Pinole City Council
January 12, 2026

PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION

MEETING AGENDA
January 12, 2026
7:00 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below How to Submit Public Comments:

In Person:

Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.

Via Zoom:

Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.

From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86505375301
Webinar ID: 865 0537 5301
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 5 minutes to speak • Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.

When the Chair opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.

Written Comments:

Please submit public comments to Planning Staff before the meeting via email to [email protected]. Please include your full name, city of residence and agenda item you are commenting on.

Planning Commission
Agenda - January 12, 2026

OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following week. The Community TV Channel 26 schedule is published on the city’s website at www.pinole.gov.

VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.pinole.gov and remain archived on the site for five (5) years.

If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact Planning Manager David Hanham at (510) 724-8912 or [email protected].

Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.

Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.pinole.gov. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected].

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION:

Persons wishing to speak on an item listed on the Agenda may do so when the Chair asks for comments in favor of or in opposition to the item under consideration. After all of those persons wishing to speak have done so, the hearing will be closed and the matter will be discussed amongst the Commission prior to rendering a decision.

Any person may appeal an action of the Planning Commission or of the Planning Manager by filing an appeal with the City Clerk, in writing, within ten (10) days of such action. Following a Public Hearing, the City Council may act to confirm, modify or reverse the action of the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission may act to confirm, modify, or reverse the action of the Planning Manager. The cost to appeal a decision is $500 and a minimum $2,500 deposit fee.

Note: If you challenge a decision of the Commission regarding a project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in writing delivered to the City of Pinole at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

Planning Commission
Agenda - January 12, 2026

A. CALL TO ORDER
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

D. ROLL CALL
E. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
The public may address the Planning Commission on items that are within its jurisdiction and not otherwise listed on the agenda. Planning Commissioners may discuss the matter brought to their attention, but by State law (Ralph M. Brown Act), action must be deferred to a future meeting. Time allowed: five (5) minutes each.

F. MEETING MINUTES:

1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2025 G. PUBLIC HEARINGS
At the beginning of an item, the Chair will read the description of that item as stated on the Agenda. The City Staff will then give a brief presentation of the proposed project. The Commission may then ask Staff questions about the item.

For those items listed as Public Hearings, the Chair will open the public hearing and ask the applicant if they wish to make a presentation. Those persons in favor of the project will then be given an opportunity to speak followed by those who are opposed to the project. The applicant will then be given an opportunity for rebuttal.

The Public Hearing will then be closed and the Commission may discuss the item amongst themselves and ask questions of Staff. The Commission will then vote to approve, deny, approve in a modified form, or continue the matter to a later date for a decision. The Chair will announce the Commission's decision and advise the audience of the appeal procedure.

Note: No Public Hearings will begin after 11:00 p.m. Items still remaining on the agenda after 11:00 p.m. will be held over to the next meeting.

1. MISC25-0009: Study Session for Self-Storage at 890 San Pablo Avenue H. OLD BUSINESS
I. NEW BUSINESS
J. CITY PLANNER'S/COMMISSIONER'S REPORT
K. COMMUNICATIONS
L. NEXT MEETING(S)

1. Planning Commission Regular Meeting on January 26, 2026 at 7:00PM

Planning Commission
Agenda - January 12, 2026

M. ADJOURNMENT
I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, and on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda. _______________________
David Hanham
Planning Manager
POSTED: _______

1 December 8, 2025
1 DRAFT
2 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
4 PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
5 6 December 8, 2025
7 8 THIS MEETING WAS HELD IN A HYBRID FORMAT
9 BOTH IN-PERSON AND ZOOM TELECONFERENCE
10 11
12 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:01 p.m.
13 14 B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
15 16 C. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the 17 Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to 18 the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land 19 that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming 20 together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their 21 stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue 22 our relationship of mutual respect and understanding. 23 24 D. WORKSHOP
25 26 1. Parklets and Outdoor Dining Workshop
27 28 Planning Manager David Hanham confirmed, when asked, that the workshop could be held 29 prior to Roll Call for the Regular Planning Commission meeting. Staff had thought to have 30 the workshop prior to the regular meeting itself but wanted to see how it went and may do 31 that in the future.
32 33 At this time, Mr. Hanham provided a PowerPoint presentation for Outdoor Dining/Parklets in 34 Pinole, which included an overview of the background of parklet statutes in the City of Pinole; 35 purpose of the Outdoor/Dining Parklet Areas; City of Pinole current Outdoor Dining 36 Regulations and topics for discussion including:
37 38 • Define categories of outdoor dining on sidewalks “sidewalk dining areas,” in 39 parking spaces in the right-of-way (ROW) or on public property, “parklets,” and on 40 private property “outdoor dining area;”
41 42 • Establish a permitting process for outdoor dining, including opportunities for public 43 input, annual reviews or inspections, one time or annual fees, and maintenance 44 and liability;
45 46 • Use the Three Corridor Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance to describe the 47 locations where different categories of outdoor dining area would be allowed 48 through the permitting process;
F.1.

2 December 8, 2025
1 • Establish standards for design and materials, size, landscaping, accessibility, 2 circulation, lighting, safety features, (guardrails, wheel stops, visible vertical 3 elements, signage, heating, air circulation and outdoor furniture); 4 5 • Establish standards to address use of the facilities (i.e., hours, public access, and 6 equity). Consider encouraging other elements such as public art and bicycle 7 parking; and
8 9 • Address the transition from temporary outdoor dining areas to permanent outdoor 10 dining areas.
11 12 The category definitions for Sidewalk Dining Areas, Private Outdoor Dining Areas, and 13 Parklets were highlighted and photographs provided with examples of a sidewalk dining 14 area, sidewalk dining and private outdoor dining areas and parklets. Staff also identified 15 the criteria for the establishment of a permitting process for outdoor dining and parklets, 16 and the use of the Three Corridors Specific Plan/Zoning Ordinance to describe the 17 locations, different categories of outdoor dining areas, parklets and the private outdoor 18 dining that would be allowed.
19 20 Mr. Hanham reported the Planning Commission Design Review Subcommittee had 21 worked over the past couple of years to complete the policy, which was why staff was now 22 reaching out to the full Planning Commission and the public for feedback to determine 23 whether anything should be added to the program.
24 25 Responding to questions from the Planning Commission on the PowerPoint presentation, 26 Mr. Hanham clarified:
27 28 • The outdoor dining area outside of Peet’s Coffee in the Trader Joe’s Shopping 29 Center was an example of an outdoor dining area that was included as part of the 30 design review process for the development of the shopping center. Chairs outside 31 of Tina’s Place, the Bear Claw and the Mexican Restaurant, as examples, were in 32 place prior to 2010. Once policies and guidelines were in place, those businesses 33 would be evaluated to ensure they met the policies and guidelines. If the new Hot 34 Chicken Restaurant, for instance, wanted to add outdoor dining, that business 35 would be required to go through an Administrative Review process. (Vice36 Chairperson Menis) 37 38 • The purpose of the workshop was to provide input on the proposed Parklets and 39 Outdoor Dining criteria. In particular, for parklets on-street and those on private 40 property and in parking lots, which had been done during COVID-19. 41 (Chairperson Sandoval)
42 43 • Staff had worked under the assumption those businesses with existing outdoor 44 dining had been established prior to 2010. The only businesses that had gone 45 through the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process for outdoor dining was East 46 Bay Coffee and Diosa Restaurant. Tina’s Place and the Bear Claw would have to 47 be researched, and if those businesses did not have an approved Admimistrative 48 Use Permit or an approved CUP, staff would work with those businesses to 49 achieve compliance with the program. (Chairperson Sandoval)

3 December 8, 2025
1 • All shopping centers had gone through the design review process but staff would 2 research to ensure everyone had the proper permitting in place. (Vice3 Chairperson Menis) 4 5 • Acknowledged a request for a slightly different shade of green in the tabs shown 6 in the PowerPoint presentation. In particular, the use of the light green color on a 7 white background on the last page of the PowerPoint presentation was barely 8 legible and the colors should be rethought. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 9 10 Commissioner Huey was pleased to see the City was considering regulations to allow more 11 parklets. She would like to see clear guidelines to protect emergency access to fire hydrants, 12 ensure emergency vehicle access in an efficient manner and ensure the parklets met 13 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements for mobility. 14 15 Commissioner Bender liked the presentation that had been prepared two months ago, which 16 was more informative.
17 18 Commissioner Uch found the PowerPoint to be informative but suggested Pinole businesses, 19 not just those located in Old Town Pinole, would take advantage of parking lots as an 20 opportunity since most businesses would consider parklets adjacent to a street, which could 21 be something that changed the use of parking lots in the City. 22 23 Vice-Chairperson Menis commented he had provided much of his feedback on the elements 24 of the presentation during his time as a member of the Planning Commission Design Review 25 Subcommittee. Overall, he found the presentation to be informative, but as mentioned, 26 suggested typograhically there were some areas where the text could be adjusted. The 27 presentation was otherwise broadly informative.
28 29 Vice-Chairperson Menis also suggested adding a caption where the photographs in the 30 PowerPoint presentation had been taken, if that data was available, to allow a cross 31 comparison and allow people to look up the location. 32 33 Chairperson Sandoval would have liked to have seen a different process for the approval of 34 the parklets versus the approval of outdoor dining/private outdoor dining areas, and possibly 35 consideration of seasonal approvals during the summer months where it would be more 36 attractive to be outside, rather than having the areas be empty during cold or inclement 37 weather. Visual structure was also needed so that it was not just a canopy tent but something 38 that was more visually pleasing, such as a mixture of concrete or wood or vertical design. 39 He asked how the process would be reviewed for sidewalk dining, and suggested that should 40 be an Administrative Review and not something that was required to come back to the 41 Planning Commission if it just required a check to ensure there was enough space or ADA 42 compliance in the space.
43 44 In terms of outdoor dining as was seen in a patio type of dining setup and parklets, 45 Chairperson Sandoval suggested that would be the type of use that should require approval 46 of a CUP, with the City Council having the ability for appeal, particularly for the parklets, which 47 would be on the street and where issues related to available parking could be involved. 48 49
50

4 December 8, 2025
1 As to the Zoning, Chairperson Sandoval suggested those types of uses should be allowed 2 in commercial zones but for residential zones allowed only with an approved CUP. In terms 3 of the parklets, he envisioned things that had been seen during the pandemic and he asked 4 whether San Pablo Avenue would be one of the areas that would have parklets or whether 5 parklets would be allowed on a main street.
6 7 Mr. Hanham clarified there had been discussions about what San Pablo Avenue may look 8 like in the future and whether there would be some type of road improvements. Parklets 9 would be allowed on San Pablo Avenue if businesses wanted to do that but they would have 10 to go through the design process. When the full package was submitted to the Planning 11 Commission, besides the guidelines, the regulatory ordinance amendments would be 12 included and there would be some requirements included such as Public Works Department 13 approval and approval of regulatory contracts. The parklets would involve a more robust 14 process due to drainage on San Pablo Avenue and other issues that would be related to the 15 use of parklets.
16 17 Chairperson Sandoval asked that some safety elements be included for the parklet 18 regulations if allowed on San Pablo Avenue given the proximity of vehicular traffic. He 19 wanted to ensure something that provided a safety barrier and at the same time was visually 20 pleasing. Also, if heavy weight barriers were allowed, he asked whether they would be 21 permanent or temporary or something that could be considered seasonal. He also asked 22 whether that would be something that would be approved by the Planning Commission or 23 planning staff.
24 25 Mr. Hanham commented that most barriers were temporary in nature and could be removed, 26 and while not easy, if there was a heavy weight barrier, they could be moved. In that case, 27 it would be whether or not the applicant wanted to consider the use of such material to be 28 permanent or seasonal. If part of the Administrative Review process or depending on what 29 was done as part of the process, it could come before the Planning Commission. It would 30 depend on what the applicant proposed and then staff would proceed accordingly. 31 32 Vice-Chairperson Menis asked whether or not parklets would be required to be removed if 33 they had been permitted in the space the Pinole Car Show typically occupied since the 34 vehicles as part of that event took up most of the street. 35 36 Mr. Hanham explained the business would pay a fee for the parklets and were not required 37 to move them now. In that scenario, if a business wanted to move a parklet to accommodate 38 the Car Show or other big event that could be considered, but otherwise there would have to 39 be other places to display the vehicles. The business paying for the parklet and meeting the 40 requirements would have the ability to have their parklet in place. 41 42 Vice-Chairperson Menis commented as to the level of permitting that would be required that 43 overall, he was in agreement with the Chair that for private property parking lots and parklets, 44 the level of approval should be through the Planning Commission with the right to appeal to 45 the City Council. As to the sidewalk dining areas, he suggested rather than just through the 46 Zoning Administrator with no right to appeal, the process should be through the Zoning 47 Administrator with the right to appeal to the Planning Commission in case there was an issue 48 and someone wanted to appeal the decision.
49 50

5 December 8, 2025
1 Commissioner Bender agreed with the Vice-Chair’s comments. He saw no issues with the 2 existing sidewalk eating areas in front of three businesses already mentioned, and suggested 3 those businesses did not need to go through the Planning Commission but through the 4 Zoning Administrator/Planning Manager, with the right to appeal. He suggested the others 5 needed full-blown review since not long ago someone who ran a business in the City was 6 unhappy about another business taking over the parking spaces in their area that was then 7 used for outdoor dining during the pandemic. He suggested that was an example that 8 necessitated a larger discussion.
9 10 Chairperson Sandoval asked if there would be a fee attached with any of the options whether 11 a sidewalk, parklet or outdoor dining and how the fee would be determined, whether a flat 12 rate, yearly or ongoing.
13 14 Mr. Hanham confirmed there would be a fee and once the polices were established the fees 15 would be established. It would depend on the review level and staff would prepare a matrix 16 of costs prior to establishing a fee, similar to how the City established its use fees. 17 18 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
19 20 There were no comments from the public.
21 22 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
23 24 Mr. Hanham advised that if anyone had any additional feedback, including members of the 25 public, they may contact City staff.
26 27 The Planning Commission returned to the regular meeting agenda at 7:48 p.m. 28 29 E. ROLL CALL
30 31 Commissioners Present: Bender, Huey, Uch, Vice-Chairperson Menis, Chairperson 32 Sandoval
33 34 Commissioners Absent: Lam-Julian, Martinez
35 36 Staff Present: David Hanham, Planning Manager
37 Justin Shiu, Senior Planner
38 39 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported on his ex-parté communications to his email list about the 40 topics on the meeting agenda and events happening in the City. 41 42 F. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
43 44 Anastasia Maynich, a resident of the Bayview, an unincorporated area surrounded by the 45 City of Pinole, reported the City’s planning and preparedness affected her community. As 46 the City continued to shape its long-term planning priorities, she asked that the City 47 consider the safety and resilience of the entire area. 48 49
50

6 December 8, 2025
1 The City of Pinole sat on the Hayward Fault, one of the most dangerous and active faults 2 in the country and with recent increased seismic activities across the region, a major 3 earthquake would have far reaching impacts on fire and police response and there could 4 be infrastructure damage, utility destruction, debris communication challenges and long5 term recovery. As an experienced Emergency Manager and during her time serving in 6 Los Angeles County and as a representative for January Wildfire Debris Removal, Ms. 7 Maynich saw firsthand how complex disaster recovery truly was and debris removal alone 8 became a months-long highly coordinated effort involving public works, environmental 9 health and utilities, county partners and sometimes federal agencies. 10 11 One of the factors that directly touched planning and land use was evacuation and access. 12 The Bayview neighborhood had only two exits, both of which routed directly into Pinole, 13 and any significant natural disaster or infrastructure destruction would result in immediate 14 congestion. As Pinole continued to develop housing and add population, those 15 bottlenecks would become even more critical to consider and evacuation routes, traffic 16 flow and emergency access could be integrated into long-term planning decisions. The 17 area was also located between two major rail lines, which carried hazardous materials 18 and heavy loads daily. In the event of an earthquake or derailment, the rail lines could 19 become blocked or damaged cutting off movement, limiting emergency access and further 20 constraining evacuation routes, which would make coordinated emergency planning even 21 more critical for both the City and the surrounding unincorporated areas. Cities that did 22 not have a designated emergency manager or emergency management function 23 struggled the most during disasters. Not because no one was committed, but because no 24 one was responsible for maintaining plans, coordinating the operations or guiding 25 recovery.
26 27 The City of Pinole planned to approve an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) in January 28 2026, but plan on paper was not the same as the person or readiness. It required active 29 stewardship of daily exercise and integration into every day planning including 30 development decisions, road capacity, land use and hazard mitigation. Those issues were 31 being raised because the entire region, including the unincorporated neighborhoods, 32 depended on the City’s planning and communication and resilience. As the City continued 33 to grow and modernize its infrastructure, having real emergency management capacity 34 built into planning would make a difference when disaster occurred. 35 36 Emergency management was built on three pillars: preparedness, response and recovery 37 and most cities began this process by bringing in an outside emergency management 38 consultant to evaluate existing plans, identify gaps and recommend appropriate levels of 39 staffing and structure. It was cost effective and allowed a city to understand its needs 40 prior to committing to long-term resources. As the City updated its General Plan and 41 Safety Element, the City was asked to consider the importance of designating an 42 emergency management function as part of the City’s long-range resilient strategy. 43 44 In response to the Chair, Mr. Hanham reported the Safety and Environmental Justice 45 Elements would be considered by the City Council in January 2026. Staff would ensure 46 the speaker’s comments were noted and the speaker would be added to the contact list. 47 The Safety Element was available for review online on the City website. The speaker 48 could also reach out to the staff working on the documents prior to presentation to the City 49 Council.
50

7 December 8, 2025
1 Vice-Chairperson Menis clarified the Planning Manager’s email address for the record. 2 He commented that it appeared the speaker’s comments were pre-written. He suggested 3 the pre-written comments be submitted to staff so that they could be posted on the City 4 website, made available to the public, and made part of the public record for the meeting. 5 6 G. MEETING MINUTES
7 8 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for October 27, 2025 9 10 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for 11 October 27, 2025, as shown.
12 13 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Bender APPROVED: 5-0-
14 2
15 ABSENT: Lam-Julian, Martinez
16 17 H. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
18 19 1. Uptown Yard (CUP 19-09 & DR 19-14) Use Permit Review and Modifications 20 [CONTINUED TO JANUARY 26, 2026]
21 22 I. OLD BUSINESS: None
23 24 J. NEW BUSINESS:
25 26 1. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Schedule 2026 27 28 The Planning Commission discussed the Planning Commission Regular Meeting 29 Schedule for 2026 and offered no suggested edits.
30 31 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
32 33 There were no comments from the public.
34 35 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
36 37 MOTION with a Roll Call Vote to adopt the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Schedule 38 for 2026, as presented.
39 40 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Menis APPROVED: 5-0-2
41 ABSENT: Lam-Julian, Martinez
42 43 K. CITY PLANNER’S/COMMISSIONER’S REPORT
44 45 Mr. Hanham reported the Planning Commission Academy would be held March 11 through 46 13, 2026 in Anaheim, and staff would like to make reservations early. He asked 47 Commissioners interested in attending to contact staff prior to the end of the year. 48 49 Chairperson Sandoval and Commissioner Uch expressed the willingness to attend the 50 Planning Commission Academy and Chairperson Sandoval suggested Commissioners LamPage 11 of 86

8 December 8, 2025
1 Julian and Martinez may also be interested in attending. 2 Mr. Hanham advised he would send out a follow-up email later in the month to get the 3 reservation process started. He otherwise reported that staff was closing in on the Parklet 4 Regulations, and the Objective Development Design Standards (ODDS) would be reviewed 5 by the City Attorney and Executive Team prior to presentation to the Planning Commission, 6 hopefully the second meeting of January or first meeting in February 2026. 7 8 Senior Planner Justin Shiu reported the temporary gas station moratorium was due to expire 9 on March 26, 2026, and staff was working on an ordinance that would be presented to the 10 Planning Commission at the beginning of the year, and thereafter to the City Council. 11 12 Mr. Hanham clarified that the meeting schedule would be discussed with the Community 13 Development Director to ensure an ordinance was in place prior to the expiration of the 14 temporary moratorium.
15 16 L. COMMUNICATIONS
17 18 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported the Senior Food Distribution would be held on December 19 9, 2025 from 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. at the Pinole Senior Center for low-income eligible persons 20 over 55 years of age and a Pinole resident, with another food distribution event planned for 21 December 23, 2025. In addition, there would be a Special City Council meeting on December 22 9, 2025, for a Closed Session to appoint an Interim City Manager; Traffic and Pedestrian 23 Safety Committee (TAPS) meeting on December 9, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.; Police Toy Charity 24 Drive on December 11, 2025 with donations accepted at the Public Safety Building and 25 Target at 1400 Fitzgerald Drive, with the toys to be donated to Oakland Children’s Hospital; 26 and the Holiday Breakfast on December 13, 2025 from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. at the Pinole Senior 27 Center where signups were required and tickets would be $10 for residents and $12 for non28 residents. He wished everyone Happy Holidays. 29 30 Chairperson Sandoval reported he attended the recent Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony 31 and spoke with some of the business owners who appreciated those types of events which 32 helped businesses do well.
33 34 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
35 36 There were no comments from the public.
37 38 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
39 40 M. NEXT MEETING
41 42 1. Planning Commission Regular Meeting on January 12, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. 43 44 N. ADJOURNMENT: 8:10 p.m.
45 46 Transcribed by: Reviewed and Edited by:
47 48 Sherri D. Lewis City Staff
49 Transcriber

PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT G.1.

DATE: JANUARY 12, 2026
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JUSTIN SHIU, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: MISC25-0009: STUDY SESSION FOR SELF-STORAGE AT 890 SAN PABLO AVENUE

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the presentation from the applicant and provide feedback on the concept for a potential self-storage project with other commercial uses at 890 San Pablo Avenue.

BACKGROUND
In 2018, Beau Reinberg (applicant) submitted an application to develop a self-storage facility at 890 San Pablo Avenue. The project previously consisted of a two-story building and a threestory building that would accommodate approximately 72,193 square feet of floor area with 525 storage units and approximately 3,760 square feet of office space.

The applicant submitted the previous application on August 14, 2018. A study session was held on January 28, 2019 (Attachment A). The design was revised following the study session. The project was brought to Planning Commission on August 26, 2019, where it was approved by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission staff report (Attachment B), plan set (Attachment C), and renderings (Attachment D) are attached for reference. The project approval was appealed to City Council on November 5, 2019. The City Council staff report is provided for reference (Attachment E). The project ultimately was denied by City Council on November 5, 2019. City Council Resolution 2019-106, setting forth City Council’s determination is provided for reference (Attachment F).

The applicant is interested in revisiting the concept for self-storage at 890 San Pablo Avenue along with the incorporation of other uses on site and considering whether to proceed with the design of a project for a development application submittal. The applicant has requested a study session with the Planning Commission to gather input that they can consider in development of a potential concept. The applicant has also submitted previous design concept iterations for reference if needed for potential discussion (Attachment G). The property owner representatives have submitted a letter in support of potential development (Attachment H).

In the Three Corridors Specific Plan, the site is located in the OIMU designation of the Service Sub-Area in the San Pablo Avenue Corridor. The list of permitted uses and conditionally permitted uses is established in Table 6.2 of the Specific Plan (Attachment I). Self-storage falls under the land use category “Personal Storage Facility”.

The Planning Commission is the approval authority for Comprehensive Design Review and

Conditional Use Permit applications, which are required for the construction of new selfstorage buildings.

No development application has been submitted, and no action can be taken by the Planning Commission to approve any proposal. Feedback provided by the Planning Commission is intended to provide preliminary and general input for consideration by the applicant in considering whether to proceed with the design of a project. Should a formal development application for a project be received, the application will be brought to Planning Commission at a public hearing to review the proposal anew so that Planning Commission may comprehensively review the actual specific design and uses proposed for approval consideration at that time.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Planning Commission may receive the presentation and questions from the applicant and provide feedback for general consideration in the applicant’s exploration of concepts. No new conceptual development plans have been received from the applicant at this time and no development application has been received, and as such no comprehensive assessment or approval consideration of a specific development project at the site can be conducted.

For reference and discussion, the plan set and rendering from the previous application is included (Attachment C and Attachment D). Additionally, the applicant has resubmitted previous concepts as a reference that may aid in discussion. A composite of key renderings from previous iterations of the design prior to the final design is attached for reference (Attachment G). Planning Commission is not taking action on these previous designs nor making a decision on whether they would approve these previous designs.

As there is no complete development application under review, Planning Commission’s formal determination of a proposal’s consistency with the General Plan, Three Corridors Specific Plan, and approval findings are not being made at this time. Such evaluation will be conducted at a public hearing with the Planning Commission if an application is submitted so that the project is considered based on all details and information provided in a comprehensive development application package.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Attachment A - Study session 1.28.2019
B. Attachment B - Planning Commission Staff Report 8.26.19 C. Attachment C - PC Plan Set
D. Attachment D - PC Renderings
E. Attachment E - City Council Staff Report 11.5.19
F. Attachment F - 2019-106 CC Reso Denial of Design Review Appeal for 890 San Pablo G. Attachment G - Previous Concepts
H. Attachment H - Comment Letter from Property Owners
I. Attachment I - Three Corridors Specific Plan Table 6.2

Pinole City Council
Minutes – January 28, 2019

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL / PLANNING

COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING

MINUTES
JANUARY 28, 2019

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Special City Council/Planning Commission Workshop Meeting was held in the Pinole Senior Center, 2500 Charles Avenue, Pinole, California. Mayor Murray called the Special Workshop Meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT A. COUNCIL MEMBERS/PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Peter Murray, Mayor
Roy Swearingen, Mayor Pro Tem
Vincent Salimi, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member – ABSENT
Simon Wong, Planning Commission Chair
Tom Brooks, Planning Commissioner
Ruskin Hartley, Planning Commissioner
Dave Kurrent, Planning Commissioner
Carol Thompson, Planning Commissioner – ABSENT
B. STAFF PRESENT
Michelle Fitzer, City Manager
Hector De La Rosa, Assistant City Manager
John Goetz, City Attorney
Tamara Miller, Development Services Director/City Engineer Winston Rhodes, Planning Manager
Deputy City Clerk De La Rosa inquiry if the Council had any conflict with items on the Agenda.

The Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda.

3. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
At 6:05 pm, the Mayor inquired if there were any Public Comments. The following speakers addressed the City Council:

Jack Meehan, resident of Pinole, stated that he would like to see Bart Director extend services to Pinole and other cities, suggested posting the Fire call log sheets, requested additional signage so that the public is aware where smoking is allowed.

Sal Spataro, resident of Pinole, congratulated the Councilmembers who supported extending the hours of the library.

Attachment A

Pinole Special City Council
Minutes – January 28, 2019

4. WORKSHOP ITEM
A. Pinole Square – Appian 80 Update [Action: Presentation - Provide Direction (Rhodes/Goetz)]
Planning Manger Winston Rhodes presented the report. He provided information on the proposed development, issues related to the specific plan regarding housing overlay on the site, and requested direction from the Council on whether to require housing or not on the site.

The Councilmembers/Planning Commissions discussed the following: design of the project, color scheme, the impact of eliminating the housing overly requirements on the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) housing allocation, can the allocated RHNA number on the site be accommodated at other sites, the benefits of the proposed development, time frame for development of site and amendment to General Plan and Specific Plan.

Carl Goldstone, owner of the property, Tony Valdez, Architect, and Todd Paradise, Real Estate Manager for Safeway, addressed the Council speaking to the project development phasing plan, the benefits to the community, and why housing is not proposed on the site.

The following speaker addressed the City Council/Planning Commission at 7:37 pm.:

Joice Dementshuk, resident of Pinole, supported the project and provided reasons for the need for the development but expressed concerns regarding traffic in the area.

Maureen Toms, resident of Pinole, expressed that delays to the project were not on the City and expressed advantages to removing housing overlay on the site.

Sara Roberts, resident of Pinole, expressed concerns about existing traffic and additional traffic if a gas station is located on the site.

Sal Spataro, resident of Pinole, asked if any developers have complied with building housing to address the RHNA allocation, suggested Doctors Hospital should be designated for housing, asked if the proposed drive-thru was for a fast food establishment.

Sara Mae Parker, resident of Pinole, expressed concern as to why applicant has not addressed why housing was not feasible and stated that she does not support a gas station on the site.

At 7:50 p.m., Mayor Murray requested direction from the City Council/Planning Commission on the direction sought by Staff. Councilmembers expressed support for removing the housing overlay as well as requiring housing. Planning Commissioners expressed concerns on traffic circulation related to the proposed gas station and lack of rooftop screening of equipment.

ACTION: The City Council directed staff to move forward with a General Plan (GP) and Specific Plan amendment (SP) to remove the Housing Overlay on the site, seek alternate sites to place housing, and have applicant pay for the cost of the GP & SP Amendments.

At 8:24 pm the Mayor requested a 5 minute recess. The Council/Planning Commission reconvened the meeting at 8:34 pm.

Pinole Special City Council
Minutes – January 28, 2019

B. San Pablo Avenue Mini-Storage (2 sites) [Action: Presentation - Provide Direction (Rhodes)]
Planning Manger Winston Rhodes presented the report citing the proposed development of two mini storage facilities and sought direction from the City Council on whether the projects are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan goals. Planning Manager also requested input from the Planning Commission on design.

Beau Reinberg, owner, Bruce Jordon, Architect, spoke to their proposed project at 890 San Pablo Avenue. Followed by Nolan Borden, applicant for the project located at 760 San Pablo Avenue.

The following speaker addressed the City Council/Planning Commission.

Sara Roberts, resident of Pinole, supported the development proposed at 760 San Pablo Avenue.

Maureen Toms, resident of Pinole, shared her observation on the two projects expressing concerns regarding size of building, loss of view by existing residents, and limited job and tax from these projects.

Ivette Rico, resident of Pinole, raised concerns over projects lack of jobs and tax and suggested denial of projects.

At 10:00 p.m., Mayor Murray requested direction from the City Council/Planning Commission on the direction sought by Staff. Councilmember Salimi and Mayor Murray stated that the project was not consistent with the General Plan and/or Specific Plan. Councilmember Tave and Mayor Pro Tem Swearingen supported the project proposed at 760 San Pablo but would like to see it as a two story project. There was no consensus to approve or deny the projects.

Planning Commissioners expressed concerns regarding the height of the project, footprint on the property and need for more landscaping.

5. ADJOURNMENT of the City Council to the Regular Council Meeting of February 5, 2019 and in Remembrance of the Amber Swartz.

At 10:18 p.m., Mayor Murray adjourned to the Regular City Council meeting of February 5, 2018, in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

Submitted by:
________________________________
Hector De La Rosa, Deputy City Clerk
Approved by City Council: February 19, 2019

Item E1
TO: PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JUSTIN SHIU, CONTRACT PLANNER
SUBJECT: EXTRA SPACE STORAGE DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND

TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
DATE: AUGUST 26, 2019
Project Applicant:

Beau Reinberg
3159 Fee Fee Road, Suite 221
Bridgeton, MO 63044
Project Owner:

R.D. and Lynn Stotka
4983 Milden Road
Martinez, CA 94553
PROJECT: Extra Space Storage
FILE: Design Review (DR) 18-13, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 18-13, and Tree Removal Permit (TR) 19-03
LOCATION: 890 San Pablo Avenue
APN: 402-240-014
ZONING: Office Industrial Mixed Use (OIMU)
GP LU DESIGNATION: Service Sub-Area
SPECIFIC PLAN: Service Sub-Area

REQUEST
Beau Reinberg, applicant, is seeking design review approval, a conditional use permit, and a tree removal permit to construct a two-story office/commercial and self-storage building and a threestory self-storage building totaling approximately 75,983 square feet on a 1.34 acre lot at 890 San Pablo Avenue. The Planning Commission has the authority to review these requests under the Zoning Code.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 19-10 conditionally approving the Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Tree Removal Permit request to construct and operate the mixed office/commercial and personal storage project at 890 San Pablo Avenue; and adopt Resolution 19-11 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

Memorandum
Attachment B

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 2
____________________________________________________________________________________

SITE LOCATION
Figure 1. Site Location
Direction from Project Site Land Use
North Vacant, undeveloped
West Office
South San Pablo Avenue (Commercial across)
East Commercial
890 San Pablo Ave
(Project Site)

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 3
____________________________________________________________________________________

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project at 890 San Pablo Avenue is a mixed office/commercial and self-storage (also know as personal storage) development consisting of an approximately 17,503 square foot, twostory building; an approximately 58,423 square foot, three-story building; and site improvements on a 58,402 square foot site at 890 San Pablo Avenue. Of the total proposed 75,953 square feet of floor area, the storage use constitutes approximately 72,193 square feet with 525 storage units and the additional office/commercial space constitutes approximately 3,760 square feet. Extra Space Storage would operate the storage use. Site modifications include new landscaping, grading throughout the site including on the hillside near the northern property line for the new building, and site improvements for parking and circulation.

BACKGROUND
The project site is an approximately 1.34 acre lot located in the OIMU zoning district within the San Pablo Avenue Service Sub-Area of the Three Corridors Specific Plan. The proposal includes construction of two new buildings on the site: a mixed office/commercial and personal storage building in front facing San Pablo Avenue and a second personal storage only building behind. The applicant describes the proposal in the project description (Attachment C). The current design of the facility is shown in the plans (Attachment D) and renderings/photosimulations (Attachment E).

The current proposal is a redesign of the initial proposal featuring a single building design that was brought before a joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting on January 28, 2019. The initial proposal at 890 San Pablo Avenue featured only personal storage use with ancillary office space to support storage operations. The plans and renderings showing the initial design can be found in the staff report for the joint meeting (Attachment F).

Staff presented a report on proposed development of storage facilities at 890 San Pablo Avenue and 760 San Pablo Avenue (a project by a separate applicant) and sought City Council direction on consistency with General Plan and Specific Plan goals. Two Councilmembers commented that the projects were not consistent with the General Plan and/or Specific Plan; two Councilmembers supported the project proposed at 760 San Pablo Avenue but would like to see two stories; and Planning Commissioners expressed concerns about the height, footprint, and the need for more landscaping. Speakers from the public also presented comments that included 1) support for the 760 San Pablo Avenue proposal, 2) concern about building sizes, loss of views, and limited job and tax revenue; and 3) concern about lack of jobs and tax and suggested denial. The comments are compiled in the meeting minutes (Attachment G).

The applicant has redesigned the 890 San Pablo Avenue proposal to address comments that were provided at the meeting, including modifying the floor area, site layout, height, and uses. The redesign features breaking up the massing and changing the footprint of the initial three-story structure into two smaller structures that consist of a two-story building facing San Pablo Avenue and a three-story building behind. The previously proposed 95,981 square foot building is reduced to two buildings totaling 75,953 square feet. While the initial proposal of 890 San Pablo Avenue did not provide office or commercial floor area other than offices ancillary to support storage operations, the project has been redesigned to allocate approximately 3,760 square feet for uses other than storage – the allocation of space for other uses was a feature that the 760 San Pablo Avenue personal storage proposal had incorporated.

Following the meeting, the proposal at 760 San Pablo Avenue was withdrawn. The proposal for 890

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 4
____________________________________________________________________________________ San Pablo Avenue currently remains as the only active proposal for personal storage facilities.

ANALYSIS
Land Use
The project site is located within the San Pablo Avenue corridor of the Three Corridors Specific Plan and is zoned Office Industrial Mixed Use (OIMU). Personal storage facilities (e.g., ministorage, selfstorage, etc) are a conditionally permitted use in the OIMU district. Office and retail are uses permitted by right. The Planning Commission is the approving authority for Conditional Use Permit requests, as well as the Design Review request for new nonresidential buildings.

General Plan Consistency
The project site is designated Service Sub-Area (SSA) in the General Plan and Three Corridors Specific Plan (Figure 2). The Service Sub-Area is intended to maintain and enhance existing land uses while providing land use flexibility and incentives to encourage new private investment and additional development. The General Plan intent for the SSA designation is to preserve land for manufacturing and industrial uses, particularly “green industry”. A limited amount of general office, retail, and residential uses may be permitted where they will not conflict with the principal industrial uses in the area. The vision for the San Pablo Avenue Service Sub-Area states that the Service sub-area will serve as the gateway into Pinole and will encourage light and green industry, serve as a transition area between the Mixed Use subarea and the western City limits, and embrace the area’s historic character as an industrial area while moving towards newer cleaner industry while allowing land use flexibility. Within the Service Sub-Area, the site is zoned Office Industrial Mixed Use as shown in Figure 3 and described further in the following section.

Figure 2. San Pablo Ave Sub-Areas Figure 3. San Pablo Ave Zoning The project is consistent with the General Plan. Below are General Plan goals and policies that support the proposed project:

Community Character Element
Project
Site
Project
Site Service
Sub-Area
Mixed-Use
Sub-Area
Office Industrial
Mixed-Use
(OIMU)
Commercial
Mixed-Use
(CMU)
Medium Density
Res. (MDR)
Residential Mixed-Use
(RMU)

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 5
____________________________________________________________________________________ POLICY CC.1.2 Require all new development to incorporate high-quality site design, architecture and planning to enhance the overall quality of the built environment in Pinole and create a visually interesting and aesthetically pleasing town environment.

Land Use and Economic Development Element
GOAL LU.7 Balance housing and employment opportunities to reduce trips in and out of the region and encourage commercial development which maintains and enhances the quality of the city’s commercial areas, provides services for residents and broadens the tax base of the community to provide needed revenues for public services.

POLICY LU.7.1 Provide sufficient land for commercial and industrial uses to allow for development that provides basic goods and services to Pinole residents.

POLICY LU.7.2 Provide for economic development which (1) maintains the City’s ability to finance services and the construction and maintenance of public improvements; (2) offers local employment opportunities for Pinole residents to reduce inter-city commuting; and (3) assures the availability and diversity of resident-serving goods and services.

GOAL LU.8 Concentrate commercial development and mixed-use activity areas within the Fitzgerald Drive, San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way corridors.

The project meets the intent and vision for the service sub-area as stated in the General Plan and Specific Plan. The proposed site would be occupied by a personal storage facility, which is categorized as an industrial use, with the inclusion of office/commercial uses to contribute to a range of uses along San Pablo Avenue. Where new two storage facilities had previously been proposed in close proximity to each other (the proposed site and 760 San Pablo Avenue) as presented in the joint meeting on January 28, 2019, the impacts regarding concentration of storage buildings has been reduced. The proposed project remains as the sole storage facility proposal, the size and storage space of the project has been reduced from the initial proposal, and the project has included office/commercial space on the ground floor. The additional office/commercial space offers more business and employment opportunities than initially designed.

The primary use of the site is personal storage. However, the site has been designed to reduce the appearance of a large storage facility by incorporating architectural details in the design and setting a taller building towards the rear of the lot.

The project helps implement the General Plan as a development with commercial and industrial uses; supporting local business and employment opportunities; and providing a service for residents, businesses and other consumers seeking additional storage space for personal use or commercial development.

Similar Land Uses in Pinole
The City has four existing storage facilities and the proposed project would present a modern facility that adds to storage available while meeting current standards. The existing facilities were generally built in the 1980s and largely contain single story structures where storage units are accessed from the exterior, with the exception of 2975 Pinole Valley Road. The proposed facility would be the first new storage facility in several decades. The project would add approximately 72,193 square feet of

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 6
____________________________________________________________________________________ total storage area, which includes approximately 71,368 square feet of storage space and 825 square feet of storage administration office. The proposal would create an approximately 27% increase in square footage for storage use and operations. The project would be within the range of existing storage facility sizes. The site would be developed with more parking than existing facilities, which can accommodate the storage use and other uses. Further discussion on parking and trip generation is provided in the section below. Table 1 provides a comparison of existing storage facilities with the proposed project.

Table 1. Storage Facilities in Pinole
Storage Facilities in Pinole
Location Size Year
Built
Stories Parking
Spaces
640 San Pablo Avenue (APN:402-200-
020) – operated by Public Storage
58,275 sf 1981 1 6
2624 Appian Way (APN: 426-020-036-7) –
operated by Public Storage
75,000 sf 1989 1-2 4
2650 Appian Way (APN: 426-020-039) –
operated by Public Storage
45,700 sf 1989 1-2 6
2975 Pinole Valley Road (APN: 360-010-
002) – operated by Security Public
Storage
88,234 sf 1989 2 12
TOTAL 267,209
Proposed Project
Proposal for 890 San Pablo Avenue 72,193 sf total
storage use (71,368
sf storage + 825 sf
storage office), and
3,760 sf
office/commercial
2-3 25*
Source: RealQuest County Assessor Information, as of January 23, 2019 *Note that the project also includes floor area for uses other than storage that would be served by parking. More discussion is presented in the Parking and Trip Generation section below.

Zoning
Within the Service Sub-Area, the project site is located in the Office Industrial Mixed Use (OIMU) zoning district (Figure 3). The allowable uses within the OIMU zoning district under the Service SubArea are listed in the Three Corridors Specific Plan. Per the list of permitted uses, a Personal Storage Facility requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.

The purpose of the OIMU zone is to allow a wide range of office and light industrial development.

This designation is intended for office and light industrial uses with supporting retail and service uses. Personal storage facilities fall under an industrial use classification in the Specific Plan and zoning code and would be consistent with the intended uses in the district.

The Three Corridors Specific Plan and the City of Pinole Zoning Code establish the development standards for new projects in the San Pablo Avenue Corridor. Where the Zoning Code contains the general standards for development within the City and the Three Corridors Specific Plan provides

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 7
____________________________________________________________________________________ additional standards within the Specific Plan area, the project has been reviewed and determined to be compatible with applicable development standards. Table 2 below summarizes the project proposal and the corresponding development standards.

Table 2. Development Standards and Proposed Project
Development
Standard for OIMU
Requirement Proposed Project
Lot Size
Minimum Lot Size N/A 58,402 square feet
Setbacks
Front Build-to-Line 0’ to 10’ 0’ to 4’
Minimum Side Yard 0’ 4’
Minimum Rear Yard 0’ 22’
Height
Maximum Height 50’ and 4 stories 38’-8” and 3 stories
Floor Area
Maximum Floor Area N/A 75,953 square feet
Parking
Minimum Required
Parking Spaces
Not specified for proposed use. Per PMC
Chapter 17.48, parking shall be provided
as required by the approving authority.
25 parking spaces
(22 standard, 2 accessible,
1 EV charging)
Design Guidelines
The project incorporates design features that are compatible with design guidelines in the Three Corridors Specific Plan, including the following:

7.3 General Design Guidelines Applicable to All Specific Plan Areas 4a. Varied and well-articulated wall planes, rooflines, and building form shall be created to reduce the overall massing and scale of buildings while providing visually engaging designs.

The front building has a variegated exterior that uses variety in colors to minimize the appearance of long walls, is articulated with changes to the wall planes, and incorporates awnings, metal panels, and changes to the materials of exterior walls that provide architectural detail and variation. The building in the back also incorporates awning, metal panels and changes to materials on exterior falls.

Trellises that support vine growth are added to the sides of the building.

7.5 Service Sub-Area Design Guidelines
1a. Building entrances shall be clearly defined and easily accessible from public transit stops.

The property is located approximately 250 feet west of a bus stop. 1b. A comfortable pedestrian environment shall be created through the design and scale of buildings and outdoor spaces.

The redesign of the building configures a two story building closer to the street with a three story building located towards the rear of the property to minimize the height of buildings located closer to the street to better scale with the pedestrian

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 8
____________________________________________________________________________________ environment.
3c. Design features must be consistent on all elevations of the structure. Side and rear elevations should not be minimized because they are oriented away from public view.

The side elevations of the front building incorporates metal awnings on the front and side elevations. The rear building incorporates metal trellises on the side elevations that provide variation in materials.
4c. Fencing and walls shall be set back a minimum of 3 feet from the sidewalk or the street to allow for planting.

The front building is set back approximately 4 feet from the back of the sidewalk.

Site Design and Operations
The project is designed with site improvements that include construction of two new buildings, new paving and landscaping, and grading. The new building facing San Pablo Avenue is a two-story building, with stucco siding as the primary exterior building material and accented by color and material variations that include architectural metal panels, spandrel glass windows, metal awnings, and corrugated metal siding. The three-story storage building in the back contains material and color variation as well, including CMU walls on the ground floor, stucco painted as different colors on the upper story, spandrel glass, metal awnings, and trellises for climbing vines. The project site would be accessed by two driveways that each provided two-way circulation. An interior circulation area between the two buildings is secured by gates that allow for entry of storage unit customers.

The design of the project adapts to some of the constraints on the site and enhances the conditions of the site. The project avoids the constraint of a pipeline easement that runs through the property through the design and orientation of the buildings that avoid construction within the easement area.

Although trees on the property would need to be removed to construct the site, only four trees are considered protected trees. The project proposes new landscaping: the landscape plan and a landscaping palette are shown in the plan set (Attachment D).

The project proposes secure storage for customers. Storage units would range in size from 150 to 400 square feet. Security features include over 25 cameras, keypad entry for customers only from 6:00am-10:00pm, and oversight from a facility manager. The project establishes clauses within storage contracts to mitigate potential storage hazards within storage units. An example storage agreement contract is attached (Attachment H). Limitations in use are built into the contract that would restrict the storage of hazardous materials and flammable substances. Further, materials would not be allowed to be stored within an 18-inch clearance area of fire sprinkler heads.

Tree Removal
The trees on the lot are proposed for removal, however only four trees are categorized as protected trees. The protected trees include a hackberry tree, two Lombardy poplar trees, and a willow tree.

Three protected trees are near the southeast corner of the property and the willow tree is located towards the northwest corner at the easement. These trees are protected trees based on their sizes rather than due to their species. Removal of these trees are required in that the hackberry tree is located in the footprint of the proposed building, the two Lombardy poplars are located within one foot of the driveway, and the willow tree is in poor health condition. The majority of trees proposed for removal on site are Eucalyptus trees, which are not protected trees. Fruit trees proposed for

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 9
____________________________________________________________________________________ removal also would not be considered protected trees. Tree removal shall follow the recommendations of the arborist report (Attachment I) and has been incorporated as a condition of approval (Attachment A). The replacement trees that have been proposed include Armstrong Maple adjacent to the building and at the southwest corner of the property, Frans Fontaine at the eastern property line, Royal Purple Smoke at the eastern property line, and Coast Live Oak towards the back of the property. The landscape plan in the plan set shows the location of replacement trees and proposed plantings (Attachment D).

Parking
The parking standard for personal storage facilities is not explicitly established in the zoning. When this situation occurs, Planning Commission may determine the adequacy of proposed parking. As presented in the comparison with existing storage facilities (Table 1 above), parking provided for storage uses are relatively low but commercial and office uses would require greater amounts of parking, which the project provides. In considering average parking provided by existing facilities, the parking ratio is about 1 space per 7,100 square feet. The project would need approximately 10 parking spaces for the storage use under this ratio, based on approximately 72,193 square feet for storage. The zoning code establishes a rate of 1 space per 250 square feet for office use.

Therefore, the project would need approximately 15 spaces for this use. For reference, office (1 per 250sf) has a more intensive parking requirement than retail (1 per 300sf) in the zoning code. As the project provides 25 parking spaces, the project would meet the estimated parking demand based for the storage and office/commercial uses.

Trip Generation
The trip generation estimates for the project show that the project is not anticipated to create a significant trip generation impact. The applicant’s estimate of trips identifies just over 100 trips per day for the storage use and an additional increase for the office/commercial space (Attachment C).

The trip generation scenario was also evaluated in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment B, Exhibit A). The IS/MND uses inputs of 525 storage units and 5,000 square feet of retail space, which rounds up the proposed non-storage floor area numbers and applies retail use to the non-storage use space. The trip generation estimates based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) standard trip generation rates show 353 daily trips, 45 AM peak hour trips, and 25 PM peak hour trips, see Table 3 below.

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 10
____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 3. Trip Generation
Trip Generation Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total
Trips
Rate Total Trips
(In & Out)
Rate Total Trips
(In & Out)
525 Storage Units 0.25 131 0.02 11
(5 in, 5 out)

0.02 11
(5 in, 5, out)
5000sf Retail 44.32 222 6.84 34
(16 in, 18 out)

2.71 14
(6 in, 8 out)
Total 353 45
(21 in, 23 out)
25 (11 in, 13 out)
Source: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by Raney Planning & Management Inc, August 5, 2019
As described in the IS/MND, San Pablo Avenue at intersections near the project site (including Del Monte Drive, Pinole Shores Drive, Sunnyview Drive, and Appian Way) currently operate at Level of Service A (LOS A) for AM and PM peak period travel; and they are projected to remain at LOS A upon General Plan buildout, except for Appian Way which may be reduced to LOS B. The addition of the project is not anticipated to significantly impact to traffic in the area as LOS A represents largely free flowing traffic, the largest peak hour trip generation is 21 trips in and 23 trips out of the site in the morning peak hour, the use is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, and the traffic impacts of the land use designation were accounted for in the land use planning under the General Plan Environmental Impact Report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared for the project to determine whether the project is anticipated to create any significant environmental impacts and to identify mitigation measures where potentially significant impacts are identified. The IS/MND was prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Attachment B, Exhibit A).

The IS/MND was prepared and notice was given for review. During the preparation of the IS/MND, inquiries for tribal consultation were initiated after the City sent email and letter requests on June 20 and June 27, 2019 and followed up with phone calls. Requests for tribal consultation were sent to representatives on the Native American Heritage Commission’s list for tribal consultation. The responses received during the tribal consultation period included requests for inclusion of an archaeological monitor and a Native American monitor during ground disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure V-3 was developed so that an archaeological monitor will be present during ground disturbing activities and interested tribes would be apprised of the construction schedule then afforded the opportunity to provide a Native American monitor. The tribal consultation request period closed on August 31, 2019 without request for consultation. The Public Review IS/MND was completed, and a Notice of Intent to Adopt the IS/MND was provided to the Contra Costa County Clerk, was posted on site, and was mailed to nearby property owners by August 5, 2019. The public review period started on August 6, 2019 and a Public Review Draft of the IS/MND was made available for review at City Hall. One comment was received stating general support for the project but requesting that the project prepare a dust mitigation plan (Attachment J). The request has been incorporated as a condition of approval. As of the publication of this report, no other comments have

STAFF MEMO

PLANNING COMMISSION
August 26, 2019 PAGE 11
____________________________________________________________________________________ been received.

The IS/MND found that factors where the project may have potentially significant impacts include biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, and tribal cultural resources. With the implementation of mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND to address these factors, the project was determined to have less than significant impacts. A mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been prepared to collect the mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for tracking during implementation (Attachment B, Exhibit B).

CONCLUSION
The project provides for additional personal storage and office space along San Pablo Avenue. The storage facility would fit with the industrial and office setting of the area. The project enhances an underutilized site with new development that offers new commercial service through the provision of storage units and integrates spaces within the design to offer some additional commercial and employment opportunities on site.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution 19-10 with Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval B. Resolution 19-11 with Exhibit A: IS/MND and Exhibit B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
C. Project Description and Traffic Memo, dated May 10, 2019 D. Plan Set, date stamped received June 19, 2019
E. Renderings and Photosimulations from Current Proposed Design F. Staff Report from Joint CC/PC Workshop Meeting on January 28, 2019 (Excerpt with Attachments Relevant to 890 San Pablo Ave)
G. Minutes from Joint CC/PC Workshop Meeting on January 28, 2019 H. Extra Space Storage Rental Agreement
I. Arborist Report
J. Letter from Neighboring Business

890 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE, CA OWNER BEAU REINBERG 3159 FEE FEE ROAD, SUITE 221 BRIDGETON, MO. 63044
TELEPHONE: (573)-673-1191
EMAIL: [email protected] ARCHITECT BRUCE JORDAN ARCHITECT 131 CALLE IGLESIA, SUITE 100, SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92673
TELEPHONE: (949) 388-8090
FACSIMILE: (949) 388-8290 CONTACT: David Meinecke E-MAIL: [email protected] CIVIL ENGINEER KISTER, SAVIO & REI 825 SAN PABLO AVENUE PINOLE, CA. 94564 TELEPHONE: (510)-222-4020 ext. 26 CONTACT: Patrick Rei EMAIL: [email protected] LANDSCAPE VALLIER DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. 210 WASHINGTON AVENUE, SUITE G POINT RICHMOND, CA 94801 TELEPHONE: (510) 367-6166 CONTACT: Marcia Vallier EMAIL: [email protected] ARCHITECTURAL A.1 COVER SHEET A.2 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN. A.3 FIRE ACCESS & SAFETY PLAN. A.4 PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS. A.5 PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS. A.6 PRELIMINARY OFFICE PLAN. A.7 PRELIMINARY ROOF PLAN. A.8 PRELIMINARY SECTION. A.9 PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS. A.10 PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS. A.11 PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS. A.12 PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS. A.13 PRELIMINARY LIGHTING PLAN. A.14 LIGHTING PLAN DETAILS. A.15 FENCE PLAN & DETAILS. CIVIL C0.1 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY. C1.0 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN. C1.1 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN DETAILS. C1.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN. LANDSCAPE L-1 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN. L-2 LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS. NTS A.1 COVER SHEET EXTRA SPACE STORAGE PINOLE DIRECTORY PROJECT DATA SHEET INDEX VICINITY MAP NORTH SITE THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT" YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. JOB NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: BEAU REINBERG EXTRA SPACE PINOLE PINOLE, CA 18-523 09/20/18 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE: IIB OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: S-1. BUILDINGS ARE EQUIPPED WITH AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 13. BASIS OF DESIGN REQUIRED PROVIDED ZONE OIMU (OFFICE INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION SSA - SERVICE SUB-AREA APN 402-240-014 OVERLAY SAN PABLO AVE SPECIFIC PLAN STRUCTURE HEIGHT 50 FT. 38 FT. LANDSCAPE AREA N/A 13,532 S.F. (24%) IMPERVIOUS AREA N/A 17,247 S.F. (30%) SETBACKS : FRONT 0 FT. 0 FT. SIDE 0 FT. 4 FT. REAR 0 FT. 22 FT. IF ABUTTING MAIN STREET 0 FT. 0 FT. PARKING SPACES 1 SPACE/10,000 S.F. OF NET RENTABLE AREA = 6 SPACES 1 SPACE/250 S.F. OF OFFICE AREA = 18 24 PARKING SIZE STANDARD: 9' X 18' PARALLEL: 9' X 24' STANDARD: 9' X 18' PARALLEL: 9' X 24' SITE DATA LOT AREA 58,402 SQ. FT. 1.34 ACRES PARKING SPACES PROVIDED STANDARDS 22 ACCESSIBLE 2 EVC PARKING 1 TOTAL 25 NUMBER OF STORAGE UNITS PROPOSED 525 BUILDING AREA TABULATIONS ( Square Feet ) SELF-STORAGE OFFICE (INCLUDES SELF-STORAGE OFFICE) TOTAL BUILDING A 1ST FLOOR 4,180 4,585 8,765 2ND FLOOR 8,765 8,765 BUILDING 'A' GROSS AREA 17,530 BUILDING B 1ST FLOOR 18,858 18,858 2ND FLOOR 18,858 18,858 3RD FLOOR 20,707 20,707 BUILDING 'B' GROSS AREA 58,423 TOTAL GROSS BUILDING AREA: 75,953 EST.NET STORAGE AREA (DOES NOT INCLUDE RETAIL OFFICE AREA) 60,662 Attachment C

NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING 1 BUILDING 'A'
SAN PABLO AVE.

ADJACENT PROPERTY
NUTTLE
2008231035
APN 402-390-004

BUILDING 'B'
24'-0" DRIVEWAY
H Y D

ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-003

ADJACENT PROPERTY
PIONEER PREMIER, LLC.
200112454
APN 402-240-016
AA.8

OFFICE AREA
(INCLUDES SELF-STORAGE

MANAGEMENT OFFICE)

ONE WAY

ONE WAY CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 13 12 11 10 9
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
14 25
82'-7"
24'-0"

DRIVEWAY VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

SELF-STORAGE
AREA

ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-002

ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-001
PINOLE SHORES OWNERS ASSN.
2008186687
APN 402-230-021
PINOLE SHORES OWNERS ASSN.
2008186687
APN 402-230-022 22'-0"
40'
±4'-0" ±25'-0" DRIVEWAY
55' 41'
100' 85' 25'
30' 10'
10' 10'
30' 30'
5'28'
95' 18'
8' 90'
72' 25'
5'25'
5'
24'-0"

DRIVEWAY
.24'-0"
DRIVEWAY 50' 45'
1 1
19 1 2
2 2
2 4
12 23
3 15
3 23
18 9
26 17
9 5
14 16
27 30
30 32
32 32
33 33
6 2
1 2
4 8
9 26
7 23
23 34
11 4 1
29 24
10 13
13 13
14 21
15 22
22 28
28 28
29 12
1 34
20 19
20 20
20 19
19 0 20' 40'
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523

AS NOTED
09/20/18 A.2

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

SCHEME D

KEY NOTES
PROPERTY LINE.

PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.

LANDSCAPE AREA. SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS.
1 17
8 7
16 14
9 10
11 6
15 5
2 4
3 18
AWNING PROJECTION ABOVE.

TRASH AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURE.

CORNICE PROJECTION ABOVE.
19 21
12 13
22 FIRE RISER.

EXISTING 10'-0" STORM DRAIN EASEMENT. TO BE RELOCATED.

LOADING AREA.

PROJECTION OF 2ND AND 2RD FLOOR ABOVE.

VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE.

BIKE RACK.

CLEAN AIR VEHICLE PARKING.

METAL TRELLIS.

OFFICE ENTRANCE.

ELEVATOR LOCATION.
20 NEW WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALONG PROPERTY LINE.

PARKING SPACE. TYP.

ELECTRICAL ROOM.

NEW 12'-0" WIDE SERVICE ACCESS EASEMENT
W/ ROLL-OVER CURB.

FIRE HYDRANT.

MECHANICAL ROOM.
23 STAIR LOCATION.
24 25 PROJECTION ABOVE.
26 NEW LIFT GATE.
27 EXISTING 33'-0" WIDE CHEVRON PIPELINE EASEMENT.
28 29
CATCH BASIN. SEE CIVIL.
30 RETENTION WALL. SEE GRADING PLAN.
31 12' WIDE GRAVEL ROADWAY. SEE CIVIL.
32 EXISTING BUILDING LOCATIONS (TO BE DEMO)
33 EXISTING STREET SIGN
ENHANCED SURFACE.

BIOSWALE LOCATION. SEE CIVIL.
34 TRANSFORMER PAD LOCATION.

NORTH

NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
1 BUILDING 'A'
SAN PABLO AVE.

ADJACENT PROPERTY
NUTTLE
2008231035
APN 402-390-004

BUILDING 'B'
24'-0" DRIVEWAY 15'-0"CLR. AERIAL APPARATUS
H Y D
1 20'-0"
CLR. FIRE LANE
R-30'
R-50'
R-30' R-50'
42' LADDER

FIRE TRUCK
42' LADDER FIRE TRUCK
2 2
2 3
3 4
4 6
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-003

ADJACENT PROPERTY
PIONEER PREMIER, LLC.
200112454
APN 402-240-016
AA.8
FIRE DEPT.

EMERG. ACCESS.

FIRE DEPT.

EMERG. ACCESS. FIRE LANE SIGN & RED CURB

OFFICE AREA
(INCLUDES SELF-STORAGE

MANAGEMENT OFFICE)

ONE WAY

ONE WAY CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 13 12 11 10 9
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
14 25
82'-7"
24'-0"

DRIVEWAY VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

SELF-STORAGE
AREA

ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-002

ADJACENT PROPERTY
LIFE LONG MEDICAL CARE , INC.
201616631
APN 402-390-001
PINOLE SHORES OWNERS ASSN.
2008186687
APN 402-230-021
PINOLE SHORES OWNERS ASSN.
2008186687
APN 402-230-022 22'-0"
40'
±4'-0" ±25'-0" DRIVEWAY
55' 41'
100' 85' 25'
30' 10'
10' 10'
30' 30'
5'28'
95' 18'
8' 90'
72' 25'
5'25'
5'
24'-0"

DRIVEWAY
.24'-0"
DRIVEWAY 50' 45' FIRE LANE SIGN & RED CURB

FIRE LANE SIGN & RED CURB
5 FIRE DEPT.

EMERG. ACCESS.
20'-0" CLR. FIRE LANE 20'-0" CLR. FIRE LANE
AS NOTED A.3

FIRE ACCESS & SAFETY PLAN

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEY NOTES
NORTH
0 20' 40'
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
NOTES TO PLAN:

1. SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE 2015 IFC.

2. PURSUANT TO IFC SECTION 903.2.9(5), AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 13, 2016 EDITION, SHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT GROUP S-1 SELF-STORAGE OCCUPANCIES.

3. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE II-B.

4. A SECONDARY MEANS OF ACCESS SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH A MINIMUM 26'-0" UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH.

5. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND MAINTAINED TO SUPPORT THE IMPOSED LOADS OF FIRE APPARATUS (85,000 LBS) AND SHALL BE SURFACED.

6. FIRE ACCESS ROAD TURNING RADII SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 40 FEET INSIDE AND 60 FEET OUTSIDE MEASURED FROM THE SAME POINT.

7. ACCESS ROADWAYS AT LEAST 26 FEET WIDE BUT LESS THAN 32 FEET WIDE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD MARKED AS FIRE LANE.

8. OPTICOM SENSOR UNIT REQUIRED FOR ALL MEANS OF ACCESS AND KNOX BOX FOR ALL SECONDARY EMERGENCY ENTRANCES.

9. FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL NOT BE LOCATE MORE THAN 300 FEET APART.

10. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE: IIB.

11. OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: S-1.

12. MAX ALLOWED STORAGE HEIGHT: 8'-0".

13. 3RD PARTY MANAGEMENT WILL IDENTIFY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PER

MUNICIPAL FIRE CODE AND PROVIDE A LIST INCLUDED IN THE LEASE CONTRACT FOR EACH STORAGE UNIT.

H Y D
FIRE HYDRANT.

FIRE LANE
26'-0" CLEAR.
1 4 FIRE RISER.
2 3
5 KNOT BOX.
6 ELECTRICAL ROOM.
42' FIRE LADDER
TRUCK.

ELEV # 2
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
5X10
10X15
5X10 5X5
10X18
8X23 5X8
8X22 8X10 8X10 8X10 8X10
10X17
10X17
5X12
5X7
5X7
5X7
DN ELEV # 1
STAIR # 1 STAIR #3 STAIR #4
5X10
DN STAIR # 2
10X12 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10
2 10X10
5X10 5X10 5X10
5X10
5X10 5X8
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
5X127X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5 5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5 5X10
10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15
10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20
DN
DN
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10 10X10
10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X15
10X12
8X10
8X10
8X10
8X10
8X10
5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10
5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X5
5X5
5X5 5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
10X10
10X15 10X15
5X8 5X10 5X10
8X10
10X15
10X13
10X11
10X15 10X15
10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15
10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 5X5
5X5
10X15
2 2
2 3
3 2
2 2
2 2
2 3
3 3
2 95'-0" 108'-0" 136'-0"
165'-0"
10X10 STAIR #3
ELEV # 2
10X15
10X15
UP ELEV # 1
STAIR # 1 UP
STAIR # 28.5X23
9X18 15X25
UP STAIR #4
UP
FR
10X10 10X10 10X10
F.R.

CARTS
10X23
TRASH
ENCL.

MECH.

ROOM
10X23
5X10 8.5X23
9X18

MANAGER'S OFFICE HOSPITALITY
RETAIL

JANITOR
ROOM

CUSTOMER SERVICE
KIOSK

CUSTOMER SERVICE
KIOSK
1 RETAIL SUITES
5X10

UNISEX RESTROOM

STORAGE
OFFICE
1 2
3 4
4 5
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 10 13
14 30'-0"
30'-0" 5'-0" 4'-0"
10'-0" 20'-0"
95'-0" 108'-0"
2 2
2 2
CARTS 10X25 10X25 10X25 10X25 10X25 10X25 10X25
10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X15
10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15
10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X15
5X10
5X10 5X10
5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10
5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X5
5X5
5X5 5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X8
8X10
10X15
10X13
10X11
10X15
10X12
8X10
8X10
8X10
8X10
8X10 10X20
1 2
2 2
2 LOADING AREA 136'-0"
165'-0"
5X10
10X10
10X18
10X23
5X10 5X10 5X10
10X20 10X20 7X15
MECH. 10X10 10X10 ROOM
AS NOTED A.4

PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS
1/16" = 1'-0" 1 1ST FLOOR PLAN - BLDG. A

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEY NOTES
1 PROJECTION OF FLOOR ABOVE.
2 3
CORNICE/AWNING PROJECTION ABOVE.

CLIMATE CONTROL AREA

SPANDREL GLASS

WALL LEGEND
PARTION WALL / LOAD BEARING 2-6"
8" CMU WALL
1/16" = 1'-0" 2 2ND FLOOR PLAN - BLDG. A
1/16" = 1'-0" 4 2ND FLOOR PLAN - BLDG. B
1/16" = 1'-0" 3 1ST FLOOR PLAN - BLDG. B

ELEV # 2
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X1010X15
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X15 10X8
10X10
10X10
10X10
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
10X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
5X5 5X5 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X20 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 10X15 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10
10X10
10X10
10X10
10X15
5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10 5X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X1010X15
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X5
5X55X10
10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10 10X10
10X15
10X12 STAIR #3
DN DN STAIR #4
10X8
10X8
10X8
10X8
5X10 10X15 10X15
8X10 10X15
5X8
10X10
10X11 10X13 5X10
5X8
6 6
4 5
4 5
3 3
3 3
3 10X10 10X10
AS NOTED A.5

PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEY NOTES
1 PROJECTION OF FLOOR ABOVE.
2 3
CORNICE/AWNING PROJECTION ABOVE.

CLIMATE CONTROL AREA

SPANDREL GLASS

WALL LEGEND
PARTION WALL / LOAD BEARING 2-6"
8" CMU WALL
1/16" = 1'-0" 1 3RD FLOOR PLAN - BLDG. B

MANAGER'S
OFFICE

HOSPITALITY
RETAIL

JANITOR
ROOM

CUSTOMER SERVICE
KIOSK

CUSTOMER SERVICE
KIOSK
1 UNISEX

RESTROOM
1 2
3 4
4 5
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 10 13
14 30'-0"
30'-0" 5'-0" 4'-0"
10'-0" 20'-0"
SAN PABLO AVE.

OFFICE NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

H Y D CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
BLDG. A
BLDG. B
AS NOTED A.6
PRELIM. OFFICE PLAN

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18
NORTH

KEY PLAN

KEY NOTES
COSTUMER SERVICE KIOSK.

CORNICE/AWNING ABOVE.

FEATURE WALL W/ MONITOR.

STOREFRONT WINDOWS. SEE ELEVATIONS.
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 9
4 10
SITTING AREA.

WATER FOUNTAINS.

DISPLAY SHELVES.

OFFICE ENTRANCE.

RESTROOM SINK.

RESTROOM TOILET.
11 OFFICE DESK.
12 COFFEE BAR SINK.
13 UNDER CABINET REFRIGERATOR.
14 JANITOR SINK & CABINET ABOVE.
3/8" = 1'-0" 1 OFFICE PLAN

SLOPE 1/2:12
SLOPE
1/2:12
8 8
2 2
2 5
5 4
7 7
+34'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
5 +38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
SLOPE
1/2:12
8 2
3 8
8 +22'-0"
T.O.RD.
+22'-0"
T.O.RD.
3 +28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+25'-4"
T.O.RD.
+25'-4"
T.O.RD.
+28'-0"
T.O.RD.

SLOPE
1/2:12
SLOPE
1/2:12
+32'-0"
T.O.RD.
+32'-0"
T.O.RD.
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+34-1"
T.O.RD.
+34-1"
T.O.RD.
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+32'-0"
T.O.RD. RIDGE
4 4
3 3
8 8 8
5 5
1 1
1 2
2 2
6 6 6
+26'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+26'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+26'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
1/16"=1'-0" A.7

ROOF PLAN

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEY NOTES
2 3
4 5
T.P.O. ROOFING SYSTEM.
6 WALL BELOW.
7 1
CORNICE.

ROOF CRICKET. TYP.

ROOF DRAIN. TYP.

TOP MOUNTED MECHANICAL UNITS.

ELEVATOR - ROOF ACCESS.
8 AWNING BELOW.

+105'-0"
+100'-0"
+110'-0"
±38'-8"
T.O.P.
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
3RD LEVEL
+34'-0"
T.O.D.
±0'-0"
A.F.F. 38'-0"

BUILDING 'A' DRIVEWAY BUILDING 'B'
+88.5' F.F. ROAD +88.5'

EXISTING GRADE
OPEN

LOADING
AREA
STAIR #4
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
UNIT

UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT
HALL

HALL UNIT UNIT HALL UNIT HALL UNIT UNIT HALL UNIT
STAIR #4
UNIT HALL UNIT STAIR #4 UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT

UNIT UNIT
±28'-8"
T.O.P.

SELF-STORAGE RETAIL SUITES UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT
OFFICE

UNIT HALL UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT HALL UNIT UNIT UNIT HALL UNIT HALL UNIT AS NOTED A.8

PRELIMINARY SECTION

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18
3/32" = 1'-0" 1 CROSS SECTION A

OFFICE

BUILDING 'A'

BUILDING 'B'
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
3RD LEVEL
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
3159
BEYOND
+35'-10"
T.O.RD.
+28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±34'-0"
T.O. C.
14 8 18 19
1 2 1 18 3 5 1 7 4 3 4 6 1
6 1
8 18 23
3 4 6 17 4 4 17 6
1 SAN PABLO AVE.

OFFICE NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

H Y D CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
BLDG. A
BLDG. B
AS NOTED A.9

PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEYNOTES
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 11
4 13
12 GLAZING.

ACCENT BAND.

SLIDING GATE.

CORNICE.

METAL AWNING.

METAL TRELLIS.

KEY MAP

STORAGE UNIT ROLL-UP DOOR
9 EXTERIOR DOOR.
10 OFFICE ENTRANCE.

WALL MOUNTED SIGN. SHOWN FOR DESIGN PURPOSE
ONLY, UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.
14 LIFT GATE.
15 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
16 17

COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD
C4
C2 CORRUGATED METAL
MANUFACTURER: MBCI
COLOR: SIGNATURE 200 CHARCOAL
FAUX WINDOW (SPANDREL GLASS).

NORTH
7' WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL.
18 C.M.U.
19 FENCE POST.

SMOOTH STUCCO FINISH.

STUCCO REVEAL CHANNEL.

PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TRICORN BLACK SW6258
20 NOT USED.
21 22
NATURAL GRADE.

NOT USED.

C1 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: NEBULOUS WHITE SW7063
C3 C.M.U.

MANUFACTURER: ORCO BLOCK
COLOR: SPLIT FACE BLACK 100 LW
C5 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: BAIZE GREEN SW6429
C6 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TUMBLIN' TUMBLEWEED SW9120
23 LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE LIGHTING PLAN.

C7 ROLL-UP DOORS
MANUFACTURER: JANUS INTERNATIONAL
COLOR: SATIN WHITE
3/32" = 1'-0" 1 SOUTH ELEVATION - SAN PABLO AVE.

BUILDING 'B' DRIVEWAY BUILDING 'A'

ANGLED VIEW
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
3RD LEVEL
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
+35'-10"
T.O.RD.
±34'-0"
BEYOND
+28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
C5
C3
C2 C4
C5 C4 C3
7 6 1
18 17 3
21 2 1 3 18 23
23 13
14 C4
4 C1
1 C4
9 11
6 C4
4 C1
1 C5
1 6
C4
4 C1
1 C6
1 2
SAN PABLO AVE.

OFFICE NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

H Y D CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
BLDG. A
BLDG. B
AS NOTED A.10

PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEYNOTES
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 11
4 13
12 GLAZING.

ACCENT BAND.

SLIDING GATE.

CORNICE.

METAL AWNING.

METAL TRELLIS.

KEY MAP

STORAGE UNIT ROLL-UP DOOR
9 EXTERIOR DOOR.
10 OFFICE ENTRANCE.

WALL MOUNTED SIGN. SHOWN FOR DESIGN PURPOSE
ONLY, UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.
14 LIFT GATE.
15 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
16 17

COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD
C4
C2 CORRUGATED METAL
MANUFACTURER: MBCI
COLOR: SIGNATURE 200 CHARCOAL
FAUX WINDOW (SPANDREL GLASS).

NORTH
7' WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL.
18 C.M.U.
19 FENCE POST.

SMOOTH STUCCO FINISH.

STUCCO REVEAL CHANNEL.

PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TRICORN BLACK SW6258
20 NOT USED.
21 22
NATURAL GRADE.

NOT USED.

C1 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: NEBULOUS WHITE SW7063
C3 C.M.U.

MANUFACTURER: ORCO BLOCK
COLOR: SPLIT FACE BLACK 100 LW
C5 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: BAIZE GREEN SW6429
C6 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TUMBLIN' TUMBLEWEED SW9120
23 LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE LIGHTING PLAN.

C7 ROLL-UP DOORS
MANUFACTURER: JANUS INTERNATIONAL
COLOR: SATIN WHITE

WEST ELEVATION
3/32" = 1'-0" 2

BUILDING 'B'
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
+32'-4"
T.O.RD.
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
3RD LEVEL
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
+35'-10"
T.O.RD.

C5 C4
23 2 1 3 21
C5 C4
23 2 1 3
3 SAN PABLO AVE.

OFFICE NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

H Y D CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
BLDG. A
BLDG. B
AS NOTED A.11

PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEYNOTES
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 11
4 13
12 GLAZING.

ACCENT BAND.

SLIDING GATE.

CORNICE.

METAL AWNING.

METAL TRELLIS.

KEY MAP

STORAGE UNIT ROLL-UP DOOR
9 EXTERIOR DOOR.
10 OFFICE ENTRANCE.

WALL MOUNTED SIGN. SHOWN FOR DESIGN PURPOSE
ONLY, UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.
14 LIFT GATE.
15 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
16 17

COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD
C4
C2 CORRUGATED METAL
MANUFACTURER: MBCI
COLOR: SIGNATURE 200 CHARCOAL
FAUX WINDOW (SPANDREL GLASS).

NORTH
7' WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL.
18 C.M.U.
19 FENCE POST.

SMOOTH STUCCO FINISH.

STUCCO REVEAL CHANNEL.

PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TRICORN BLACK SW6258
20 NOT USED.
21 22
NATURAL GRADE.

NOT USED.

C1 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: NEBULOUS WHITE SW7063
C3 C.M.U.

MANUFACTURER: ORCO BLOCK
COLOR: SPLIT FACE BLACK 100 LW
C5 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: BAIZE GREEN SW6429
C6 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TUMBLIN' TUMBLEWEED SW9120
23 LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE LIGHTING PLAN.

C7 ROLL-UP DOORS
MANUFACTURER: JANUS INTERNATIONAL
COLOR: SATIN WHITE
3/32" = 1'-0" 3 NORTH ELEVATION

BUILDING 'A'

OFFICE PARKING AREA - BEYOND

DRIVEWAY BUILDING 'B'
+28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±28'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
+35'-10"
T.O.RD.
3159
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
T.O.RD.
+12'-0"
2ND LEVEL
+22'-0"
3RD LEVEL
+38'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
±0'-0"
A.F.F.
±34'-0"
T.O. CORNICE
+26'-0"
T.O.CORNICE
C5
C1 C4 C6
C4
C4 C2 C4
C5 C4 C4 C6
1 1 7 3 2 1
4 10 11 9
3 2 17 3
2 1 21
23 13 3 6 4 1 13
C1
6 1
C4
5 4
23 23
C3
18 C6
1 C4
3 C3
18 C4
4 C5
1 C5
1 C4
4 SAN PABLO AVE.

OFFICE NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

H Y D CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
BLDG. A
BLDG. B
AS NOTED A.12

PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18
3/32" = 1'-0" 4 EAST ELEVATION

KEYNOTES
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 11
4 13
12 GLAZING.

ACCENT BAND.

SLIDING GATE.

CORNICE.

METAL AWNING.

METAL TRELLIS.

KEY MAP

STORAGE UNIT ROLL-UP DOOR
9 EXTERIOR DOOR.
10 OFFICE ENTRANCE.

WALL MOUNTED SIGN. SHOWN FOR DESIGN PURPOSE
ONLY, UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.
14 LIFT GATE.
15 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
16 17

COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD
C4
C2 CORRUGATED METAL
MANUFACTURER: MBCI
COLOR: SIGNATURE 200 CHARCOAL
FAUX WINDOW (SPANDREL GLASS).

NORTH
7' WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL.
18 C.M.U.
19 FENCE POST.

SMOOTH STUCCO FINISH.

STUCCO REVEAL CHANNEL.

PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TRICORN BLACK SW6258
20 NOT USED.
21 22
NATURAL GRADE.

NOT USED.

C1 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: NEBULOUS WHITE SW7063
C3 C.M.U.

MANUFACTURER: ORCO BLOCK
COLOR: SPLIT FACE BLACK 100 LW
C5 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: BAIZE GREEN SW6429
C6 PAINT
MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
COLOR: TUMBLIN' TUMBLEWEED SW9120
23 LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE LIGHTING PLAN.

C7 ROLL-UP DOORS
MANUFACTURER: JANUS INTERNATIONAL
COLOR: SATIN WHITE

NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

BUILDING 'A'
SAN PABLO AVE.

BUILDING 'B'
1 1
1 3 2
2 3
2 2
3 H Y D
AA.8
1 CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
3 3
3 3
3 1
2 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2 2 2
3 AS NOTED A.13

LIGHTING PLAN

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18

KEY NOTES
0 20' 40'
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
SITE LIGHTING MOUNTED ON BUILDING WALL @ 30'-0" 0.C.

SEE DETAIL SHEET.
1 ACCENT LIGHTING FIXTURE MOUNTED ON BUILDING WALL.

SEE DETAIL SHEET. 2
3 DOWNLIGHT. SEE DETAIL SHEET.

NORTH

AS NOTED A.14

LIGHTING PLAN DETAILS

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523
09/20/18
NTS 2 ACCENT LIGHT
NTS 3 DOWNLIGHT

WALLPACK
NTS 1

NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING
24'-0" DRIVEWAY
H Y D
1 4
3 3 3 3
3 3 CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV
82'-7"
24'-0"
DRIVEWAY VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING 22'-0"
40'
±4'-0" ±25'-0" DRIVEWAY
55' 41'
100' 85' 25'
30' 10'
10' 10'
30' 30'
5'28'
95' 18'
8' 90'
72' 25'
5'25'
5'
24'-0"

DRIVEWAY
.24'-0"
DRIVEWAY 50' 45'
2 CONCRETE FOUNDATION

HORIZONTAL CROSS MEMBER

RAILS & UPRIGHTS
2 3/8" ROUND METAL TUBING. TYP.
2" SQUARE METAL

TUBE POST TO

WELD METAL FENCE
OR GATE. SEE

STRUCTURAL FOR
FOUNDATION. 4
HINGES MIN.
2 3/8" ROUND METAL
TUBING. TYP.

PIER PIER PIER

CONCRETE FOUNDATION
27'-9
7 8
" LIFT GATE 6'-0"

GATE MOTOR & CONTROL
BOX

PIER (SEE ELEVATIONS)

PIER (SEE ELEVATIONS)
FENCE
FENCE

LIFT GATE
GRADE

TOP VIEW

FRONT VIEW
27'-6"

LIFT GATE

HORIZONTAL CROSS MEMBER

RAILS & UPRIGHTS
PIER 2 3/8" ROUND METAL TUBING. TYP. PIER

CONCRETE FOUNDATION CONCRETE FOUNDATION

GATE MOTOR & CONTROL
BOX

PIER (SEE ELEVATIONS)

PEDESTRIAN FENCE
GATE

PEDESTRIAN
GATE

LIFT GATE

FRONT VIEW

TOP VIEW
2'-8" GRADE 6'-0"
2" SQUARE METAL

TUBE POST TO

WELD METAL FENCE
OR GATE. SEE

STRUCTURAL FOR
FOUNDATION. 4
HINGES MIN.

FENCE

RAILS & UPRIGHTS
2 3/8" ROUND METAL TUBING. TYP.

PIER
TYP.

CONCRETE FOUNDATION CONCRETE FOUNDATION 6'-0"
GRADE
SIGN @ 7' AFF
8" SPLIT FACE C.M.U. WALL.

SEE ELEVATIONS FOR
COLOR.

RAMP. COORD

W/CIVIL
6' HIGH STEEL CORNER
GUARD. PAINT MATCH
BUILDING COLOR.
8'-0" CLR. 9'-6" CLR.
9'-4" CLR. 1% SLOPE

CONCRETE SLAB
COORDINATE WITH CIVIL 1'-6"
6' HIGH STEEL CORNER
GUARD. PAINT MATCH
BUILDING COLOR.

ONE 8 CUBIC YARDS

ROLLING DUMPSTER
8" SPLIT FACE C.M.U. WALL.

SEE ELEVATIONS FOR
COLOR.

SIGN @ 7' AFF

EXTERIOR

EXTERIOR
BLDG. INTERIOR
BLDG. INTERIOR
ROLL UP DOOR.

SEE ELEVATIONS.

BUMPER & CONCRETE
CURB

THIS DRAWING AND ITS CONTENTS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF

SERVICE AND ARE THE COPYRIGHTED PROPERTY OF JORDAN
ARCHITECTS, INC. THE USE IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED FOR THE

PROJECT NOTED ABOVE AND MAY NOT BE REUSED OR

REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
PERMISSION OF JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC. "COPYRIGHT"
YEAR OF FIRST PUBLICATION 2018 JORDAN ARCHITECTS, INC.

JOB NUMBER:

SCALE:

DATE:

BEAU REINBERG

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE

PINOLE, CA
18-523

AS NOTED
09/20/18A.15

FENCE PLAN & DETAILS

KEY NOTES
1/4"= 1'-0" 2 EXIT ONLY LIFT GATE DETAIL.
1/4"= 1'-0" 1 ENTRY ONLY LIFT GATE DETAIL.

WROUGHT IRON FENCE DETAIL
1/4"= 1'-0" 3
1"= 30'-0" 1 FENCE & GATE LOCATION

ENTRY ONLY LIFT GATE

EXIT ONLY LIFT GATE
1 2
4 3 NEW WROUGHT IRON FENCE (ALONG PROPERTY LINE)

PEDESTRIAN GATE
1/4"= 1'-0" 4 TRASH ENCLOSURE DETAIL. TYP.

NO PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING

CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/ EV

VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING DATE

PROJECT SHEET TITLE SHEET
NO. DATE REVISION APRIL 2019

EXTRA SPACE PINOLE
890 SAN PABLO AVENUE
PINOLE, CA VALLIER DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING DESIGN 210 WASHINGTON AVENUE, SUITE G POINT RICHMOND, CA 94801 TELEPHONE 510.237.7745 0 NORTH 10 20 40 HYDROSEED EROSION CONTROL MIX ON SLOPE AND HILLSIDE. SEE LEGEND CHEVRON PIPELINE EASEMENT NO TREES ALLOWED WITHIN AREA, SHALLOW-ROOTED SHRUBS ONLY EXISTING MULTI-TRUNK WILLOW TREE TO REMAIN IF NOT ENCROACHING ON EASEMENT. BIOSWALE/STORM WATER TREATMENT AREA (S.C.D.) (TYP.) CAR DIV Carex divulsa, Berkeley sedge 1 Gallon Size at 12" On Center EPI CAN Epilobium canum, California fushsia 1 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread and Height JUN PAT Juncus patens, blue rush 1 Gallon Size, 2'-0" Spread and Height CER OCC Cercis occidentalis, western redbud 15 Gallon Size, 10'-0" Spread and Height GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD (S.C.D.) ASPHALT ROAD AND PARKING AREA (S.C.D.) RETAINING WALL (S.C.D.) PLANTING AT PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) ACE ARM Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong', Armstrong Maple 15 Gallon Size, 15'-0" Spread, 40'-0" Height ACCENT PLANTING AT ENTRY/EXIT (TYP.) DIE BIC Dietes bicolor 'Orange Drop', Orange Drop Fortnight Lily 1 Gallon Size, 3'-0" Spread and Height FES EB Festuca galuca 'Elijah Blue', Elijah Blue Fescue 1 Gallon Size, 2'-0" Spread and Height L-1 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN NATIVE LANDSCAPE BUFFER QUE AGR Quercus agrifolia, Coast Live Oak 15 Gallon Size, 30'-0" to 70'-0" Spread and Height RHA CAL Rhamnus california, California Coffeberry 1 Gallon Size, 8'-0" Spread and Height FRONTAGE PLANTING CAR FF Carpinus betulus 'Frans Fontaine', Frans Fontaine Beech 24" Box, 10'-0" Spread, 35'-0" Height WES ML Westringa fruticosa 'Morning Light', Coast Rosemary
15 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread, 6'-0" Height WES WG Westringa fruticosa 'Wynyablle Gem', Coast Rosemary
15 Gallon Size, 6'-0" Spread, 8'-0" Height SCREEN PLANTING AT PROPERTY LINE CAR FF Carpinus betulus 'Fran Fontaine', Columnar European HornBeam 15 Gallon Size, 10'-0" Spread, 35'-0" Height PIT TEN Pittosporum tenuifolium 'Silver Sheen', Silver Sheen Kohuhu, Hedge to 4' Wide. 5 Gallon Size, 8'-0" Spread, 12'-0" Height LINEAR ROOT BARRIER FOR TREES ADJACENT TO PAVING ACE ARM Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong', Armstrong Maple 15 Gallon Size, 15'-0" Spread, 40'-0" Height WES ML Westringa fruticosa 'Morning Light', Coast Rosemary 5 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread, 6'-0" Height DIE BIC Dietes bicolor 'Orange Drop', Orange Drop Fortnight Lily 1 Gallon Size, 3'-0" Spread and Height ORNAMENTAL GATES AND FENCING (S.A.D.) ASPHALT ROAD AND ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA (S.A.D.) SCREEN PLANTING AT PROPERTY LINE COT COG Cotinus coggygria 'Royal Purple', Royal Purple Smoke Tree 15 Gallon Size, 8'-0" Spread, 15'-0" Height ROS TB Rosmarinis officinalis 'Tuscan Blue', Tuscan Blue Rosemary 5 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread, 6'-0" Height SAL SB Salvia 'Celestial Blue', Celestial Blue Sage 5 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread and Height FES EB Festuca galuca 'Elijah Blue', Elijah Blue Fescue 1 Gallon Size, 2'-0" Spread and Height LINEAR ROOT BARRIER FOR TREES ADJACENT TO PAVING PLANT LIST LEGEND S.A.D. SEE ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS S.C.D. SEE CIVIL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS (TYP.) TYPICAL FES EB Festuca galuca 'Elijah Blue', Elijah Blue Fescue 1 Gallon Size, 2'-0" Spread and Height DIE BIC Dietes bicolor 'Orange Drop', Orange Drop Fortnight Lily 1 Gallon Size, 3'-0" Spread and Height VINES ON TRELLIS STRUCTURE (TYP.) DIS BUC Distictis buccinatoria, Red Trumpet Vine 5 Gallon Size, 20'-0" Spread and Height Install at Trellis Structure (S.A.D.) PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE (TYP.) DIE BIC Dietes bicolor 'Orange Drop', Orange Drop Fortnight Lily 1 Gallon Size, 3'-0" Spread and Height BIOSWALE/STORM WATER TREATMENT AREA (TYP.) (S.C.D.) CAR DIV Carex divulsa, Berkeley Sedge 1 Gallon Size, 12" On Center EPI CAN Epilobium canum, California Fushisa 1 Gallon Size, 4'-0" Spread and Height CER OCC Cercis occidentalis, Western Redbud 15 Gallon Size, 10'-0" Spread and Height JUN PAT Juncus patens, Blue Rush 1 Gallon Size, 2'-0" Spread and Height PERMEABLE PAVING (S.C.D.) PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE (TYP.) VINES ON TRELLIS STRUCTURE (TYP.) DIS BUC Distictis buccinatoria, Red Trumpet Vine 5 Gallon Size, 20'-0" Spread and Height Install at Trellis Structure (S.A.D.) LANDSCAPE NARRATIVE ACE ARM Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong', Armstrong Maple 15 Gallon Size, 15'-0" Spread, 40'-0" Height

DATEPROJECT SHEET TITLE
SHEET NO. DATE REVISION
AUGUST 2018 EXTRA SPACE PINOLE 890 SAN PABLO AVENUE

PINOLE, CA
VALLIER DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC.

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING DESIGN
210 WASHINGTON AVENUE, SUITE G
POINT RICHMOND, CA 94801
TELEPHONE 510.237.7745
L-2LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Acer x fremannii ‘Armstrong, Armstrong Maple Carpinus betulus ‘Frans Fontaine’, Frans Fontaine Beech Cotinus coggygria ‘Royal Purple’, Royal Purple Smoke Tree Quercus agrifolia, Coast Live Oak

PLANT PALETTE - TREES
Dietes bicolor ‘Orange Drop’, Orange Fornight Lily Festuca glauca ‘Elijah Blue’, Elijah Blue Fescue Pittosporum tenuifolium ‘Silver Sheen’’, Silver Sheen Kohuhu Rhamnus californica, California Coffeeberry Rosmarinis officinalis ‘Tuscan Blue’, Tuscan Blue Rosemary Salvia ‘Celestial Blue’, Celestial Blue Sage Westringia fruticosa ‘Morning Light, Coast Rosemary Westringia fruticosa ‘Wynyabbie Gem’, Coast Rosemary

SHRUBS / ACCENT PLANTS / GROUND COVERS

BIOSWALE/STORM WATER TREATMENT AREA PLANTS
Carex divulsa, Berkeley sedge Cercis occidentalis, Western Redbud Epilobium canum, California Fuchsia Juncus patens, Blue Rush

SAN PABLO AVENUE ELEVATION
Scale 1”=16’-0”
Shade tree and shrubs in parking area
Evergreen screen planting at project perimeter with shade trees and evergreen shrubs
Columnar street tree
Evergreen shrub foundation planting with
Accent planting at project entry and exit drives
APRIL 2019

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST
Attachment D

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM NORTHEAST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH OFFICE DETAIL

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH EAST ELEVATION

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH SOUTH ELEVATION

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH SAN PABLO APPROACH FROM EAST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH SAN PABLO APPROACH FROM WEST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019

PHOTO SIMULATIONS KEY

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 1

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 2

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 3

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 4

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 5

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 6

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
APRIL 29, 2019
PHOTO SIMULATION VIEW 7

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 3A
DATE: NOVEMBER 5, 2019
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JUSTIN SHIU, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF A PROJECT PROPOSING A PERSONAL STORAGE FACILITY AT 890 SAN PABLO AVENUE

RECOMMENDATION
To consider an appeal of a project proposing a personal storage facility at 890 San Pablo Avenue.

Staff recommends that City Council confirm the Planning Commission approval of the proposed project at 890 San Pablo Avenue, and adopt a resolution approving Design Review, a Conditional Use Permit, and Tree Removal Permit for the proposed project.

BACKGROUND
Beau Reinberg, applicant, submitted an application for the development of a new Personal Storage Facility at 890 San Pablo Avenue (APN 402-240-014). The final design in the approved plans includes construction of a two-story office and selfstorage building and a three-story self-storage building totaling approximately 75,983 square feet on a 1.34 acre lot at 890 San Pablo Avenue.

On January 28, 2019, the applicant presented the initial design proposal for a 95,981 square foot building containing only personal storage use to a Joint City Council and Planning Commission Study Session for comments on design and consistency with General Plan and Specific Plan goals. The applicant redesigned the project based on comments heard at the meeting and resubmitted a 75,983 square foot project including approximately 3,760 square feet of office/commercial space.

On August 26, 2019, Planning Commission considered the project at a public hearing held on August 26, 2019. The proposed project requires Design Review for nonresidential developments, a Conditional Use Permit, and an associated Tree Removal Permit. The Planning Commission is the decision-making body for Attachment E

City Council Report 3A
November 5, 2019 2
approval of these types of entitlements. . The staff report containing the Planning Commission resolution, conditions of approval, and project plans is included as Attachment B. The Planning Commission approved the project with a 4-3 decision.

Minutes from the meeting are included as Attachment C. A decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council for review by a member of the City Council or a member of the public. A complete appeal application was submitted by a member of the public within the required ten-day appeal period. The Appeal Statement is included as Attachment D.

The City Council may confirm, modify, or reverse the action of the Planning Commission, in whole or in part, or add or amend such conditions as it deems necessary. As provided in 17.10.070 of the Municipal Code, City Council shall state the basis for its action in taking the action on an appeal.

During the appeal hearing, both appellant and the project applicant will have the opportunity to present their cases with greater detail at the City Council meeting for consideration.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS
In hearing the appeal, the City Council must decide whether to approve or deny Design Review, a Conditional Use Permit, and an associated Tree Removal Permit for the proposed project, with conditions as the Council determines necessary.

Standards for Decision
In considering Design Review for the project, the City Council must determine whether or not the following findings can be made for the proposed project, as conditioned:

1. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the general plan and complies with applicable zoning regulations, planned development, master plan or specific plan provisions, improvement standards, and other applicable standards and regulations adopted by the city;

2. The proposed project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation; and

3. The site layout (orientation and placement of buildings and parking areas), as well as the landscaping, lighting, and other development features, are compatible with and complement the existing surrounding environment and ultimate character of the area under the general plan and applicable specific plans.

In considering the Conditional Use Permit for the project, the City Council must determine whether or not the following findings can be made for the proposed project, as conditioned:

City Council Report 3A
November 5, 2019 3

1. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plans, and all applicable provisions of this title (Title 17 Zoning Code);

2. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case (location, size, design, and operating characteristics), be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use or to the general welfare of the city;

3. The site of the proposed use is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and related structures being proposed; and

4. It will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses, development regulations, or performance standards established for the zoning district in which it is located. The proposed use and related structures are compatible with other land uses, transportation and service facilities in the vicinity.

In considering the Tree Removal Permit for the project, the City Council must determine whether or not the following findings can be made for removal of the protected trees on the property:

1. The burden to the applicant in preserving the protected tree(s) greatly outweighs the benefit to the public; and

2. Preserving the protected tree(s) would severely reduce the scale or feasibility of the development.

The City Council may only approve the entitlement, as conditioned, if it can make the above findings for each entitlement sought. Conversely, the City Council may only deny the requested entitlements if it is not able to make one or more of those findings. The Council’s decision must specifically identify which findings can or cannot be made, and there must be evidence in record to support that decision (which can include the application materials, materials prepared by staff, as well as public testimony during the Public Hearing). For example, if the City Council believes the project is not consistent with the General Plan, it should identify specific General Plan policies and/or goals with which the proposed project is inconsistent.

Appellant’s Points of Appeal
A summary of reasons the appellant submitted the appeal is shown below, and the full appeal statement is included in Attachment D.
• The project does not meet the goals as set forth in Pinole’s General Plan and Three Corridors Specific Plan.
• This project does not meet the economic development goals of Pinole. • This project adds no meaningful enhancement or revenue to our community. • This project will be very profitable for Extra Space Storage but brings in in little revenue for Pinole.

City Council Report 3A
November 5, 2019 4
• Pinole may soon be perceived as the regional storage area for surrounding cities.
• The proposed small office suites are not a true incubator model, and the concept does not guarantee they will be used by small businesses or be affordable alternatives.

Some of the reasons for the appeal identified by the appellant are the same as, or very similar to, the required findings established by the Municipal Code for considering the project. The City Council’s decision must be based on its ability, or inability, to make the required findings, and not on any other factors.

Information Regarding Land Use Considerations
A discussion of points regarding land use, including the proposed project’s consistency with the General Plan, is below. This information also addresses some of the issues raised in the appeal.
• The project is a light industrial use on a site designated Service Sub Area (SSA) in the General Plan. The SSA designation within the San Pablo Avenue area is intended to “preserve land for manufacturing and industrial uses, particularly ‘green industry’. A limited amount of general office, retail and residential uses may be permitted where they will not conflict with the principal industrial uses in the area” (Page 5.0-21, General Plan). Within the Service Sub-Area, the project site is located in the Office Industrial Mixed Use (OIMU) district. The Three Corridors Specific Plan provides that the purpose of the OIMU district is “to allow a wide range of office and light industrial development. This designation is intended for office and light industrial uses with supporting retail and service uses” (Page 6.0-4, Three Corridors Specific Plan).
• The project is compatible with Goal LU.1 and Policy LU.1.1 in contributing to the diversity of land uses along San Pablo Avenue and providing for the availability of commercial services and employment opportunities. San Pablo Avenue consists of a variety of land use designations, including medium to high density residential, residential mixed use, commercial mixed use, and office industrial mixed use, and the project proposes a use compatible with the portion of San Pablo Avenue intended for office and light industrial type uses.
o GOAL LU.1 Preserve and enhance the natural resources, high-quality residential neighborhoods and commercial areas, and small-town (semi-rural) character of Pinole.
o POLICY LU.1.1 Increase land use diversity along the San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road and Appian Way corridors; reduce residential density on large land holdings designated for Suburban Residential land use; and maintain other land use designations for a variety of residential, commercial, light industrial, recreational, open space and public purposes which (1) protect environmental resources;

City Council Report 3A
November 5, 2019 5
(2) provide a mix of housing types, densities and tenure; (3) ensure that a variety of commercial and industrial goods, services and employment opportunities are available; and (4) offer a range of recreational and public facilities to meet the needs of residents. • The project would redevelop an underutilized lot to contribute new development with greater use and benefits along the portion of San Pablo Avenue that can accommodate office and light industrial development.

Personal storage facilities are a light industrial use, and the property is designated for industrial uses. The project would add to the services provided and to the tax base, referenced in Goal LU.7 and Policy LU.7.1. The extent to which the project does this can be further deliberated through the City Council discussions.
o GOAL LU.7 Balance housing and employment opportunities to reduce trips in and out of the region and encourage commercial development which maintains and enhances the quality of the city’s commercial areas, provides services for residents and broadens the tax base of the community to provide needed revenues for public services. o POLICY LU.7.1 Provide sufficient land for commercial and industrial uses to allow for development that provides basic goods and services to Pinole residents.
o POLICY LU.7.2 Provide for economic development which (1) maintains the City’s ability to finance services and the construction and maintenance of public improvements; (2) offers local employment opportunities for Pinole residents to reduce inter-city commuting; and (3) assures the availability and diversity of resident-serving goods and services.
• The project site, in the OIMU district, is intended for office and light industrial uses and has limitations on certain other uses, as provided in the land use description in the Three Corridors Specific Plan. Commercial and other support services may be provided but the predominant use of integrated developments is office and/or light industrial. Retail must be ancillary to industrial use and cannot exceed ten percent of total usable floor area. Public and quasi-public uses are permitted.
o “The purpose of the Office Industrial Mixed Use District is to allow a wide range of office and light industrial development. This designation is intended for office and light industrial uses with supporting retail and service uses. Offices may be developed in an office park setting, but most office and light industrial development stands alone. Commercial and other support services may be integrated vertically and/or horizontally in this district, but the predominant use of integrated developments is office and/or light industrial. Retail must be ancillary to the principal industrial activity of the property and cannot exceed 10% of total usable floor area. Public and quasi-public uses (community centers, public library, city hall, parks and other community serving uses etc) are permitted.” (Page 6.0-4, Three Corridors Specific Plan).

City Council Report 3A
November 5, 2019 6
• Personal storage facilities are prohibited in all zoning districts in the City, except for the OIMU district, in which they are a conditionally permitted use.

OIMU designated properties are located only in the San Pablo Avenue corridor. Any proposals for future storage facilities would be subject to discretionary review, through the Conditional Use Permit process.

In hearing the appeal, the City Council is requested to consider this staff report and all other evidence and testimony presented at the hearing. The City Council may confirm, modify, or reverse the Planning Commission’s approval, or add or amend conditions as deemed necessary.

FISCAL IMPACT
Approval or denial of the proposed project will have no direct fiscal impacts.

ATTACHMENT(S):

A: Draft Resolution
B: Planning Commission Staff Report for August 26, 2019, excluding Attachment B exhibits (under Resolution 19-11, not in appeal consideration).

C: Draft Minutes, dated August 26, 2019
D: Appeal Statement

Attachment F

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
April 15, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST
Attachment G

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
April 15, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
April 18, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
April 18, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
MAY 10, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
MAY 10, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
SEPTEMBER 5, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST

Pinole Self Storage
Conceptual Design
890 San Pablo Avenue, Pinole, CA 94564
SEPTEMBER 5, 2018

CONCEPTUAL SKETCH AERIAL VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST

VI

LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Table 6.2
Permitted Use Table for San Pablo Avenue
Permitted Use provisions are symbolized in the table as follows:

P = Land Use permitted by right
CUP = Land Use permitted with approval of Conditional Use Permit N = Land Use not permitted
N/A = Not Applicable

LAND USE

CLASSIFICATIONS
Old Town Sub-Area Service Sub-Area Mixed-Use Sub-Area

MDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI CMU OPMU OIMU PQI VHDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI Residential Use Listings
Adult Day Care Home P P P P N P P P N P P P P P
Child Day Care Facility CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP Dwelling, Multifamily P P Pb Pb N Pb Pb CUP N P P Pb Pb N Accessory Dwelling Unit /
Junior Accessory Dwelling
Unit

P P P P N P P P N P P P P N
Dwelling, Single-family P P N N N N N N N N N N N N
Dwelling, Two-family Pd Pd Nd N N N N N N N N N N N
Family Day Care Home,
Small P P P P P P P N P P P P P N
Family Day Care Home,
Large P P P P P P P N P P P P P N
Home Occupation P P P P N Pa Pa Pa P Pa Pa Pa P N
Live-Work Facility P P P P P P P P P N P P P P
Low Barrier Navigation
Center

N P P P N P P P N N P P P N
Residential Care Facility P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Group Residential/Home P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Emergency Shelter/
Temporary Home N N N N N CUPb CUPb P CUP CUP N CUPb CUPb N CITY OF PINOLE – THREE CORRIDORS SPECIFIC PLAN
San Pablo Avenue
Attachment I

VISan Pablo Avenue

LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF PINOLE – THREE CORRIDORS SPECIFIC PLAN

6.0-18

LAND USE

CLASSIFICATIONS
Old Town Sub-Area Service Sub-Area Mixed-Use Sub-Area

MDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI CMU OPMU OIMU PQI VHDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI Community Service Use Listings
Clubs, Lodges, Private
Meeting Halls N P P P P P P P P N P P P P
Indoor Amusement/
Entertainment N CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP Indoor Fitness and
Sports Facilities N CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP Libraries and Museums P P P P P P P P P N N P P P
Outdoor Commercial
Recreation N N P P P P P P P N N P P P
Parks and Public Plazas P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Public Safety Facility CUP P P P P P P P P CUP P P P P
Religious Institutions CUP P P P P P P P P CUP P P P P
Schools – Public CUP P P P P P P P P CUP P P P P
Schools – Private,
Special/Studio N P P P P P P P P N P P P P
Theatres and
Auditoriums N P P P P P P P P N P P P P
Utility, Transportation, and Communication Use Listings Bus and Truck Terminal
Parking N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Heliports N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Park and Ride Facility N N N CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N N CUP CUP CUP Public Parking P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Telecommunications
Facility CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP Transit Stations and
Terminals CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP

VI

LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
San Pablo Avenue
CITY OF PINOLE – THREE CORRIDORS SPECIFIC PLAN

6.0-19

LAND USE

CLASSIFICATIONS
Old Town Sub-Area Service Sub-Area Mixed-Use Sub-Area

MDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI CMU OPMU OIMU PQI VHDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI Retail, Service, and Office Listings
Adult-Related Business N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Alcoholic Beverage
Sales N CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP Banks and Financial
Services N P P P N P P P N N P P P N
Bars and Nightclubs N CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N Bed and Breakfast CUP CUP CUP N N CUP N N N CUP CUP CUP N N Building Materials
Stores and Yards N CUP CUP N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Business Support
Services N N CUP CUP N P P P N N P P P N
Drive-in/Drive-through
sales/services N N N N N N CUP CUP N N N CUP CUP N
Equipment Sales and
Rental N CUPC P CUP N N CUP CUP N N N N CUP N
Home Improvement
Supplies N CUP P CUP N P CUP CUP N N CUPc P CUP N
Hotels/Motels N N CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N N CUP CUP CUP N Kennels N N CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N N N CUP CUP N
Medical Services -
General N N CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N N N CUP CUP N
Medical Services –
Hospital N N CUP CUP P P P P P N N CUP CUP P
Office – Business and
Professional N P P P P P P P P N P P P P
Personal Services CUP P P P P P P P P CUP P P P P
Personal Services -
Restricted N CUP CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP N N CUP CUP CUP N Restaurants N P P P N P P P N N P P P N

VISan Pablo Avenue

LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CITY OF PINOLE – THREE CORRIDORS SPECIFIC PLAN

6.0-20

LAND USE

CLASSIFICATIONS
Old Town Sub-Area Service Sub-Area Mixed-Use Sub-Area

MDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI CMU OPMU OIMU PQI VHDR RMU CMU OPMU PQI Retail N P P P N P P P N N P P P N
Veterinary Facility N CUP P P N P P P N N CUP P P N
Automotive and Vehicle Use Listings
Auto Parts Sales N CUP P P N P P P N N CUP P P N
Car Wash and Detailing N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Service Stations N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Vehicle Services N N CUP CUP N CUP CUP CUP CUP N N CUP CUP N Industrial, Manufacturing, and Processing Use Listings
Manufacturing - Minor N CUP CUP N N N N CUP N N N N N N Cottage Industry N P P N N P P P N N CUP N N N
Personal Storage
Facility N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Printing and Publishing N CUP P P N P P P N N CUP P P N Recycling Facility –
Collection N P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Recycling Facility –
Processing N N N N N N N CUP N N N N N N
Footnotes:
a – Home occupations must have no external evidence of business activity, (e.g. signs, noise, odor, vibration, etc.) or reduce available parking. No customers or employees are allowed at the home and no advertising which gives the home address is allowed. b – Not allowed on first floor at street frontage, except for residential development on a property with an affordable housing agreement and when that development includes community benefits as specified in the General Plan.
c – Square footage not to exceed 10,000 Square feet.
d – Not permitted if the same use is preexisting and within 200’ e – See Multi-Family Residential