perfect.

Um so now I'd like to open it up for anything else.

Oh, okay, okay.

I'd like to open it up for public comment in case there's anybody that would like to come up and say something about the safety element.

Any cards received on this item?

Three three.

Two cards for three items.

Oh, the item three B.

Oh, pardon me.

Okay.

Um, so seeing none, you're you know, you don't have to come back up.

Um, then I will close the public portion of this hearing and bring it back to my fellow commissioners to see if any there's any discussion that you guys would like to have.

Yes.

I just like to make the point that um what I appreciated, and I think is important is that we recognize the trends that were discussed.

Uh, and what really stood out to me was the wildfire and the extreme heat days that we're gonna be having as compared to now cue the thank you.

Right.

I did that.

And the extreme heat days that we suffer now are gonna be uh greater in number in the next coming decades, and we don't have enough cooling centers now, so it's nice to be able to see the train coming down the tracks, so to speak.

And then the last point I'd like to make is that and this came up in the public comment is that uh, and I can't speak to this, but the the state of cert might be an opportunity uh for our citizens, and especially when people are looking for ways to get involved in their communities.

The city has responsibility to help evacuate people and cut down on wildfire risk, but we as a community can step up and make sure our neighbors are taken care of.

Uh and that was kind of brought, I thought, to light with one of the public comment letters, and uh I don't know much about it, but I think that's a real good opportunity, especially if somebody's watching and they want to get involved, then cert seems like it could use some love.

And that's all I have.

Yes.

Um I just want to say thank you to uh the the staff and the subcommittee, everyone who worked on this.

It's a uh very extensive um plan update, and um and I really appreciate the level of detail that it goes into because as I've been you know out and about throughout our city, this is definitely uh one of the top issues that comes up is safety, right?

Um and people wanting to know what is our plan and how are we gonna make sure that we have that public education and community outreach that you talked about?

That is one of the goals here.

Um so the fact that we've added that as as a specific goal with specific action plans um is really great to see.

And it's really great to see the data that we're basing that on that we have the evacuation plan, um uh the evacuation options and stuff and things like that.

Um and I also really appreciated the planning for vulnerable people who may need special support.

That's something that um I've uh as a in my role in my day job as a as a state field rep, I've interacted with the and ganda trainings at the county level um with the emergency operations plans, and that's one of the things that they talk about now too that has been previously missing, you know, sort of nationwide in a lot of uh emergency planning is are we actually being intentional and specifically thinking about our most vulnerable populations and what we're gonna do about that instead of just thinking about it after the fact and going, gosh, uh it's too bad for those people, right?

Um, how are we thinking about um seniors living alone?

How are we thinking about people with disabilities, people who might not speak English, have we planned for that?

So I really appreciate that that is intentionally included here because that is a best practice.

Um then the partnerships with the community because as uh as just a city entity, we can't do this alone, right?

We have to be working with our police, with our fire, with all of our community agencies and our nonprofits and with our cert volunteers, absolutely.

Um just personally, I appreciate this so much as a Girl Scout, Girl Scout Leader, Wilderness First Aid, you know, certified, and I really want to do that cert training.

If it's not on Thursday nights during our planning commission meetings, then I will definitely join it.

Um but uh yeah, so just much appreciation, and I look forward to seeing how this gets implemented uh as a city and how we're able to really communicate out to the community about these plans because right now in the the way that it's written, it's just you know a hundred page document that is not in and of itself gonna educate the community, but the plans are there to do so.

So very much appreciate that.

Thanks.

Oh do we need two motions?

Yes, um, there are two items that actually and and before we do that, um, because there's two, so let me know who wants to do it.

Give me a little nod.

I need I should put my glasses on.

Um super quick thing that I like to talk about just because everybody knows that I geek out on environmental stuff.

I found it um it was a pleasant surprise to know that when the environmental analysis was done, right?

Um, that there that the negative declaration was determined that the project will have no impacts or less a significant impact, such that no mitigation measures were required.

And that's important because this commission here, when when we do look at all these projects, we go through in detail what were those mitigation measures to make it um to make that impact less than significant.

And so it was nice here that we just went through all those goals, policies, and actions, and that we realized that the environmental analysis that studies those goals, policies, or actions, then subsequently resulted in some into something that was an ND without those mitigation measures that we didn't have to go through here today.

So who would like to make a motion on there's two items that we have to recommend for city council?

Does it have to be two different motions?

Oh could it be combined in one yeah, because there's two resos, the ND and the um adoption.

I move to adopt the draft um resolution recommended city council to adopt the initial study negative declaration.

A second.

Okay.

Roll call.

Commissioner Strongman?

Yes.

Commissioner Quok.

Yes.

Commissioner Anderson.

Yes.

Commissioner Moran?

Yes.

Commissioner Cound.

Yes.

Vice Chair Klopp.

Yes.

And Chair Needing?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Great.

Um now moving on.

And I would like to make a motion.

Oh, the second.

That's right.

That was too there.

Go ahead.

So I move to approve the resolution recommending City Council adoption of general plan amendment to incorporate the safety element update.

Second.

Okay.

Commissioner Cowd?

Yes.

Commissioner Strongman.

Yes.

Commissioner Anderson.

Yes.

Commissioner Moran?

Yes.

Commissioner Quok.

Yes.

Vice Chair Klopp.

Yes.

And Chair Needing.

Yes.

I believe we covered them all.

Yes.

Great.

Motion carries.

Perfect.

Now moving on to item 3B of the public hearing agenda item, which is solar energy system at Diablo Hills Golf Course Permit number S25188 at 1551 March Banks Drive.

Does staff have the presentation?

Yes, I covered thank you.

Shorter presentation.

Okay.

Oh.

Okay.

Okay.

All right.

We're ready to go.

Good evening, Chair and Planning Commissioner.

My name is Frank Khan.

Uh, I'm interviewing official for the city.

Tonight I will make a presentation about the solar project at the up Diablo Hill golf course at located at 1551 March Bank Drive in Wana Creek.

This is the photo of the site.

And as you can see, the golf course was a bondage by the merchant banks towards the east and uh bounded by the residential community towards to the west.

And the projects, the scope of the project uh including the installation of the rule for mounted solar panel above the existing building where the um the arrow here shows, and also the ground mounts solar panels on the south side of the side, which roughly you can see on the screen between those two piles of the dirt.

That's the right relatively flat side and where the ground mounted solar panels were being stalled.

Okay.

So on the left hand side is the side plan showing the proposed uh solar panel here, and uh relatively to the location of the property line.

So from the west side, you can roughly see the ground mounted solar panel is about 21 feet from the property line.

On the right-hand side picture indicated the solar panel uh installed uh at the ground level.

I want to talk about the what is the city's right and our authority to review the solar project here.

So the government code 65A50.5, also called the Solar Rights Act in California, require the local agencies to approve qualified solar energy system through ministerial building permit process.

And the city's review authority is limited to determining whether the project complies with the applicable California Building Code and objective public health and a safety standard that were in effect when the application was deemed complete.

There is an exception to this ministerial process requirement.

If the building official can make a finding that the project would create a specific and adverse impact on public health or safety, which is defined as a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact based on an objective rating standard in effect at the time of the application complete.

The application was submitted on August 1st of last year.

So during the review, staff didn't find finding that there is adverse impact to the public health, and which will trigger the exception, as we saw in the third bulletin point.

As such, a building permit was issued on November 24th last year.

And pretty soon after that, the construction started.

On February 13th of this year, appeal was filed to the city.

Now per the government code and also Solar Rights Act.

So the decision of the building official regarding a solar project may be appealable to the planning commission.

And that's why we're here tonight.

The following is the code and standard we used to review this solar project here.

And on the plan, the it indicates anti-reflective solar glasses were used for the solars on the ground level installation.

Okay.

So I want a little bit make it clear.

So the appeal does not concern the building officials view regarding the technical part.

Okay.

Instead, the appellant contents that the physical units of a nearby residence and the glare from the solar panel constitute a public health and a safety issue.

And a use permit shall have been required prior to the issuance of the building permit.

So that's the core part of the appeal.

Now I to require a use permit, per the California Solar Rights Act, the city must identify a specified adopted standard and demonstrate that the project violated the standard in a manner that created a qualifiable impact to the public health and the safeties.

Now, based on staff's review, no such standard objective standards or evidence of the significant adverse impact was identified in the review.

And the same time during the uh the uh for the appellant, we can the appellant was not able to cite any specific applicable objective written public health and safety standard to demonstrate that the allegations will meet the statute threshold, which is what require um a building uh a special use permit through the planning commission for the exception.

As such, staff will recommend the planning commissioner to move to adopt the drafted resolution denying the appeal of the building code permit number S25118 and upholding the building officials approval of this permit.

So this concludes my conversation uh presentation.

I will be happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you so much.

Sure.

Does anyone have any questions for search?

Yes, thank you for the presentation.

Um I drove past it this morning and it looks like it's complete.

Is it connected to PG ⁇ E?

Uh not yet.

But it is building complete.

The installation um I don't know, it's not 100% complete.

Okay.

Since we reached the appeal was received on February 13th, so I make a decision to hold any inspection from that.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Go ahead.

All right.

Go ahead.

Thank you for the presentation.

So I wanted to get a better understanding of um when we talk about significant quantifiable direct unavoidable impacts.

Uh if we would have to make that kind of finding, is are those impacts that would have to be to specific parties, or would they have to be more of the general public as a whole?

That's right.

Could you clarify which one is it?

It's that would be specific and also uh impact the general public.

For example, if the glare and uh reflected to the east side of the margin bank cause the driver to lose the control, cannot see it and create the traffic.

So that will be considered as the as a public health issue, not individuals, you know, physical illness or thank you.

And just I do want to clarify, so that is based that is all has to be be based on a standard.

So let's say there is a standard that says, you know, you cannot emit such X amount of glare towards the you know facing of the highway, then that would be a standard.

So you have to kind of think about that in conjunction with the result.

So do we have an objective standard on that glare?

We don't have our any object standard right now.

Thank you for the city.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Any questions?

I'm good, thank you.

Oh so uh so yes, if there is no standard um for glare off of the panels.

How do you determine whether there is um a specific adverse impact?

So based on a standard, if there is no standard, it seems like there's circular.

Yeah.

So I mean the law said it's uh you know, at a time when the permit is submitted, right?

So the staff have to review based on the available formally up, you know, adopted standard in the city's municode or something there regard, you know, to regarding a public health impact.

So during that time last year from last August, when staff review the project here, we don't have any any standard regarding the glare, you know, is is a glare will trigger some kind of a public health issue or not.

So if you can't identify a specific adverse impact, even it's because there's no standard compared to um, then um you know then it it goes ahead.

Um so I'm wondering you said that there is um you did test for or calculate that there's be no um adverse impact on on the road going by I just give an example I said right now give example what is a public hazard will uh will looks like the example is uh if you the uh the the typical example is if the panel is installed something on the way near the airport, right?

When the airplane is uh try to land it on, the glare will cause the the blindness of the pilot, that will be public header.

And I just give an example.

That's some standard of verified federal aviation.

I mean, obviously given the location and the angle and so forth.

Right.

Unless the sun is shining from underground somewhere, it it won't have that reflection on the highway.

So I mean that's that's fairly obvious.

But um as far as uh glare into other uh private dwellings, um uh again, the angles that appears that there shouldn't be much of a problem.

But is that was that tested as well by you or by the applicant?

You mean to test the the whether whether there's significant glare going into homes nearby or any other place?

Well I was not a we didn't do any testing about that glare.

And uh to my opinion, the glare, if there's first let's assume if there's a glare to that private house, that's uh not a public health issue, but it is a private nuisance, which is a cause you know, some impact to the residents enjoy their property, right?

So that's a problem manner between the golf course and the the impact of residents.

Okay.

Yeah.

So and just to follow up on that, so the commission might think of it as first you you should look at the evidence and and think if there is an impact.

Um and then if there is an impact, you know, there has to be as to be to the level that the statute says you could require use permit or to deny the project.

And this is this is similar to um, you know, in a housing project context, is actually the standard is it's is almost the same.

Um that you even if you know there are times the neighbors will comment that they're you know, view impacts or design impacts, but they don't rise the level of um meeting the standards to be able to for the city to be able to deny the project, then the city wouldn't be able to do it because you you can't make the finding.

So I I suggest to the commission you think about it that way.

Um I wanted to ask about uh we got a letter just I guess like late yesterday um regarding ADA compliance.

And I'm wondering there's one term that uh came up, an ADA coordinator.

Okay.

Can you explain what that is and whether that has an application in this instance?

Okay, so the first thing I want to say in the uh United States um accessibility law act, so there is a definition about obligation for the private business owners, and the title two is about the city's obligation to provide accommodations to the program and to the facilities the city own.

And in this case, the Diablo uh golf course is a private uh manner, right?

So uh private property.

So it will not trigger by the city don't have obligation to to enforce any accessibility accommodations to the in the uh United States uh you know accessibility act.

And uh now the second question I probably should answer directly.

The accessibility uh the uh accessibility coordinator in the city is more like in a row to enforce the title two of the American Disability Act, which is to try to make sure to uh to make the city's program and the city's facility to make a reasonable accommodation for the people which have a need.

So the ADA um basically says that this type of situation with a private entity, um if there's going to be any kind of enforcement or um uh regulation for ADA purposes, it's between that entity, that private entity and neighbors or whoever might have a concern about that.

It's not for the city to adjudicate that.

Yes, so the ADA basically said if you there's a Title I so there's three titles over there.

So the for some titles they talk about private business.

If you open the if you are a restaurant owner, you open the pub the business to serve the general public.

So you are obligated to do something to make sure the disabled people will enjoy the similar service as able body will do.

But that's the that's a similar thing.

So that's applicable to the golf course here.

They are private entity, the dining area in that building, so the parking lot, they need to do something, they have obligation to provide accessibility accommodations or some improvement and to for disabled.

Right?

And the city, if we have a city's building, the ADA accessibility coordinator's job is going to make sure monitor the city's facility and come out of plan.

If there is some kind of a barriers for the disabled people to enjoy the city's facility or program, that position, the person in the as a coordinator need to come of a plan to say, okay, I identify certain barriers throughout the city's facility or program, then it should have a budget we call reasonable accommodation, accommodation.

So down the road in certain years, you know, I have to fix it.

This this barrier in this building and then move before we move to the next one.

That's their general in their job.

Okay.

So but because of the the type of entity we're we're dealing with a private golf club.

Is a private, so the ADA coordinator would not be we're not played that role for this facility.

Yeah.

Another phrase here is an ADA interactive process.

Do you know what that is?

Say one more time.

Sorry.

The ADA interactive process.

I was not familiar with it.

That is that is um a process.

So if somebody makes the accommodation request, uh in certain situations, the law requires the the public entity or whoever is responsible to make something accessible to engage in the interactive process with the person filing the request to determine what is a um what is a reasonable feasible accommodation.

So in this case, the city doesn't have that obligation in this case, because it's private entity that's correct.

The city's the city's role here is really just the permit issuer.

And so it's looking at it's making a uh a quasi-judicial decision, if you will, to make sure to look at the evidence in the records to look at the facts that's presented in application and see if it's you know um the permit can be issued, and which is what the building officials um role is is supposed to be doing.

Okay, question the a back to the ADA.

It's there's nothing about these solar cells restricting access to the property, the business or the golf course to anyone.

Is that correct?

I mean, we're looking at uh ADA deals with accessibility or egress into the the business, and it doesn't seem to be appearing to stop anybody from entering alone.

That's correct.

There's no interference to the accessibility for the disabled access.

Yeah, thank you.

And one just a couple more things.

Um there's a comment here that it's logically inconsistent to treat these large panels um on the ground.

Um commercial scale solar farm as ministerial building permit.

It's inherently requires this inherently requires a discretionary review.

Um I mean they claims that the state legislature is logically consistent.

I wouldn't make that claim.

But the fact is, consistent or not, logical or not, the state legislature has said this is a ministerial yes decision.

It is not a discretionary.

So whether it's inherently discretionary is not a relevant concern because the state says that's not what it is.

The solar act, solar rise acts didn't differentiate, you know, the limits, right of the qualified solar uh system, right, to go through this ministerial permitting process.

And so it doesn't matter, it is a big uh one single one one solar project for for single family, or worstly this one there is a commercial installation.

So there's no restrictions over there in the solar rights act.

And the last thing, um comment the Solar Rights Act Um was applied while ignoring um the city's own safety exceptions.

What we've heard, I assume the city does not have safety exceptions to the solar rights act.

No, we review the uh solars uh project here based on we adopted a building code, like it I listed here.

So there's you know, California Building Code, California Electrical Code to make sure they they don't have any fire hazard electrical header and a structure header.

We gotta make sure the installation is the install the property water will stay there.

Doesn't matter during the earthquake, we just talk about safety elements, right?

And during a natural header.

And uh so it is uh we review everything based on the building standard, the code we are enforcing right now.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, I think vice uh vice chair Kloppy.

Hey Molly.

Right?

That sounds good.

I think I'm gonna get to everybody by the um so uh thank you for your uh time and look forward to hearing more.

But um I wanted to uh just a c ask a couple of questions about the document received today from the solar technologies uh company uh Jeff Parr saying that studies were done uh to do time lapse uh looking at um glare uh as well as testing of the completed um panels was done looking at GLAR um and it seems as if some of the problem might have been timing of the complaint because at the time that the complainant complaint there were big metal support systems, not the covered blue glass panels.

Um so it seems now based on this uh time-lapse study and these pictures that there's not glare.

You can't demonstrate glare now right now.

Am I correct?

Am I interpreting this?

That's what I read the same thing as you do, but I cannot speak for them.

And uh is it the solar company?

So what we're gonna do is um I I am gonna open it up to the appellant and the applicant.

Okay.

Is that what you were gonna say, Claire?

Well, yeah, the the question you can reserve that for the application.

Okay, yeah, yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

So, Commissioner Moran, I think you had a question.

Thank you, Commissioner Anderson stole my thunder.

It was about the ministerial why we're here, right?

Yeah, yeah, the steps and the with the reason the state has deemed that these projects get approved.

But thank you.

Good.

Through the chair.

Can I can I clear something up?

Um the document that uh vice chair club referred to was submitted by the the applicant, the owner, a representative of the owner of Diablo of the Gulf Gulf Course.

Thank you.

And then I think, Commissioner Strongman, did you no more questions?

Um I had one quick thing, and it and it's to touch um on one more item about ministerial, which everyone has discussed, but there was a few comments about why why wasn't there a sequel?

Why wasn't there um a noticing period?

Can you just super quickly explain how when it's ministerial and it and it um and it satisfies all the objective standards?

How that plays uh I can I can question so uh generally ministerial projects, which is when the city does not exercise discretion, it just basically like building permits, grading permits, it checks off a list and then says if the building or the permit is approved.

So the minister actions are not subject to CEQA because CQ says that if you're not accepting discretion, there's no environmental analysis required.

Um so this would be one of those um permits.

It was a building permit, so it's it was ministerial, and therefore there's no CEQA required.

Um and I think the staff report does touch on you know, if we were to do CEQA, um there is there are exemptions for facilities like this where it's you know not relatively smaller, not exceeding, for example, 10,000 square feet.

Um and this project um based on what's presented would qualify for those exemptions.

Um and so that's that's kind of a two process or two step analysis that we that or the staff report did.

Um but as a first step, the ministerial projects they do not require CQA 2 to begin with beautiful, thank you.

Um okay, so thank you.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Um okay, so this is how it's going to go.

I'm going to open up the public hearing, and we're gonna have first the appellant, they're gonna have 15 minutes, and then the applicant will have 15 minutes, and then I'm gonna have public comment, and then I'm gonna have, and then there will be an opportunity for the appellant to come back up and the applicant.

You guys, if it if you forget that, that's okay, because I'm here.

Okie dokie.

Is it 15?

It's coming.

Is that okay?

What um would the appellant lots of A's?

Please come up.

My mic was on.

Thank you.

So I spoke to James.

Um that's okay.

We can pass it down.

Thank you very much.

Oh, I don't have a video.

Uh I'm just gonna repeat what I've I've said here.

So together you have 15 minutes.

Thanks.

That's right.

Um chairman and uh members of the planning commission.

Um, my name is Michael Royums, and I'm here to know it together with my wife Margaret, because the solar firm, not the ones on the roof that were mentioned to you earlier, it's just the solar firm was built within 60 feet of our house windows this month of March, without a planning commission public hearing.

This solar farm consists of 146 panels and it adjoins the property line of Heather Farms Homeowners Association.

We, my wife and I are members are homeowners in Heather Farms Homeowners Association, and our windows of our master bedroom, living room, and dining room, office room, all have glare from the 146th panel solar farm in our near view.

I've shown a photo there of what I mean by near view.

It's within 60 feet of our property, and the photo you are looking at there was taken by Jerry here, who is further away than myself and my wife are.

So we are even closer than that than that photo indicates.

For your information, the first sign of construction of the solar farm occurred January the 28th this year, when digging of the support structure holes commenced.

It was only apparent on February the 9th that holes were for a solar farm.

We had no idea that such was going in to that location.

My neighbor Jerry here, he went immediately to the planning department to inquire if the project had a permit and was told to submit any concerns in writing.

And he did such.

Oh, yeah, you don't like.

Thank you.

So I'm a little nervous.

Dear Planning Commission Commissioner and the department leadership.

My name is Jerry Chow.

And we have a picture over there.

Well, uh, I'm a little nervous.

I never done this before.

Um, I I'm I'm here because I need to appeal the permit number S25188.

Um this appeal was centered on a documented pattern of administrative behavior and miss uh interpreting the fundamental legal uh distinction between ministrial and uh discretionary action uh to the detriment of public and safety federal loss is a jurisdiction of uh P E59.

Um it's a jurisdiction of uh P A 59.

Um this site is situated on the planet uh PD 859, which is for um I guess is for open the open space is logical inconsistent.

You probably read this already that for 146 uh commercial solar panel as treated as ministrial um sexual massive uh land use in the PD zone should be inherently discretionary review to evaluate the impact on the adjacent property and uh and uh yeah and uh uh surroundings.

Uh during my meeting was on 25th, um when we asked um the city officials produce the list of the guidelines, and we were told that it was uh too um it was uh it was a lot, and it was a lot, they they couldn't produce the uh uh the list to us, even though I specifically asked the day before if I could review them.

So my reasoning is very, very simple.

If they couldn't explain to me, then it is not ministrial, it's discretionary.

So CAS uh C E Q A 1526A guideline says when you have sort of limbo between discretionary and ministrial, you err on discretionary, you do not err on ministrial.

The reason why is very, very simple.

This is a time lapse picture.

Uh yeah, Chip, would you please start that?

Now, what you're looking at this at this is it is called a um a terminology uh specular reflection band.

So basically what this is this is about 10 minutes of it, and this enter to our to to uh to our living quarters.

My mom has vertical.

This is I think I ski, we all ski, right?

We wear goggles when we face something like this.

There's a reason why, because this glare is below us.

Effectively, what the restaurant has done, the golf course owner has done, is create this sort of patch of snow globe year-round.

And my mom couldn't get away from this.

Frank just said we don't have a standard.

Well, we have a standard.

When we go skiing, we wear goggles.

This is a time lapse, and this happened every single day.

Every single day in the morning times.

So this is quantifiable.

My mom has vertical.

I have this is her pill.

I can pass it around.

This was on the 23rd of February 2026.

She has nausea.

Once again, we are going by common sense.

If Frank has no standards, I show you everyone that skis.

This is a standard.

If you look at this, you go, wait a second, that is pretty bright.

So the GLARE report.

The glare report that you that submit to you is fundamentally flawed.

Because the observer from the pathway are different elevation and angles.

Let me look at this.

This is from my house.

This is from my dining dining room.

This is from my living room, right?

They cannot observe the entire, this roughly about 2,000 square feet of reflection, strike directly into my coast and my homes.

Why a pathway observers see that pathway?

They're saying that's conclusive.

That's a conclusive.

What they send to you, they said that's a conclusive, that there's no glare.

If you look at it, the person that walked by that pathway, how tall do they have to be to observe the entire view of that solar panel?

It is glaring.

So it's inconclusive.

Now, the the significant public health impact, vertical, and Michael hasn't said a lot.

He has tube in the back.

He has balance issues.

What he has, I would not review.

He hasn't said, I will not say it.

But he has submitted to you.

Medical documentation, a very common one.

All of us eventually will might have it, because this is not benign.

This is just basically something eventually we catch.

As we get older, we're not talking about something that, oh, this is a disease that you do certain things that you will catch.

This is aging.

This is for people that we all age.

So this is a significant public health impact because my mom has vertical and Michael has what he has.

As far as ADA, it's very simple.

Contractor, they can go to city planning department and say, hey, I have XYZ, this is what I want to build.

Would you take a look at it and say, do you think this will fly?

They say, yeah.

If you have this, it's gonna fly.

Well, my mom has certain medical conditions.

We want someone with professional knowledge.

The last time I checked, Frank and Chip, they don't have a medical degree.

And yet they're here to tell you, oh yeah, we know what it is.

I want ADA.

Who knows what happened?

Who knows?

Yeah, okay.

Oh, Jerry's mom has vertigo.

Michael, whatever he has, this could cause issues.

I want expertise.

If the city allow contractors to have expertise like Chip and Frank, yet the same vein when I asked for ADA, they say, no, you cannot have it.

We are talking about a process, a permit process.

We're not talking about restaurant golf course.

We're talking about appealing this process.

This permit is issued by you.

That's called fiduciary responsibilities.

I just want that.

It is like the police arrest and say, Oh, you don't, you're not entitled to eat Miranda rights.

This is fundamental, guys.

This is called due process.

My mom has issues.

ADA coordinator will easily spot that.

Yeah, this could cause that.

Can Frank can Chip say that to my mom?

You will be fine.

I don't, I don't know.

I'm not sure.

So I I I said specifically to this California Solar Act.

Gave a specific exemption.

Frank said that.

He acknowledged in front of you.

I have no quantifiable numbers.

Yeah, everyone here, you can see this.

I mean, can we press play on this?

Thank you, Chip.

I appreciate it.

This is 10 minutes.

We're not talking about instant.

Wake about 10 minutes of this.

My mom has cowering fear now.

All the way in the back room.

And you you said this is not a specific adverse health condition.

I don't know what it is.

So I asked you to reclassify this project discretionary because that's what it is.

When you're caught in the limbo, see there's a specific guideline, CO 15268 guideline.

It says, if you're calling a limbo, go discretionary.

Don't go ministrial.

I want the ADA.

Who was afforded to us?

She said, she said to Chip, I'm keeping everyone in the loop.

She's not here anymore.

She cannot be here to tell you, yes, Jerry has a point.

Same thing as Chip, sending Frank, giving you giving you her point of view.

And I want those two things.

Can we do questions after the is that okay?

Okay.

The applicant now has 15 minutes together.

There's a known known soldier coming up.

Chip, can I give you that?

Uh good evening, honorable chair and honorable planning commissioner members.

Um my name is Peter Lizak.

I'm a walnut creek city resident, uh local planning consultant.

And I'm here tonight representing the uh Diablo Hills Management Group, who is the owner of the Diablo Hills golf course.

Um the solar technologies, Jeff Park could not be here tonight.

So I'm also here to share some of the information that he had provided.

Um and so let me back up just a moment and and tell you that uh when this came to the attention of the owners, the concerns of the neighbors, um, trying to understand how to do the right thing for the neighbors and understand was there really an impact here, or was this just a another kind of neighborhood NIMBY concern?

Difficult to know.

So they went to Solar Technologies and said, Explain to us how your solar system is designed and and explain to us why this is intended not to have any kind of glare impacts on neighbors.

And so the uh permit contractor solar technologies explained to us that the system was designed to be relatively flat, that the system is designed with non-reflective uh panels, and that as part of their their analysis, these systems don't have glare, or certainly not glare to the level that it's generally considered a health concern.

So they provided some information which which I then uh forwarded to uh the appellant to try to reach out and express our concern.

Uh I did not receive a response, and but I did review the appellants' concerns, and so we went back to uh solar technologies and asked them, you know, how do you do a a glare study?

How would this be done?

So we'd really be able to address this.

And what we were told was generally speaking, they do an analysis ahead of time because the GLARE study is really an after-the-fact performance check.

And so his review suggested that maybe what they were seeing was experiencing a glare off of the structure, which is just a you know, a white set of metal, as opposed to the panels that have this anti-reflective coating on them.

So to try to follow up and understand whether this was going to be a concern, uh, solar technologies went out the other day and shot this video, um, which was included as an uh as a link in the letter that Mr.

Pars submitted, though, because it was embedded in that link in the way that this came out, it appears that maybe you missed this.

So this is the other video, and again, this is not about intended to be about you know challenging studies.

This is just about to try to help you understand what we were doing to try to address this concern.

So this is a time-lapse video that was taken.

Go ahead.

Uh, from 7 a 8 a.m.

to 7 p.m.

last Tuesday.

And you know, I certainly wouldn't refute Mr.

Chow's observation that I can't have him take a video from their second story window.

This is from the top of the fence adjacent to their property.

Um, I really am not qualified to speak to what exactly is glare, whether it was in his video or this video, but this is the video that all day long that our expert is suggesting is why we don't think that there is a glare impact and why their system is designed not to have a glare impact.

Now I would say that some of this stuff is a little bit above and beyond what what we expected to do.

None of these studies were were done up front, but also we did this all in the best interest of trying to address uh the concern of the appellant.

Um couple of other comments came up about the PD zoning.

Um as you might know.

I have some expertise in land use planning, and I reviewed the PD zone.

The PD zone was for the entire golf course development area, including all the residential, the golf course uses, including the clubhouse, um, and certainly uh solar panels for the purposes of powering the golf the clubhouse or perhaps on the top of a home are are certainly not inconsistent with the PD, and there's nothing in the PD that would suggest otherwise or to suggest that it's in an inconsistent use.

Um I reviewed the title report for the property.

There are no recorded easements over this particular area.

Um there is an easement for the canal that you can see in front of you.

There is an easement for the trail for East Bay Parks, because that trail actually connects.

Um to the degree that those are on the golf course property, um, the the solar panels exceed the the required setbacks.

So just just speaking to the planning issues that were brought up in in the appellant.

I don't know that in this particular case that that's intended to address any of the the health or other concerns that the appellant has brought up.

Um we're just trying to address you know those things that we could address, let you know that uh the golf course certainly did not intend for there to be any of these issues.

The applicant who's the permit the uh the solar contractor um was following the law and the process with the city.

And uh I will let you know that there is fairly significant expense into the project, um, all of which is complete and ready for a final inspection as at as early as possible.

Uh and if that is not completed and uh permit issued by April 14th, there would be fairly significant financial impact, tax credits, and a number of other things related to the PG ⁇ E approvals.

Um and so I'm you know certainly not looking for that to be uh part of your consideration, but relative to the law and the statements about um you know financial consideration.

I just wanted to let you know that that that is part of this.

Uh and it's also part of you know, any would be part of any um civil matter that would be discussed between the parties and uh certainly appreciate the neighbors' uh comments.

The golf course has no interest in any kind of litigation.

The golf course wants to be good neighbors in the same way.

The golf course has always wanted to do the right thing and felt like this is the absolute perfect spot uh for a solar panels that would offset the use of of the clubhouse.

Um it's proximate to the clubhouse in a way that allows for it to be close enough for the connectivity that is required for solar panels, but set aside far enough so that it doesn't impede the other delivery and other access things that you can see are going on in the photo in front of you.

Um so all of this is very deliberate.

Um we certainly did not mean to cause any health concerns or impacts on any of the neighbors.

Um we hope that you would uh deny the appeal based on the state law and understand um the situation is that we we don't feel based on the information that we had that there was uh a specific lair impact.

And while I'm not a solar expert, um I'm available to answer any questions about that should you have any uh once you complete your public comment and uh uh that's all the information I have for you today.

Thank you very much, and of course, thank you for your service.

Thank you.

Um I think what I'd like to do is let's do public comment first, please, and then we can have when the when the appellant and the applicant have the chance to come back up, we can then subsequently ask questions.

Is that okay?

Beautiful.

Any public comments.

Chip, I thought there was some.

No.

Didn't we have any appellants?

Oh, okay.

There, oh, we do have some.

Okay.

If you wouldn't mind stating your name.

And oh, chip.

Uh two minutes.

Thank you.

Sure, thank you.

Hi, my name is Ryan Iberg.

I'm a resident here in Walnut Creek.

Um also uh adjacent to the solar industry, uh, work for a large-scale utility developer.

Um I do that out of uh well, one it's a job, but two, uh passionate about sustainability, and I would urge that uh the commission take that seriously and and deny this appeal because I find that uh especially you know in this earlier agenda item about uh the safety element of the general plan, just looking at climate resiliency and what uh offsetting traditional energy sources can do.

I think that uh signals to other commercial users the importance that uh the city places on looking towards alternative energy sources.

Um I think if it sets a standard where a building permit can be obtained, constructed near complete, money invested, tax credits lost, it really disins or disincentivizes companies to invest in this technology.

Thanks.

I don't have a card.

Okay.

Okay.

Hi, I'm David Peterson, resident of Walnut Creek.

Um fan of solar, I'm an advocate of solar.

Um I was just wondering if the lovely neighbors and the owners of the golf course had proposed and offered to plant some vegetation in trees to mitigate both the glare and the view issues that the appellant has complained about.

Um didn't seem as though they had.

When you look at the appellants photograph when they were looking out the view, the most spectacular thing was a tree that looked just like the symbol in the city of Walnut Creek, and seems like they could add a few more of those and solve all their problems easily.

So that is a deciduous tree, of course.

So maybe they want to put in some evergreens as well.

Seems like an easy solution.

Um in their own video, they showed a tree out of the way that cast a shadow and fell just short of the solar panels.

Seems like there's plenty of room to add a few more trees to cast shadows and block the views, and the shadows seem to stop at the street if they're far enough back.

So seems like an easy solution.

They just have to wait for the trees to grow, right?

Thanks.

Thank you for your comment.

I don't think I we have any more public comments.

So what I would like to do first is if the applicant, I know they were just standing up and they're probably closer to the microphone.

Maybe not.

Oh, there you what I wanted to uh before um.

Can we do questions now for the okay?

So before the rebuttals, what I'd like to do is are there any questions for the applicant?

Yes, Commissioner Anderson.

Oh, yeah, there you are.

Thank you.

Um the look at the two videos.

One kind of striking difference that you noted it, was that in the first video, the the uh panels appeared off white, very light colored.

Uh in your video, they appeared black.

Well, I'm wondering, I think you said that the first video was taken in February a few weeks ago.

Um when what were the panels complete at that time, or were we looking at uh a substructure of some kind?

Um the video that we just showed you was taken on Tuesday of this week.

Right.

So it is uh a current video reflects the as-built condition of the project.

Um and I'm going to guess that uh the appellants video is also a recent recently taken video.

Um so I'm I'm guessing that they're within the same period of time.

Okay.

And that you know the in both cases the panels we're talking about have this non-reflective material on it.

I and in this case, this happened all day.

So it would have encompassed you know the same period of time that the appellant.

Uh I think any difference that you might see in in the two, and and again, I don't know how to quantify those differences, but the any difference would be just due to the height, because clearly this is the top of this is the top of the the fence, so this is roughly six feet above the grade of their backyard, and he was taking his video out of what was supposed to be the upstairs window.

So that would mean it's you know, another floor, another eight or nine feet or something higher up.

Okay, that's that's the only thing I could think of.

Thank you.

Commissioner Clock Qualk.

Um, so thanks you guys.

Go.

Thank you for these explanations on the video.

It was very helpful to get a both the perspectives of the applicant and the appellant.

I did want to get a little bit more um insight into what sort of discussions the applicant and the appellant have had.

Um as far as I know, there aren't any.

Okay.

Um I while I'm representing the owner as as the uh land use consultant trying to understand and help them through the technical issues.

Um I'm not aware that the applicant actually reached out directly to them.

Um I did send this information and email to the appellant on behalf of the owner with the hope that the appellant might respond.

The only contact information I had was through the appeal process.

So as far as I know, there hasn't been a direct discussion other than our effort, if you will, to try to item by item sort of respond to that.

Um I will briefly respond to the comment about vegetation.

Um, because this was an item that was brought up in one of the appellants things.

We felt like the other things that the appellant had asked for, including the the um the glare the um uh anti-glare reflection uh coding on the panels, those other things had already addressed the concerns.

Um we generally would see uh a a landscaping response to this as being more in the significant cost area.

Um this this isn't about just planting a couple of trees.

Uh even if you know, I mean the trees would take quite a period of time to grow to the height that we're just talked about that would be helpful, but it's an irrigation system, it's maintenance, there's a whole number of things.

This is an area of the golf course.

If if you'd see the kind of the area that we're looking at, this area is on the other side of the canal.

There's not infrastructure here specifically to do that, and we didn't want to place anything on the other side adjacent to the panels that might block the panels.

Again, I'm not gonna suggest that there isn't, you know, a possible solution there, but that's a a more significant cost that we didn't think in and of itself.

We thought in fact it would impact the panels as opposed to helping the solution.

Uh again, I I know the owners they're not opposed to trying to work something out.

Um, but we really didn't understand there to be a problem, and this information that we had gotten suggested that there wasn't.

Um and so that's why we're here to share that information with you.

All right, thank you.

Commissioner Moran.

Thanks, Peter.

Um for a rebuttal?

No.

We I'll I'll let my chair uh kind of drive the bus here, but yeah, thank you for your your time.

Uh the panels are built, right?

Yes.

What's the next step?

Final inspection.

Yes.

City.

Are you involved with that at all?

Uh personally am not.

Uh-huh.

Um in this case, the contractor would call for the inspection.

Would you know certainly like to have an inspection tomorrow, like or Monday?

Um there are significant tax credits.

This is a net metering two project.

So as you can imagine, if the project doesn't meet that deadline, that's a fairly significant um there's a whole whole list of things every day that this project is not connected.

Means I mean that that building has a fairly significant electrical use.

And so every day that the that this is being held up is a is a cost.

Um and so um the interest of the owners is to have the the contractor be able to schedule an inspection as soon as possible.

I know uh building official con is doing what he thinks to be appropriate to have everything on hold so we can have this discussion, but it's clearly our interest to do this as quickly as possible.

And and the the inspection is gonna look at the structure, uh the angle, I assume is are they gonna look at the the glare, the anti-glare type are they gonna get that deeper in the weeds so to speak, or you know I'd probably let Frank handle that question, but I I would tell you that the final inspection would review all of the things that are on the plans to make sure that the con the construction is complete in accordance with the plans.

I believe that there have been incremental inspections, structural inspection probably of the of the structure before the panels went on, things of that nature.

Um but yes, all of the things that you just mentioned, I would I would believe to the degree that they're on the plans and part of the review of the building department would be checked.

How last question is how long without without the the this process here right now, would it have already been hooked up?

Yes.

Okay.

Thanks.

Any other vice chair clock?

Hi, thank you for your time.

Just a quick question.

I uh assume this is not the only solar project that has ever been built of this size, and I and in the industry, the solar industry, it's too bad our guy who was the expert left.

I uh assume this is not the only solar project that has ever been built of this size and I and in the industry the solar industry it's too bad our guy who was the expert left I'm not aware of glare generally usually being a problem with solar installations.

Do we have any clue about sort of industry standards and benchmarking I I would assume that they they look at this across all uh the industry all the solar industry.

And you you know unfortunately I can't speak to that directly I did ask a similar question when I was trying to information gather and the I the what I understood is it's not that the these panels are not going to have zero glare.

They have this antireflective coating which is supposed to reduce that glare to the point where it's minimal these are you know mitigated impacts perhaps not no impact and certainly you know we have a very extreme case of of what we're hearing in terms of what what may be a a uh a medical conditions and and again I don't want to speak to that but I I I from what I understand this is standard practice and that these panels that this doesn't typically come up.

Okay.

And but I will mention that I believe and I don't know where it is and what kind of review it has but I believe the Heather Farm Park is intending a fairly good size solar panel project as part of its redevelopment of of the park and you know I'm guessing that that array would be bigger and I think it's similarly like on the other side of the street like this is not the this is a this is something that I think we were going to see I know we're gonna see more of in Walnut Creek and uh you know I I think is an appropriate use for Heather Farm Park and for this location at least from a planning perspective.

Thank you.

I have a question does anybody the plans showed there being solar panels the ground array and then on top of the existing clubhouse it seems from from from what I noticed the house the the clubhouse is at a lower elevation than the existing homes is that correct yes I would I I would say that's correct that that that the hill that these homes wrap as you can see in this photo around the quarter at on a on a grade that's above that grade below where the trail is that there would be owners around the corner who would be looking down at panels on top of that roof that roof on the clubhouse yeah the clubhouse of the roof of that clubhouse is covered just like in the plan that building official Kong showed to us earlier and I would think that people are looking down at them none of those people raised a concern that I'm aware of so again I I I think that this is this is a very specific concern by these homeowners as opposed to the larger issue with the installation so the other question that I had was and I and I and this is in my review of the memo from the solar company it also um talks about panel tents site orientation and there are there are panels it it's to me it's interesting because they're flat so was there an intention to not have them be tilted in the same manner that the clubhouse panels which then would be facing the neighbors I I I think again I'm not the designer but I ask a few of these questions so I think the answer is you work from the surface that you have available to you.

When you're building on the surface of the clubhouse you're gonna cover the roof that's existing and you're gonna place them in certain places and panels in that space are going to have times of day that they have good sun and times of day that they don't and so when you're laying out an array on a surface like this that you get to create yourself you're generally laying them out flat possibly for reasons of reducing glare but also because what you're trying to do is lay them out in a in an orientation that allows for the most sun exposure generally to all of those panels across the widest period of time.

So there is a little bit of of angle to these panels, which I think you may have seen better in the appellants video than than even in in this particular one.

Um but it's it's it's not great.

It's not like these things are tilts really tilted back into the you know, adjacent to the into the adjacent homes in the way maybe one would say some of the ones are on the top of the clubhouse.

Hopefully that addresses your question.

Yeah, that I I noticed the difference in in the first thing that popped to me was a difference in elevation, but um I want to make sure that the appellant has time to come up because they have five minutes.

So would you like to come up?

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And I would like to use their video to rebound them.

The reason why it's very careful.

The reflective angle is about tangent to the 10 degrees.

The reason why you don't can we play their video, please?

The reason why you don't see any glares, this this panel is specifically not reflect light at this angle.

So what they're saying is of course this is inconclusive.

This is exactly what I said before.

An ADA coordinator would have a done in home glare study.

These panels that he's not an expert.

He's he admitted I don't know anything about this.

So I can tell you these panels, they're designed not to reflect light at this specific angle.

You can do it all day.

You will not catch a glare.

Can you please go back to my video, please?

I'm so sorry.

I appreciate it.

Can you extend time by times in the okay?

Yeah, that's the first one.

This is so while Chip is working on that.

I will say this.

If you look at my video, which is shot two days ago, probably the same day, every single morning from seven, roughly to ten o'clock, this glare will come.

It will show almost every single day.

And that's the reason why I said earlier.

If I go to a doctor's office and ask for Louis's vice, what would I get?

If I go to Lloyd's office getting a doctor's, what would I get?

Contract to go to Chip, go to Frank for construction.

I want ADA for medical device for disability information.

If you look at this, this is a time lapse, probably taking on the same day.

If you look at this angle, it's called a reflector's 2x, tangent of 10 degrees, and this will predict very, very accurately when the sun, a certain rotation, you will see this glare.

So when they have an expert, don't even know geometry.

Yeah, he there he is here to tell you everything is okay.

And I'm showing you video, probably taking on the same day.

You do see glare.

This is like us skiing, looking down, you will see white glares.

This white glare is very visible.

There's no mistaking about that.

For my mom, who love if you look behind it, it's head of farms.

I will tell you one more thing.

Why green are so pleasing to us?

Because the plant filtered out all the other color wavelength, they only show green.

This solar panel is reflective.

It is like you having a huge uh some kind of a TV over there.

I don't even care what kind of reflective, what whatever you're supposed to have.

A solar panel can only absorb 38% or less.

The other 60% are reflected.

It is a scientific fact.

That's why you're seeing what it is.

That's why I I request 88.

And I I would say this.

If you want to know specific information, is uh S EQA 15268, that's a guideline.

If you want to know about city not failing to follow CD code WCMC 10-2102, is when when I file for this day, it should have been done right away.

The only reason his this expert say, oh, we have so many financial at risk because he wanna stop on the day.

If you stop on the day, this will be minimized.

We just need to go back to the day that hey, Frank wants me to object to this permit back in August of 2005.

I will say this to Frank.

If I have a time machine, I don't want to go back to last year.

I go back to last week, I will get a lot of ticket.

I cannot object to something that's August 2025.

So when this is known, the city code says this very simply.

Jerry, if you put a pro uh appeal to it, we will accept.

And then we will we will start this.

That wasn't done.

In my phone, I have day day pictures.

They stay, was not executed.

Thank you, Matt.

You know what?

We actually have some questions for you.

Sure, of course.

So, but to kind of keep order and to keep since everyone was to make it fair.

Does anybody have any questions for Mr.

Shao?

Because I have one question.

Yes, uh, Commissioner Count.

I'm just curious um whether you ever invited the uh golf course owner to come up to see what you're seeing and have it spoken to them at all.

So to me, I make my point very clear.

This is not a civil matter.

This is about a permit.

Was a permit ever should have been issued.

This is a public interactive process.

We're not talking a private issue.

We're talking about a public issue.

Uh a permit was issued by the city was the issue, was the right set of situation.

So we're talking about permit, we're not talking about I am for solar, by the way.

When Frank called me on the phone and said, Frank, thank goodness you call me.

That's a fact.

You can ask Frank.

I want to communicate.

I'm for solar, I'm not against solar.

I will tell you one more thing.

This nine whole golf court, plenty of space, not even, I want to say 100 feet, 50 feet from that.

This additional space, a proper planning by Frank, fun chip would identify.

So I'm sorry, the the answer the answer to the question then is no, you have not invited them to come and see so that they could understand the impact on you.

Uh my uh my my Michael over there.

To answer your question, we have not.

Okay, thank you.

That was thank you.

Um, any other comments from my uh Commissioner Man.

Do you know exactly what day that video is from?

Yes, this was uh two days ago.

Two days ago, two days, 24 24th.

Uh, you just said you you weren't sure, but you know, I'm very sure.

I had in my phone, I I I took so many pictures, that's the reason why when I was sure I had about six days of time lapse.

Okay.

So that uh this was taken too, that's the reason why I tried to identify which day it was.

What and is it where is that angle?

Is that from a part of the dining room?

This if you look at this, this is roughly, I mean Frank noted, this is roughly about you know, about 10 degrees, 15 degrees.

So your dining room is on the second room.

It's on a level.

Okay.

And to is to so my living room, my dining room is on the second floor.

My mom has cow in fear now.

She has vertical.

Okay, that's I got I got you.

Okay, okay, thank you.

Oh, yes.

Um if I could get some clarification.

I had I was reading through the um appeal, and I had the impression that the is the glare from light that's filtering into the dining room, so like is it illuminating the ceiling, for example?

That's right, or is the glare from the perspective that we're looking at now, where if we were in the dining room and looking out towards um the panels that we would see the glare on the panels?

Okay, so a picture is worth a thousand points.

You're looking at it.

So you have to understand their difference between energy and glare.

You might be saying something slightly different.

So a solar panel is max at the current technology, roughly 38%.

The other 60-some percent are reflected.

Each solar panel, the design certain way that the end goes, sort of shifted away.

So when I show you this picture, yes, this is coming to my dining room.

Yes, this is coming to my to my uh living room.

Well, Michael is coming to every single room on his second floor.

I'm talking about every single one.

Master bedroom, living room, dining room, uh uh office.

Office.

Okay, so if it has medical conditions, okay.

If it's medical condition, thank you.

Thank you, if I may.

Um it's mostly glare from looking directly at the panels, not from indirect light shining into the room.

Like if I were looking at a wall or somewhere else in the house.

Okay.

So if you were to close the curtains on the house, then we wouldn't have this issue.

Okay.

So uh if you want me qualify or do you want me to answer it?

You can answer the question.

I'm just going to answer.

So to answer your questions, yes, the clear is coming through.

Okay.

Um has closing the curtains.

Help, yes.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

I I have one question, and then I think are we all done with the appellant?

Um that um that photo right there is not taken from your roof.

No, this is from my dining room, from my living room.

If you press play, this is a time lapse.

No, no, I I understand.

I'm just I'm looking at the architecture from the street, and I don't see any portion of roof with a roof vent.

Oh, yeah, I'm so sorry.

So our home is slightly uh engineered differently.

We intersected the first floor, and our first floor is actually you want to say first floor basement.

So our first floor is our second floor because sitting on the hill.

Okay.

Yeah.

That was the only question I had.

Um I'd like to give a chance for the applicant.

Is everybody no more questions?

Thank you so much for coming up here.

Of course.

Michael has questions.

Okay.

Last does the applicant, you have five minutes if you wish to come up to robot.

Uh I'll just like to clarify something uh Peter might have said left you thinking that uh he mentioned the land between our houses and the uh solar farm.

That land belongs to the homeowners association.

What you see there, uh the the canal land, the public walkway land, and the slope down to that solver farm is the homeowners association property.

And the idea that some chap had, which was brilliant, uh of building of uh planting some trees along there to hide it.

Uh he there's no land for that so the golf course man to put it on.

I think you'll find he's put it right up to our property, the association property, and the association uh will not be uh interested in planting trees.

They uh already trying to cut back their costs, tree costs and landscaping costs and water costs.

So uh, but all I would ask is that uh when you come to inspect the uh silver panel array this coming week or whenever you might consider whether he has built it within the survey lines property lines that he's allowed to build it in.

Uh last time uh he can't he wanted to do something there, the uh golf course operator, he wanted to build uh indoor golf range on that property, and uh when it was put in front of you planning people uh he had he was putting it on our property.

He thought that that slight plan was his property, but it's not.

Well, your comment is duly noted, and and since the building official is here, I think they will definitely make sure that when the inspection comes, that things are only built on the appropriate property.

Thank you so much for coming up here.

It's been surveyed.

Absolutely.

I know I have occasion.

Pardon me?

That that's not what we're here to discuss right now about the surveying that happened, but I can assure you that when a mist ministerial permit is issued that there are app there's an application that's deemed complete that has all this information so that people aren't building on someone else's property.

Yeah.

Thank you so much.

Does it hear that?

Thanks.

Does the applicant you don't have to?

Okay, thank you.

Then I'm going to uh close public comment and bring it to my fellow commissioners for discussion.

Yes, Commissioner Anderson.

I have a lot to say about um some of the solar information that's been brought out and what I believe in what I don't believe, and um whether there is a glare or not.

Um not going to say those things.

Okay.

Um because what we really have here is a question of whether a ministerial uh process was properly conducted.

Um clearly it was um and you know, whether we agree with whether the state legislature and setting, you know, and demanding this process, you know, was logically consistent.

Um whether you know it it uh cries out for discretionary um consideration.

Uh that's uh not what the process is because the state has determined that it is not.

It is a ministerial process.

I believe that has been done correctly.

Um and the appeal should be denied.

Are there any further discussion items from the Commission?

Commissioner Moran?

I was thinking.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I need to put glasses on.

Anybody else?

Would anybody like to oh yes, uh, Commissioner Clock.

If if I can make the motion.

Oh, yes.

All right, so I move that the planning commission and I appeal to the building permit number S twenty five one eight eight, so their energy system uh Yeah Hills.

Second.

And uh that's to adopt the resolution making that decision.

Yes.

Thank you.

Second again.

Roll Cobra?

Yes, please.

Okay.

Uh Commissioner Quok.

Yes.

Commissioner Strongman.

Yes.

Commissioner Anderson.

Yes.

Commissioner Moran?

Yes.

Commissioner Cound.

Yes.

Vice Chair Klopp.

Yes.

Chair Needing.

Yes.

Motion carries.

We're going to take a quick five-minute break here.

Um, so we will be back at eight o'clock.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, we are back.

Thank you so much for um the quick break.

So now we're on our third item 3C, and that is the Oceana Design Review Application Y 25099, located at 1555 Bonanza Street, the former yacht club in planning has presentation.

Thank you.

Good evening, Planning Commissioners.

My name is Jessica Gonzalez, Senior Planner, and I will be presenting the Oceana project.

So getting started with the project location.

The project site is an existing two-story building at the corner of Locust and Bonanza Street at 1555 Bonanza.

Oceana is a fish bar restaurant that proposes to use the existing building formerly occupied by Yacht Club.

The proposal is for the ground floor to be used with restaurant and for the second floor to be used with offices.

And overall, the project scope includes a first and second floor addition to the existing building, remodeling the exist the building facade, constructing a new trash enclosure, and a new patio as well.

So just for some context, I've included some pictures of the existing building on the screen.

The top photo is the side along Bonanza Street, and the photo at the bottom shows the building side along Locust Street.

Just a quick overview of the entitlement process for the project.

And the project has been presented before the DRC as a study session.

And tonight the project is before the planning commission for final design review decision.

So as I mentioned on March 4th, 2026, the DRC did review the project, and overall they generally felt that they were supportive of the project and the ability to make the design guidelines and standards.

But there were some recommendations, including adding the additional details for the metal scrim on the building, added adding some details showing the how the rooftop equipment will be screened, and adding details to show how the windows along Locust Street will be screened and missing details for ground planters along Bonanza Street.

And so since then the applicant has revised their plans in response to the recommendations, and those revised plans are before you tonight.

Jumping into the site changes, the site plan on the left side of the screen shows the existing conditions.

And the site plan on the right side of the screen shows the proposal for the project.

As I mentioned, the project includes a new trash enclosure, which is circled in red on the screen.

Also proposing a new two-story addition, which is highlighted as well.

Just for some understanding, this is a rendering of the proposed outdoor patio area.

And then, as I mentioned, the trash enclosure here, the elevations showing the proposal and design.

The trash enclosure is being designed to match the proposed building colors and materials.

Moving into the landscape plan plan for the project, the green areas on the plan show the proposed landscape for the project.

The project includes painting the building a light sea foam green with some brown trim elements.

Additional elevations, additional design proposal includes blue mosaic glass tiles along the exterior, blue awnings, and floor and a floor to ceiling gold decorative metal scrim system at the corner to highlight and feature.

As you can see, the project includes a color scheme which features blue, gold, and brown elements.

And so with that, staff does recommend that the planning commission move to adopt the attached draft resolution approving the design review application Y 25099 for Oceana.

I'm available for any questions, and the applicant team is also available to make a presentation as well.

Thank you so much.

That was a great presentation.

Are there any questions for staff?

Commissioner Strong.

Yes, uh, thank you for great presentation.

It looks like a great project right now, but you have the courtyard with permit uh perma pavers.

Um yeah, I can't pronounce these things these days.

Um what is gonna happen there?

My understanding is that that back area, and I'll go let me just pull it back to the site plan, is uh just going to be used by staff for loading.

Um there is a believe a corridor area there in front of that area.

And so my understanding is there will be no outdoor dining or anything like that.

Oh, okay.

That's my pretty much my question is so uh it's just gonna be blank then.

Nothing's gonna happen there.

But thank you.

Yes.

Uh and a quick question the parking that was there.

How much how much are we losing?

And what are the thoughts about that?

So the parking that was there, I from what I remember, I believe it was between maybe six to seven stalls, depending on how you kind of look at it, and if you you know view one of those stalls as an acceptable space or not, and you feel comfortable maybe getting in and out of there.

Um, but there is no replacement parking.

Um and what was your other question?

So we'll lose that.

And is there a plan or a concern about losing the parking or so because the project is within half a mile of BART, there is no required parking per state law?

Um, so there is no requirement to replace that.

Any other uh yes.

Um I'm I just curiosity.

On the north side there, the very narrow planter is described as a biofiltration planter.

Um given its narrow profile, um, it's not gonna collect a lot of rain.

Um is there some method of delivering runoff water to that planter?

It's also 30 inches high, so not sure how water gets to it.

I think I will let the applicant speak to are you asking if they're planning on uh adding additional irrigation?

I'm just I'm just wondering if that is in fact um you know a a destination for runoff water from somewhere.

But I'll wait for the applicant.

That's fine.

Thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

One one quick question that I noticed.

Um they did a pretty good job trying to find the objective objective design standards, but the height, it was simply because they're constrained by the existing height of the building, right?

As they're building the second floor edition.

It was like 12 versus 18.

Correct.

The the height for commercial uses um because of the existing because of the that's what's constraining being able to satisfy that objective standard.

Correct.

Okay.

Any other before?

Beautiful.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

The is the applicant here.

No.

Yes.

Yes.

Oh, sorry.

Would you like to come up and make a presentation?

I think you have this is a lot harder than being in the restaurants.

It's easy to talk.

Now I feel intimidated.

Um Chip, do you want to the okay perfect?

Uh thank you very much for having me here.

My name is Mike Gabin.

Along with David Narola, we are the three siblings involved in this project.

And I thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of you.

Uh before our team comes up to introduce the project, I thought I would share with you uh our family history and background uh to give context to this project and its importance.

Um Walnut Creek here back in the early 80s.

This is where our family took its first steps into the restaurant world.

Driven simply by the love for good food, community, and hospitality.

A city where we build our lives, raised our kids, and invested in our future.

Our father of first generation hospitality professional, deeply valued relationships in this city.

My simply and I represent the second generation of this legacy.

Wallach Creek has been home to our family story for four decades.

Um give you a little history about the restaurants that we've been involved in.

Um it began in the early 80s at uh 1516 Bonanza.

Oh, thank you.

It began uh in the early 80s at 1516 Bonanza Street.

I don't have a picture of that here, but that is the uh restaurant my parents started called La Ultima, was a New Mexico restaurant.

Uh it was the uh old firehouse and where Hivana resides today.

That was back in the 80s.

Um at the same time, uh my father also started at 1401 Mad Diablo, which is the Chico building.

Back then he had a French restaurant called La Fontaine, and then after that he had the Walnut Creek Hoffra was there, which was there for about 20 years.

Um these were not restaurants to them, these were these were places where people came together, shared meals, and created lasting memories.

As kids, uh the three of us grew up in that world bussing tables, washing dishes, doing whatever needed to be done.

Um the restaurants were kind of our playground and our classroom.

We learned a lot.

Um we took that vision of our father in the 1990s, uh, we moved it forward and we opened up uh at 1548 Bananza Hubcaps Diner, and we were there for about 27 years, um, in which later we transformed to Broderick what it is today.

Um years later, after taking um Hubcaps, we uh ended up acquiring Mel's Diner on Main Street, and we were there for 25 years until we transformed it to one of our concept, which is Hot Boys right now.

Um lastly, in um 2022, we introduced LEDA, uh Latin Caribbean concept chef driven, and uh we brought that to fruition.

It was really tough.

We did that during the pandemic, and that was not uh easy um project.

Well, each of these concepts have their own identity, they all share the same foundation we built.

Commitment to hospitality, quality, and connection, people's connection.

Although we have eateries throughout Northern California, Nevada, and Indianapolis, Walnut Creek has always been home to our most cherished brands.

Throughout these decades, we've been more than business owners and property owners.

We are neighbors, residents who deeply care about the fabric of this community, and I truly mean that.

Um of all of our restaurants that we have, the ones that we cherish the most are the ones in the city, and this is why we continue to want to do more here.

Um this is home.

Um 1555 became available, we knew it was our calling.

A corner that has been our home for 30 years, an iconic location, one that deserves preservation, but boy, it needs a lot of work.

It's tired.

Um the port the proposal we're introducing to you guys tonight is rooted with respect to the Walnut Creek character.

It's not a standalone development for us, it's a continuation of our family long-standing commitment to the downtown core.

We approach this design and elements.

We approach this design's elements and details with intention.

We view 1555 as a piece of downtown history that will support local activity, honor old memories, create new ones, and contribute to a thriving community.

We believe this will be a defining project for us.

A chance to honor our roots, invest in our community, and continue the legacy of our family began all these years back.

Taking this project on feels like coming full circle.

We're part we're proud to have been, we're proud to have contributed and been part of this evolution of the restaurant landscape in Walnut Creek, a vibrant community that has become today.

We value your feedback.

We appreciate you guys taking a look at this project, and we look forward to doing a high standard project that deserved that this community deserves.

Thank you very much.

I'll take any questions.

Thank you.

Does anybody have any questions for the applicant?

Thank you.

Speechless, thank you.

Are there any public com I don't see any, but are there oh yes.

Sorry.

No public comment.

Okay.

You got excited, you were moving.

Well, I can answer some of the questions.

So these are the this is our team architect right here.

Uh hi, I'm uh good evening, Brandon Marshall, Fog Studio.

Um Mike didn't show you some of these images, but um, these are some of their restaurants downtown.

Um it's very clear they they're very passionate, and I think it's a special special bond they have with with the city.

That's pretty unique.

I I was gonna go really quickly over the changes.

I don't know if that's necessary.

Um and these are just responsive from VRC.

Yes.

Um and in some cases will overlap with a couple questions that were asked.

Uh let's see if I can make this smaller.

There we go.

Uh one of the questions was it more technical.

How so the building is gonna be clad in part with a a laser cut metal scrim that's gonna a kind of add some softness and scale to both the locust and bonanza sides, but also protect the there's a lot of glazing there, protect it from the sun and allow potential vine creepers to also soften.

Um the specific question was how was it gonna get attached because it kind of bridges over the solid wall and the curtain wall, the glaze wall.

So really these details were um providing a response to that.

Um another question had to do with the visibility of the rooftop equipment and ducting, and I don't know if you can see the the cursor.

The main equipment is gonna be at the kind of the easternmost portion of the addition, and then there's um equipment that serves the existing building that's already shrouded with a roof shroud.

The way that we designed the addition, the roof slopes up to the high point where the equipment will be, and the roof plan we provided shows there's not going to be ducting, which was the main concern of the the DRC.

Uh the the one of the other concerns was along um the the restroom wall uh walkway um and the ability to see into those existing windows and basically see people coming in and out of restrooms.

What we're proposing is uh a mirrored film that kind of has a gold tint that works within the the palette of the of the building materials.

Um and then finally the I think there were just some nuts and bolts questions about how the the the fig was gonna grow.

It's gonna be a little bit of a labor of love to train it and mold it, but uh I think they're up to it.

I given their experience with other other restaurants in the in a similar approach.

Um so anyway, this plan was showing those areas of concern.

I just wanted to point out the couple questions on the planters.

So these planters here are in fact filtration planters, and they're gonna have a hardline roof leader that dumps water into them.

So they're they're actually doing work for us, and that's how we're getting water there.

Um the permeable pavers that were brought up are actually reducing our uh impermeability.

It's it's bringing our number down.

And so um that that also is potentially gonna allow the staff who um are gonna be on the the second floor, uh which is mostly offices for their operation, some outdoor space in the back.

Um there was a question about parking.

One of the challenges when we came in was getting the the space is so constrained in the back that it doesn't fit city standards for parking.

So the fact that it was striped doesn't necessarily mean it was parkable, um at least legally.

So we struggle with that, and um the approach is really gonna be that this is all really for service access to the kitchen and then and employee pedestrian access and not for public parking.

And so yeah, I think that covered the the high-level changes or responses that have any other uh questions I can I'm happy to answer.

Are there any questions for the applicant?

I like to hear that you're doing C3.

Yep.

Uh we don't have choice.

It wasn't there before.

It wasn't there before.

I mean, I we we haven't really dug in here, but like Mike said, they're touching every corner of this building.

Yeah.

We're rebuilding the entire rear lot area because of the grading to try and get all the water to drain properly, because right now in that that back this is gonna be filtration as well.

Yeah.

Right now, all the water collects there and they pump it out under the building or the you know, that outdoor dining area to um the street.

Problematic.

So um I mean this is gonna be I mean 50 to 75 year building when they're done with it.

It's gonna be a brand new building, which is kind of cool.

Um thank you.

Oh, yes, just one question, and uh maybe this is more for you, Mike.

Um, but the in terms of the design you talked about, um, sort of paying homage to the to the history.

Area to um the street problematic so um I mean this is gonna be I mean 50 to 75 year building when they're done with it it's gonna be a brand new building which is kind of cool um yeah thank you oh yes just one question and uh maybe this is more for you Mike um but the in terms of the design you talked about um sort of paying homage to the to the history um and I was just wondering if you wanted to talk at all about the the way that you did the the colors and the the um the texture and whether that's paying homage to the yacht club in some way yes there was a lot of so Kevin and my brother David Swan I said you want um you want sure just come to the microphone so that anyone watching online or watching later can hear you thank you when we looked at this building initially um it's uh it's very tired and we thought about scraping it and starting over and uh you know Kevin and I have been friends for 30 years and we we we've had discussions about this and um part of the reason that we didn't do that is because we wanted to pay homage to the building and that's why we didn't touch the facade we kept it the same way it as it is and we added on to it because we felt that uh the aut club was a very iconic brand and it really had it touched a lot of people in the city and wanted to pay homage to that and uh this is why we kept it in its g it's the existing condition of course we have to change the glass and we're a lot of it is not really um compliant uh to standards so we're doing a lot of that but that was the reason that we kept the whole facade is paying homage and there might be some stuff within our menu as well that might be uh to weaken a little bit of that as well so it'll be it'll be in it'll be exciting thank you thank you anybody else well thank you so much I'm gonna close public comment any um take it back to the um commission for any discussions a motion I'll I'll start out I won't make a motion but I'll say it's a it looks like a great project any other comments oh commissioner moran um yeah I I second that uh I just wanted to to say that I think that uh I speak for my fellow commissioners that we appreciate the time and the care and the effort that seems to have gone in uh because the yacht club was an iconic uh piece of downtown Walnut Creek for many years I myself I had my wedding reception dinner there in the patio uh so it's fun it's fun yeah right oh so that was you okay so uh but I just wanted to say thank you to the family because I I know that you guys are maybe an underappreciated anchor of what makes the downtown area special and vibrant and please keep up the good work and I can't wait to see the end result.

Thank you.

Commissioner Count I think you want to say something um yeah I just wanted to say this is this is such a great example of when you have people who really care who live here who are part of the community and build something it's it's beautiful it's just the design is gorgeous um and I think it will be uh uh an iconic part of walnut creek for years to come um so I'd like to go ahead and make the motion unless there are other I thinkerson wanted to say something I still miss hubcaps I missed it what do you say he missed Hobbed cap and then super super quick um I'm it I'm I can't wait to see this building up because it's interesting because you're right in front of Broderick and Lita I'm curious to see how those architectural elements are gonna pull that in um to what that is because it it looks very different but the the towel is beautiful so okay I apologize one more comment uh nostalgia is I used to go with the Eric Cafe Barbara before yacht club oh didn't stay around I know so we're expecting some very good memories there yes commission on that note I move to adopt the resolution approving design review application number Y25-099 for Oceana authoring the building modifications to the building at 1555 Bonanza Street subject to the conditions contained therein second roll call vote yes Commissioner County Commissioner Anderson yes Commissioner Moran yes commissioner strongman yes commissioner quok yes vice chair clopp yes and chair kneading yes motion carries seven zero and I'd like that tile in my bathroom yes yes um well thank you very much so now on to any commission considerations or staff reports or announcements Chip you got something good for us um I think I mentioned that I think I mentioned at our last meeting that the planning commission agendas are are not packed but they have items on them through through the first meeting in May and I

So now on to any commission considerations or staff reports or announcements.

Chip, you got something good for us.

Um I think I mentioned I I think I mentioned at our last meeting that the Planning Commission agendas are not packed, but they have items on them through and through the first meeting in May.

And I suspect the second meeting in May will be the same.

Okay.

So it's busy.

So we're gonna make ourselves worthy.

Oh, yes.

Uh, just um just wanted to share with the team.

Um, thank you for handling last meeting without me.

Um, because I was away at the Planning Commissioner's Academy, um, which was fantastic.

Um, I highly recommend checking out any of the resources uh if you haven't already.

I was able to complete my required ethics training while I was there for AB One Two Three Four.

But also um having access to the uh and all of this is available to all of you online.

Those of you who've been around it already know that.

But um the Institute for Local Government Planning Commissioner handbook, very handy resource.

Uh there's also workshops on um planning resiliency after wild wildfires.

Uh California housing law updates.

Um of the things they talked about is the relationship between the planning commission, the city council, and the city staff.

And I have to say, in hearing from other cities around the state and how some of them are uh engaged in many challenges in that area.

Um I'm very, very appreciative of our city staff and our city council for the kind of strong relationships and uh uh very um effective communication that we have and the kind of support that we're given as commissioners.

So I wanted to thank you for that.

And uh yeah, that's it.

Thank you.

Anything with signs or transportation?

No?

Okay, then we will adjourn at eight twenty-seven.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.