Pinole City Council
February 23, 2026

PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION

MEETING AGENDA
February 23, 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 - February 23, 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 - February 23, 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 February 9, 2026 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. Uptown Yard (CUP19-09 & DR19-14) Use Permit Review and Modification 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 March 9, 2026 at 7:00PM

Planning Commission
Agenda - February 23, 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 February 9, 2026
1 DRAFT
2 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
4 PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
5 6 February 9, 2026
7 8 THIS MEETING WAS HELD IN A HYBRID FORMAT
9 BOTH IN-PERSON AND ZOOM TELECONFERENCE
10 11
12 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 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. ROLL CALL
25 26 Commissioners Present: Bender, Huey, Martinez, Uch, Vice-Chairperson Menis and 27 Chairperson Sandoval
28 29 Commissioners Excused: Lam-Julian
30 31 Staff Present: David Hanham, Planning Manager
32 Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
33 Justin Shiu, Associate Planner
34 35 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported on his ex-parté communications to his email list about the 36 topics on the meeting agenda.
37 38 E. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
39 40 There were no comments from the public.
41 42 F. MEETING MINUTES
43 44 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for January 26, 2026 45 46 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for 47 January 26, 2026, as shown.
48 49
50 F.1.

2 February 9, 2026
1 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Menis APPROVED: 5-0-1-1
2 ABSTAIN: Martinez
3 ABSENT: Lam-Julian
4 5 G. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
6 7 1. SM26-0001 Subdivision of Parcel Located at 2860 Pinole Valley Road (APN:
8 430-330-027) for Land Dedication Trail to the City of Pinole 9 10 Planning Manager David Hanham introduced the item. 11 12 Public Works Director Heba El-Guindy provided a PowerPoint presentation for SM26-0001 13 Subdivision of a Parcel located at 2860 Pinole Valley Road for a land dedication trail to 14 the City of Pinole, and recommended the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 26-02, 15 approving the subdivision of one lot into two lots located at 2860 Pinole Valley Road, 16 consistent with the Tentative Map contained in Attachment B. 17 18 Responding to questions from the Planning Commission, Public Works Director El-Guindy 19 clarified the following:
20 21 • The creek itself was under the jurisdiction of the Contra Costa Flood Control 22 District (CCFCD). Parcel B did not include the creek. (Bender) 23 24 • The PowerPoint presentation included concepts that had been prepared by 25 Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed. Once the subdivision was approved, the 26 design process would start and the types of furniture to be installed and what would 27 qualify under grant funding would then be identified. There were no current plans 28 available for review other than survey work and the title report. (Uch) 29 30 • The path was currently a dirt multi-use path that while not heavily used due to its 31 condition was used by pedestrians/cyclists and students. Presently, there were 32 lights aiming towards Pinole Valley High School (PVHS) that reflected onto the 33 trail, and along the fence area where the boundary was shown in the PowerPoint 34 presentation, a fence that belonged to PVHS which had multiple overhead lights. 35 The trail lighting that was planned to be added would be solar powered and would 36 not have energy extension/electricity, but be lit during the evening and night hours. 37 Staff expected safety with numbers and with the increased use of the trail were 38 expecting that activity to enhance safety. Staff had not looked into security but 39 would collaborate with the CCFCD, the City’s Information Technology (IT) 40 Department and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, to possibly consider the 41 addition of security cameras. The IT Department was researching the use of 42 security cameras and alarms for various facilities within the City, and this site could 43 potentially be added. (Martinez)
44 45 • The Clean California Grant was close to be being approved. The initial application 46 was for $200,000, but staff had learned the initial ask may be increased to 47 $300,000. (Huey)
48

3 February 9, 2026
1 • Staff hoped the City would secure the Clean California Grant that would cover 2 furniture, debris removal and vegetation management for Parcel B, but would not 3 include the creek itself and the embankment within Parcel B. The grant would 4 cover the art pieces, wayfinding signage to the trail and creek and larger scale 5 signs at both ends of the trail at Sarah Court and Pinole Valley Road. Lighting 6 could be implemented soon, as a priority, and as a capital improvement as part of 7 City-wide improvements under the Public Works Department, which would allocate 8 funds for the installation of the lights given the priority of the safety element. Staff 9 also continued to search for a number of grant programs for the pedestrian/bicycle 10 bridge and widening and resurfacing or surfacing of the multi-use path with 11 permeable pavement given the environmental impacts of having regular pavement 12 that would specifically be for a trail use. (Huey)
13 14 • Staff had not formalized counts that were typically done as part of data collection 15 regarding the users of the trail. That could be done pursuant to City Council 16 direction to capture the peak periods during the week or weekends, to determine 17 whether the users were commuters or recreational users, or those accessing the 18 shopping center or school during the week. Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed 19 may have some data and staff could check but the Public Works Department did 20 not have formalized counts. (Huey)
21 22 • The PowerPoint presentation could be modified with more details on future steps 23 and potential sources of funding prior to uploading to the City website. (Vice24 Chairperson Menis) 25 26 • If approved, the land would be donated to the City of Pinole and under the City’s 27 jurisdiction. (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
28 29 • The item before the Planning Commission was only the Parcel Map. (Vice30 Chairperson Menis) 31 32 • The City currently maintained the area of Parcel B to secure the safety of the users 33 since the vegetation left unmaintained could potentially harm users of the dirt path. 34 The City was maintaining the location and it would not significantly increase the 35 need for staff time or costs when the land was donated to the City. The future 36 improvements, particularly for the bridge, were intended to reduce the potential for 37 the ultimate need to replace the bridge. Staff hoped the maintenance could be 38 more organized given the improvements and overall conditions of the area. (Vice39 Chairperson Menis) 40 41 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
42 43 Jonathan Jarvis, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and the lead for the Pinole Creekside 44 Project, appreciated the support from the City for this project. The trail was predominantly 45 used by PVHS students and the community that lived on Sarah Court. The trail was active 46 and while there were no hard numbers for total usage, it was clear that during the day the 47 trail was heavily used.
48

4 February 9, 2026
1 Mr. Jarvis reported the trail had been identified by the Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed’s 2 Monthly Trash Clean-Ups as a trash hot spot, and it was felt if the trail could be improved 3 with the installation of trash receptacles, which the City had done, and the removal of non4 native vegetation and with improvement to the trail tred, there could be more respect for 5 the area. Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed reached out and obtained a pro bono design 6 by a landscape architectural firm. These design concepts were available on the Friends 7 of Pinole Creek Watershed website.
8 9 Mr. Jarvis added there was a need for lighting and students had expressed concern with 10 the trail when dark. The addition of lighting, art work, amenities and furniture, were all 11 suggestions from the public and the students who wanted to be able to see and feel a 12 connection to Pinole Creek. Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed also appreciated the 13 opportunity to participate in any grant opportunities that would improve the trail and 14 removing the non-native species along the edge of the trail and replanting with native 15 species, which would be part of the grant and which would significantly reduce the 16 maintenance. Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed also reached out to the Ohlone 17 community who were interested in supporting the work and the planting of any native 18 plants that could be interesting for cultural and traditional uses. He suggested this was a 19 great project, and he appreciated the Planning Commission’s consideration that would 20 facilitate the opportunity to improve the trail and its access for students and the public. 21 22 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
23 24 Vice-Chairperson Menis thanked Mr. Jarvis for answering some of the questions he had 25 with the proposal, particularly that there had been outreach to the Ohlone Tribes. He also 26 noted that the audio in the Council Chambers had briefly cut out during the speaker’s 27 comments, and some of the comments may not have been audible. 28 29 Commissioner Bender referenced Attachment A, Planning Commission Resolution 26-02, 30 Conditions of Approval, Condition 6, Tentative Subdivision Map (b), and noted the 31 reference to Appian Professional Plaza, should be stricken. 32 33 Commissioner Bender also referenced Page 31 of 37 of the agenda packet, the first page 34 of Attachment A, Planning Commission Resolution 26-02, and the seventh WHEREAS 35 clause, which read: WHEREAS, the project meets the criteria for a Categorical Exemption 36 as Minor Land Divisions pursuant to Section 15315 of the California Environmental Quality 37 Act (CEQA) Guidelines because it involves a minor land division of less than four parcels 38 within an urbanized area consistent with the General Plan and zoning and the property 39 does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent; and … He asked where the 40 reference to 20 percent had originated since the staff report noted no more than 30 percent 41 of the subject lot had slopes of 10 percent or greater. 42 43 Planning Manager David Hanham explained that the staff report was stating what the 44 actual slope was within the area. The reference to 20 percent was what the Subdivision 45 Code required.
46 47 Associate Planner Justin Shiu added the CEQA Exemption also referenced the 20 percent 48 slope.
49

5 February 9, 2026
1 Public Works Director El-Guindy explained the slopes that were less than 20 percent were 2 actually less than 10 percent for the majority of the land. She also noted there would be 3 accessibility improvements on both ends of the multi-use path at Pinole Valley Road and 4 Sarah Court. Currently the access points were not Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 5 compliant and would be improved as part of the surfacing of the multi-use path and access 6 locations.
7 8 The Public Works Director also clarified that while the public hearing was for the 9 subdivision of the parcel, if the Planning Commission desired staff could come back with 10 a presentation in future months as the project progressed. 11 12 Chairperson Sandoval thanked staff for the presentation and appreciated the offer for staff 13 to provide an update as the project progressed.
14 15 Vice-Chairperson Menis asked for consideration of a future update, as suggested, as a 16 future agenda item.
17 18 Mr. Hanham confirmed that could be done but noted the Planning Commission would have 19 no say or approval authority since this project did not involve design review. For 20 informational purposes, an agenda item could be brought back. 21 22 MOTION with a Roll Call vote for the Public Works Director to provide an update on the 23 project as it progressed, as a future agenda item.
24 25 MOTION: Menis SECONDED: Menis APPROVED: 6-0-
26 1
27 ABSENT: Lam-Julian
28 29 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to adopt Resolution 26-02, with Exhibit A: Conditions of 30 Approval, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole, County of Contra 31 Costa, State of California, Approving a Tentative Parcel Map (26-0001) to Establish a Two 32 Lot Subdivision at 2860 Pinole Valley Road, APN: 430-330-027, subject to the correction of 33 the typographical error in Condition 6 (b) of the Conditions of Approval. 34 35 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Bender APPROVED: 6-0-1 36 ABSENT: Lam-Julian
37 38 Chairperson Sandoval identified the 10-day appeal process of a decision of the Planning 39 Commission in writing to the City Clerk.
40 41 H. OLD BUSINESS: None
42 43 I. NEW BUSINESS: None
44 45 J. CITY PLANNER’S/COMMISSIONER’S REPORT
46 47 Mr. Hanham provided the following updates:
48 49 • Future agenda items included the Objective Development Design Standards (ODDS) 50 and Parklet Program.

6 February 9, 2026
1 2 • Staff was working with on-call consultants on the preliminary stages of obtaining costs 3 for updates to the General Plan, Specific Plan, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 4 and Downtown Master Plan.
5 6 • Staff continued to work with the current developers of Appian Village. Five buildings 7 were currently under permit, the foundations were done for all five, and it was hoped 8 occupancies would occur in the next 8 to 12 weeks, weather permitting. 9 10 Vice-Chairperson Menis asked about the status of the former Kmart property, to which Mr. 11 Hanham reported staff was working with the developer to have the demolition permit 12 approved, but had no further information on any permits for the actual building. 13 14 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
15 16 There were no comments from the public.
17 18 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
19 20 K. COMMUNICATIONS
21 22 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported upcoming community events included the Senior Food 23 Distribution at the Senior Center from 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. on February 10, 2026, with 24 application eligibility required, and Coffee with a Cop on February 11, 2026 at Alamode 25 Donuts from 8:00 to 10:00 a.m.
26 27 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
28 29 There were no comments from the public.
30 31 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
32 33 L. NEXT MEETING
34 35 1. Planning Commission Regular Meeting on February 23, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. 36 37 M. ADJOURNMENT: 7:50 p.m.
38 39 Transcribed by:
40 41 Sherri D. Lewis
42 Transcriber

PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT G.1.

DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2026
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: DAVID HANHAM, PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: UPTOWN YARD (CUP19-09 & DR19-14) USE PERMIT REVIEW AND

MODIFICATION

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving the yearly review for Uptown Yard and finding that the use complies with the Conditions of Approval.

BACKGROUND
In 2019, Raquel Contreas applied for a Comprehensive Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of Casa Amada (aka Uptown Yard) located at 2337 San Pablo Avenue. The purpose of Uptown Yard is to create an outdoor seating area, general vendors, and food vendors on approximately 4,140 square foot lot. The project site is located within the Three Corridor Specific Plan, within the San Pablo Avenue Corridor. The property is located within the Old-Town Sub Area and is zoned Commercial Mixed Use, CMU. The use is permitted in the current district.

The existing surrounding land uses are as follows:

North—Existing commercial development.

South -- Parking Lot and existing commercial development East — Existing commercial development
West – Vacant lot (Community Corner)
The Planning Commission at its regular meeting on October 27, 2020, adopted Resolution 20- 01 approving findings and conditions for a Comprehensive Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit for the creation of Uptown Yard. Staff has attached the original Staff Report (Attachment 2), Resolution 20-01 with 43 Conditions of Approval (Attachment 3) for the original project. The original site plan shows the layout of the property for general vendors and food vendors (Attachment 4) that is used for Uptown Yard.

Pursuant to Condition 43 of the approved Conditions of Approval, it states, “These conditions of approval shall be brought back for review before the Planning Commission in one year to review the adequacy of the Conditional Use Permit and possible modification.” Based on the original approval date, the first review would have been October 26, 2021. However, due to the COVID pandemic and delays in getting the Uptown Yard ready for customers, staff felt that a review of the project would not be productive since there would be few events. Since October 2021, more events have been had so a review is necessary. The staff was prepared to review the project in October 2025. However, the owner wanted to make some changes to the project

schedules and events.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
As a part of the approval of the project, the Planning Commission adopted findings for the Design Review and the Conditional Use Permit. The Design Review component of the project required that the Planning Commission approve four findings. The Conditional Use Permit component also required the Planning Commission to approve four findings. For this action, the Planning Commission will review the operation of the use for compliance with the approved Conditional Use Permit findings and Conditions of Approval. The review will also include Site Inspections, Complaint Records, Code Enforcement history, and agency coordination.

FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS:

The following is a review of the Conditional Use Permit findings and Conditions of Approval. Staff has listed the Conditions of Approval that comply, conditions that have minor issues, and conditions that are not in compliance. The full text of the Conditions of Approval is listed in Attachment 2 of this report.

Conditional Use Permit Findings:

1. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plans, and all applicable provisions of this title.

Staff Review. The subject property is consistent with the General Plan and the Three Corridor Specific Plan. Uptown Yard provides space for retail/food vendor use. Both of the uses are permitted. The selling of alcohol requires a Conditional Use Permit.

However, Uptown Yard does have a liquor license. In most cases, if alcohol is to be sold, it is by the vendors of the event. The vendors must get temporary liquor licenses.

If Uptown Yard wants to sell alcohol, it will need to go through the alcohol permitting process outlined in Chapter 17.59 of the Pinole Municipal Code.

Staff determined that this finding is currently being met.

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.

Staff Review. Uptown Yard has not been 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. Staff have conducted site inspections of events and have found they are operating within compliance with the Conditions of Approval for this project.

Staff determined that this finding is currently being met

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

Staff Review: The site is physically suitable for the requested addition of an ancillary amount of beer and wine sales for off-site consumption. The Uptown Yard occupies a footprint of 4,140 square feet, and the entire property encompasses events using benches and having vendor spaces. The continued operation of this event center, with strict adherence to the imposed conditions, proper management, and supervision, will continue to provide a positive environment that is beneficial, convenient, and necessary for the community. As a result, the proposed use will not require physical alteration of the applicant’s property, and no additional construction is proposed at this time. .

Staff determined that this finding is currently being met.

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.

Staff Review. The Uptown Yard is located in the Commercial Mixed Use, CMU zoning district. Per the Three Corridor Specific Plan, sites in the CMU zoning district are intended to integrate retail and service commercial uses. This use of Uptown Yard is predominantly retail, with small entertainment venues, and food vendors meeting the needs of both residents and capturing business from travelers on the nearby 80 freeway. The applicant’s business is aimed at both functions.

Staff determined that this finding is currently being met.

Conditions of Approval
As stated above, this section will review the 43 Conditions of Approval as approved in Resolution 20-01 Exhibit A for compliance, minor issues in compliance, and noncompliance. The full text of the existing Conditions of Approval is in Attachment 2 of this report. If there is a minor issue or non-compliance, the staff will suggest modifications to the Conditions of Approval that will allow the condition to become compliant.

Compliant Conditions: 1-4. 7, 9-14; 17-19; 21-22; 24; 26-43 Conditions with Minor Issues: 5-6; 8, 15-16; 20; 23; 25 Non-Compliant Conditions: There are no Conditions of Approval that are in a noncompliant status.

Table 1 – Conditions of Approval needing modifications
Conditions Minor Issue Modification of Condition

1. SCHEDULE –
Regular operation of
the use of the site
shall be within the
times provided in the
project description
and listed below.

REGULAR HOURS
Food vendors
Thursday-Sunday: 9:00 am –
9:00 pm*
*Hours may change during
daylight savings time but
shall not deviate by more
than one hour from the
above-mentioned times.

THEMES AND TIMES
January to February
Regular hours, as shown
above.

March to September
(Spring Harvest, Taco Fest,
BBQ Fest: food vendors
and plant/herb vendors)
Regular hours, as shown
above.

May to December
(Art Walk: artist display
and sales)
Art Walk
First Friday of the Month:
9:00 am – 9:00 pm
Food vendors
Regular hours, as shown
above.

The issue with this condition
is that when the schedule
was put together, the
number and types of events
were not known. Now that
Uptown Yard has been
having events, the owner
would like to amend this
condition to match what the
current type of events that
the Uptown Yard is
obtaining.

Staff is willing to modify this
condition based on the
number of events and make
the condition more userfriendly.

September to October
(Halloween: pumpkin patch
and food vendors)
Pumpkin patch
Every day: 9:00 am – 9:00
pm
Food vendors
Every day: 9:00 am – 9:00
pm
November
(Day of the Dead: artist
display and food vendors)
November 1 and 2: 9:00 am
– 9:00 pm
November to December
24th
(Christmas Tree Sales and
Decoration/ Holiday
Market: artist display and
sales and food vendors)
Tree Sales and Holiday
Market
Every day: 9:00 am – 9:00
pm
Food vendors
Every day: 9:00 am – 9:00
pm
Proposed modifications to
the schedule shall be subject
to review by the Planning
Manager, who may
determine if changes should
return to Planning
Commission for
consideration.

SPECIAL EVENTS OR
USES
One-time or limited-time
special events or use of the
site, including but not limited
to community events,
fundraisers, or private
events, that are not noted
with specific times, dates, or

descriptions in the above
schedule are subject to
notification to the Planning
Division, and the Planning
Manager may determine
whether further approval is
required, which may include
a temporary use permit, use
permit modification, or new
use permit. The owner
should notify the Planning
Division at least two weeks
before the special event or
use.

6. NUMBER OF VENDORS
– No more than four food
vendors shall be hosted on
site at the same time.

The issue with this condition
is that there could be times
when more than 4 food
vendors can fit on the site.

Staff determined that this
condition needs to be
modified.

8. USE AND DESIGN
MODIFICATIONS – The
owner shall submit any
proposed modifications to
the site design or use,
including days and times of
events, to the Planning
Manager for consideration.

The Planning Manager shall
determine whether the
project should be brought to
Planning Commission for
further consideration.

The owner would like to
modify the design of the
project. Those designs are
in Attachment 6 of this
report.

Staff determines that this
condition needs to be
modified. However, we can
continue to modify with the
approval of the staff or the
Planning Commission if
needed.

15. LIVE MUSIC
SCHEDULE – The site may
have live music no more than
30 days per year, with no
more than three days per
month, and only within the
following timeframes:

Fridays – 5 pm to 8 pm
Saturdays – 5 pm to 9 pm
Sundays – 12 pm to 8 pm
The Property owner is
looking to expand the hours
for musical entertainment.

The owner of the property
would also like to expand
the musical selections. See
Attachment 7.

We have some complaints
that a couple of events
made a couple of events not
be able to enjoy their
specific events
For both of these
conditions, 15 & 16,
Modifications need to be
made regarding special
events in other areas.

16. AMPLIFIED MUSIC – No The Property owner is

amplified music shall be
played on site without prior
approval from the
Development Services
Department.
looking to expand the hours
for musical entertainment.

The owner of the property
would also like to expand
the musical selections. See
Attachment 7 of this report

20. VENDOR, ARTIST, AND
OTHER SET-UP – The
owner, vendors, artists, or
other parties setting up
booths, furniture, and other
items on site shall access the
site from the adjacent
parking lot.

The property owner is
proposing a new setup.

This condition will not need
to be modified.

23. PARKING AND

TRANSPORTATION
INFORMATION – The owner
shall provide clearly visible
information and maps inside
the site regarding the
location of Old Town parking
lots and public transportation
stops. The owner should also
incorporate parking and
transit information in
marketing materials and
project-related webpages
where possible.

There has been some
issues with food trucks
taking up parking stalls
during other events that are
taking place.

Staff has determined that
this condition needs to be
modified regarding food
vendors

25. BUSINESS LICENSES/

COUNTY HEALTH
PERMITS – All vendors and
parties conducting business
on site shall hold a valid
business license from the
City of Pinole. All vendors
and parties serving food shall
obtain applicable permits
from the Contra Costa Health
Services Division.

There have been issues
with the vendors not getting
business licenses, and
things that are supposed to
be just Uptown Yard or
individual vendor permits.

Staff has determined that a
modification of this condition
is necessary to make sure
that all the businesses are
legal at the time of events.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt per Section 15301 Existing Facilities of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines in that it consists of no physical expansion of existing business within an existing commercial building.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution 26-03 CUP19-09 2337 San Pablo Ave
B. DR19-14 CUP19-09 - COAs
C. 20-01 Reso - Casa Amada - signed
D. Final PC Minutes 10-26-20
E. Final PC Minutes 2-24-20
F. Site Plan 2.9.26
G. Plan Set and Booth Layout 10.12.20
H. Uptown Yard CUP Letter Review

PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 26-03
WITH EXHIBIT A: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ADEQUACY OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP19-09), AND MAKING A SIMILAR USE

DETERMINATION, TO MAKE SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR AN OUTDOOR SEATING SPACE

WITH FENCING, A SMALL STRUCTURE, AND A TRASH ENCLOSURE REDESIGN AND TO

PROVIDE FOR HOSTING OF ARTISAN DISPLAYS, EVENTS, VENDORS AND FOOD VENDORS ON AN APPROXIMATELY 4,140 SQUARE FOOT VACANT LOT IN THE CMU ZONING DISTRICT AT 2337 SAN PABLO AVENUE, APN: 401-162-002 WHEREAS, the City of Pinole is reviewing Conditional Use Permit (CUP19-09) for adequacy and to be able to make site improvements to create an outdoor seating, artisan display/sales, and food vendor hosting space on an approximately 4,140 square foot vacant lot; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole is the appropriate authority to hear and act on this project; and

WHEREAS, said property is designated Old Town Sub-Area (OTSA) in the Pinole General Plan and Three Corridors Specific Plan and is intended to maintain and enhance the area’s quaint residential, commercial, and mixed-use nature, architectural scale, character, style, and serve as a connection to Old Town Pinole; and WHEREAS, the property is zoned Commercial Mixed Use (CMU), which allows for commercial uses; and
WHEREAS, the project proposes a use for an outdoor seating space to host artisan displays/sales and food vendors that corresponds to commercial uses but does not have a single direct corresponding use definition specifically listed in the Zoning Code or Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, when a particular use is not specifically listed in this Zoning Code and it is unclear whether the use is permitted, the municipal code allows the approving authority to determine whether or not a proposed use is similar to a permitted or conditionally permitted use WHEREAS, the findings can be made for a Similar Use Determination in that the project contains uses comparable to Parks and Public Plazas, Restaurants, Retail, and Artisan Shops, which are permitted uses in the same district, and the proposed use will be consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Zoning Code; and
WHEREAS, design review is required for the redesign and site improvements of a commercial site; and
WHEREAS, a conditional use permit is required to establish the use of the site for special events that exceed three periods per year and/or 30 calendar days per year and to allow outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, the design of the site meets applicable development standards and Specific Plan design guidelines; and

WHEREAS, the project meets the criteria for a Categorical Exemption as an In-Fill Project, a new small structures, and minor alterations of land pursuant to Section 15303, Section 15304, and Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole has conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider DR19-14 and CUP19-09 on February 24, 2020, and the meeting was continued to a date uncertain; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole has conducted a duly noticed public hearing to continue consideration of DR19-14 and CUP19-09 on October 26, 2020 and was adjourned to October 27, 2020; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole held a public hearing to continue consideration of DR19-14 and CUP19-09 on October 27, 2020; and WHEREAS; the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole held a public hearing to approve a review of CUP19-09 in connection with Condition 43 of the approved Resolution 20- 01, Exhibit A
WHEREAS, after the close of public hearing, the Planning Commission considered all public comments received both before and during the public hearing, the presentation by City staff, the staff report, and all other pertinent information regarding the proposed development.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission hereby finds that:

1. The Planning Commission has considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such information as the staff report, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to it. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

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 in that the project, as conditioned, shall improve an underutilized site and establish ongoing requirements to maintain operations.

3. The site of the proposed use is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and related structures being proposed in that the site does not propose construction of a new building and the proposed use would primarily be commercial in nature.

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 improvements are compatible with permitted uses in the zoning district and do not include the construction of commercial structures.

5. Similar Use Determination. The project proposes uses similar to other permitted and conditionally permitted uses in the zoning district and is consistent with the general plan, specific plan, and zoning code.

a. The characteristics of and activities associated with the proposed use are equivalent to one (1) or more of the listed uses and will not involve a higher level of activity or population density than the uses listed in the zoning district. Parks and Public Plazas, Restaurants, Retail, and Artisan Shops are permitted uses in the CMU district and comparable to the proposed use.
b. The proposed use will be consistent with the purposes of the applicable zoning district. The project is consistent with the development standards of the zoning district as no new permanent structures are proposed for development. c. The proposed use will be consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plan, and the zoning code. The proposed uses are consistent with the general plan land use designation of OTSA and the specific plan and zoning code CMU district in that the proposed use provides for commercial use compatible with the intent to “maintain and enhance the residential, commercial and mixed-use character, scale and style of Old Town Pinole. All types of commercial and residential uses as either a single use or in combination with other allowable commercial and residential uses are allowed within this area, at intensities that preserve the character of Old Town Pinole,” contained in the description of the OTSA. The Specific Plan and Zoning Code describes the purpose of the CMU district is to “designate property for vibrant commercial and mixed-use development. While predominantly commercial (this category is designed to provide for the integration of retail and service commercial uses with office and/or residential uses).”

6. Outdoor Dining. The project does not place seating in the public right of way to interfere with sidewalk traffic, public utilities, or traffic devices. Where seating is located on the property, a minimum six-foot-wide path of travel will be required to be maintained, as conditioned.

7. The conditional use permit request is Categorically Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, 15303, Section 15304, and Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that this proposal involves minor alteration of land. The project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15304 and Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines. The project proposes a redesigned trash enclosure and new small storage structure. Minor changes to the landscaping of the site are made, including addition of new water-efficient landscaping and fencing. The project is consistent with applicable provisions in the General Plan and Zoning Code, the development is on a site that is no more than five acres and is surrounded by urban uses, the site has no value as habitat for endangered species, the project would not create new significant impacts, and the site can be served by required utilities and public services.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole:

A. Hereby approves the review for CUP19-09 as provided in the staff report, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution.

B. The approval of CUP19-09 shall expire on February 19, 2027, unless exercised and actual construction or alteration as needed under valid permits has begun within said period or a written request has been submitted to the City, prior to the expiration date, for an extension of time as allowed under the Zoning Ordinance.

The above action is final unless an appeal is filed pursuant to Chapter 17.10 of the Pinole Municipal Code within ten (10) calendar days following Planning Commission action.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole on this 23rd day of February 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
_________________________________
Gabriel Sandoval, Chair, 2025-2026
ATTEST:
________________________________
David Hanham, Planning Manager

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 1 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

1. The project shall be constructed and operated in substantial compliance with the approved Design Review and Conditional Use Permit request for the outdoor use at 2337 San Pablo Avenue (APN 401-162-002), approved by the Planning Commission as shown on the project description date-stamped received October 19, 2020 and project plans date-stamped received October 12, 2020, unless otherwise conditioned.

The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the City of Pinole to implement the project (e.g., Building Permits, Encroachment Permits, etc) Any modifications must be reviewed by the Planning Manager who shall determine whether the modification requires additional approval of the Planning Commission.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

2. The proposed project shall be built and operated in a manner consistent with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

3. The Applicant shall hold harmless the City, its Council Members, its Planning Commission, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from liability for any award, damages, costs and fees incurred by the City and/or awarded to any plaintiff in an action challenging the validity of this permit or any environmental or other documentation related to approval of this permit. Applicant further agrees to provide a defense for the City in any such action.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 2 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
Ongoing Requirements

4. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL – The conditions of approval shall be kept by the applicant/owner and shall be made readily available for review when requested by the officers and representatives of the City of Pinole.

These conditions of approval shall also be included in any plan set submitted for a permit with the City.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

5. SCHEDULE – Regular operation of the use of the site shall be within the times provided in the project description and listed below.

REGULAR HOURS
Food vendors
Thursday-Sunday: 9:00am – 9:00pm*
*Hours may change during daylight savings time but shall not deviate by more than one hour from the above-mentioned times.

THEMES AND TIMES
January to February
Regular hours, as shown above.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 3 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
March to September
(Spring Harvest, Taco Fest, BBQ Fest: food vendors and plant/herb vendors)
Regular hours, as shown above.

May to December
(Art Walk: artist display and sales)
Art Walk
First Friday of the Month: 9:00am – 9:00pm
Food vendors
Regular hours, as shown above.

September to October
(Halloween: pumpkin patch and food vendors)
Pumpkin patch
Every day: 9:00am – 9:00pm
Food vendors
Every day: 9:00am – 9:00pm
November
(Day of the Dead: artist display and food vendors)
November 1 and 2: 9:00am – 9:00pm

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 4 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
November to December 24th
(Christmas Tree Sales and Decoration/ Holiday Market: artist display and sales and food vendors)
Tree Sales and Holiday Market
Every day: 9:00am – 9:00pm
Food vendors
Every day: 9:00am – 9:00pm
Proposed modifications to the schedule shall be subject to review by the Planning Manager, who may determine if changes should return to Planning Commission for consideration.

SPECIAL EVENTS OR USES
One-time or limited-time special events or use of the site, including but not limited to community events, fundraisers, or private events, that are not noted with specific times, dates, or descriptions in the above schedule are subject to notification to the Planning Division, and the Planning Manager may determine whether further approval is required, which may include a temporary use permit, use permit modification, or new use permit. The owner should notify the Planning Division at least two weeks before the special event or use.

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 5 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

6. NUMBER OF VENDORS – No more than four food vendors shall be hosted on site at the same time.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

7. USE EVALUATION – The proposed use may be subject to further consideration following implementation of the use. The owner shall cooperate with the Development Services Department to resolve any verified nuisance complaints regarding the use. The Planning Manager shall have the discretion to put a hold on the use and reconsider the continued operation of the use where significant nuisances attributed to the use arise. The use permit may be subject to, but is not limited to, modification or revocation. The Planning Manager shall determine whether the project should be brought to Planning Commission for further consideration.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

8. USE AND DESIGN MODIFICATIONS – The owner shall submit any proposed modifications to the site design or use, including days and times of events, to the Planning Manager for consideration. The Planning Manager shall determine whether the project should be brought to Planning Commission for further consideration.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 6 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

9. LOCAL BUSINESSES AND ARTISTS – In the provision of vendor and artist spaces, the owner shall give preference to food vendors who prepare at Kitchen at 812, as proposed in the application’s project description, and to local businesses and artists.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

10. SITE MONITORING STAFF – When the site is open for use, the owner or designated site monitor, either of whom are clearly identifiable to visitors, shall be on site to manage crowds, maintain safe site conditions, and mitigate potential nuisances. The site monitor shall ensure a minimum six foot wide path of travel through the site is maintained.

Security monitors shall be placed at the entrances for special events with potentially large crowds if needed to ensure visitors at these events remain within property boundaries to avoid blocking the rights-of-way.

The owner or designated site monitor shall be responsible for implementing recommendations and requirements of public health agencies and authorities in maintaining a safe and healthy environment, which may include but is not limited to sanitizing shared amenities, managing the concentration of visitors, and maintaining safe separation distances.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 7 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

11. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE – The owner shall maintain all landscaping on site. The owner shall replace all dead or dying plants on site with plants of the same species or with plants of comparable water use and size at maturity that are suitable for the Pinole climate.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

12. STORAGE – The owner shall ensure that all tables, chairs, and equipment are stored away and secured when not in use.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

13. TRASH AND DEBRIS – The owner shall ensure that the property remains free of trash and debris. When the property is open to the public, the owner shall make waste receptacles readily available and clearly visible on site. Each vendor shall be required to provide waste receptacles for trash, recycling, and compost recycling. Following the end of use each day, waste receptacles shall be promptly returned to their designated enclosed storage areas. The owner shall be responsible for coordinating waste pick-up with the waste management provider on a weekly basis at minimum, and the frequency of pick-up shall be increased as needed to ensure the property remains free of waste and receptables have sufficient capacity at all times. The owner shall ensure waste bins are returned to designated enclosed areas within 24 hours of pick-up.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 8 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

14. SANITARY FACILITIES AND RESTROOMS – The owner shall ensure sanitary facilities, including handwashing facilities and portable restrooms, are available for public use whenever the property is open to the public.

The site shall have at least one restroom and handwashing facility each day the use is in operation. Restrooms and handwashing facilities shall be serviced at least two times per week or before a restroom has reached 150 uses (or the prescribed average uses under the design specifications of the portable restroom), whichever is more frequent.

The number of restrooms and handwashing facilities and/or frequency of servicing shall be increased as needed to follow the current public health recommendations and guidance provided by local, state, or federal agencies and authorities.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

15. LIVE MUSIC SCHEDULE – The site may have live music no more than 30 days per year, with no more than three days per month, and only within the following timeframes:

Fridays – 5pm to 8pm
Saturdays – 5pm to 9pm
Sundays – 12pm to 8pm
Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 9 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

16. AMPLIFIED MUSIC – No amplified music shall be played on site without prior approval from the Development Services Department.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

17. ENTRIES AND LOCKS – Entry gates shall be kept wide opening during use of the space to maintain visibility inside the site when viewed from the parking lot and right-of-way. The entries shall be locked when the site is not in use. The type of locks shall be labelled in the final plan set for review by the Police Department.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department/
Police
Department

18. LIGHTING – The owner shall ensure that lighting is available on site during late-afternoon to evening hours and the entire lot has adequate lighting. Lighting equipment shall include shields to project light downward and to prevent light and glare impacts on adjacent properties and the right-of-way. The proposed lighting set-up locations, including portable lighting equipment, shall be identified in the final plan set for review by the Police Department.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department/
Police
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 10 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

19. FIRE SAFETY –The following Fire Safety comments from preliminary review of the project shall be implemented, unless otherwise modified by the Fire Department review of final project plans:
• A minimum of two fire extinguishers shall be provided on site and shall be a minimum size of 2A10BC.
• Egress doors, gates or the like shall swing in the direction of the egress path (i.e., out to the parking lot).
• A minimum 36 inch clearance shall be maintained between tables (from back of chair to back of chair), vendor booths, and artist display areas to provide for egress.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department/
Fire
Department

20. VENDOR, ARTIST, AND OTHER SET-UP – The owner, vendors, artists, or other parties setting up booths, furniture, and other items on site shall access the site from the adjacent parking lot.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

21. ALCOHOL SALES AND SERVICE – Alcohol sales and service on site shall not be permitted without obtaining additional necessary approvals from the City of Pinole and the California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 11 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

22. SIGNAGE – Any permanent or temporary signage proposal shall be reviewed by the Development Services Department prior to installation and shall comply with the applicable permit requirements of Chapter

17.52 Signs of the Municipal Code and the specifications of the Three Corridors Specific Plan.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

23. PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION – The owner shall provide clearly visible information and maps inside the site regarding the location of Old Town parking lots and public transportation stops. The owner should also incorporate parking and transit information in marketing materials and project-related webpages where possible.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department

24. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE – The owner shall provide a certificate of insurance that designates the City of Pinole as additional insured. The owner shall provide updated certificates of insurance where any change to insurance is made.

Prior to
Issuance of
Permits, and
Ongoing
Development
Services
Department

25. BUSINESS LICENSES/ COUNTY HEALTH PERMITS – All vendors and parties conducting business on site shall hold a valid business license from the City of Pinole. All vendors and parties serving food shall obtain applicable permits from the Contra Costa Health Services Division.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department/
Finance
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 12 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

26. EASEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES – The owner acknowledges that any use of easement areas dedicated to the City of Pinole may be subject to revocation for future City projects and purposes. In such cases, the owner shall be responsible for removing all new structures proposed in this project and all personal property from the easement area, including tables, chairs, and bins. If requested by the City, the owner shall be responsible for restoring the trash enclosure within the easement to the original size and design specifications. Should the owner fail to act on the aforementioned removal and/or restoration of elements in the easement area after receiving notice from the City, the owner shall be responsible for reimbursing the City for any cost-incurred by the City to conduct such work, and the City shall not be held liable for the demolition and/or disposal of structures and property.

Ongoing Development
Services
Department
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

27. LANDSCAPE AND FENCING PLAN – The applicant shall prepare and submit a final full detailed landscape, fencing and irrigation plan for review and approval by the Development Services Department prior to the issuance of building permits.

The landscape, fencing and irrigation plan shall include the number, type, and size of all proposed new trees, shrubs, and groundcover specimens.

Any new fencing or gate design details shall be included within the building construction plans. All proposed plantings shall be droughtPrior to Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 13 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
tolerant and well-suited to the City’s climate zone.

The detailed landscape, fencing and irrigation plan shall be consistent with all applicable requirements of the Municipal Code including Chapter

17.44. 28. LIGHTING DETAILS – The applicant shall include the location and description of existing and proposed lighting on site, including lighting specifications, examples, or cut sheets, in the building plan set. Light fixtures selected shall include shields to project light downward and to prevent light and glare impacts on adjacent properties and the right-ofway.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

29. DRAINAGE PLANS – The applicant shall prepare a final drainage plan for Development Services Department review and approval. The construction drainage plan will show how drainage will be handled during construction. The final drainage plan will show how drainage will be handled after construction is complete. Site design shall avoid drainage of water from one property onto another property and shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

30. BICYCLE PARKING – The applicant shall identify areas to accommodate parking of at least five bicycles and clearly identify these locations with markers or signs on site.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 14 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

31. POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEW – The applicant shall provide the final project description, event schedule, and plan to the Police Department Community Outreach Unit for final review.

Prior to
Issuance of
Permits
Development
Services
Department/
Police
Department

32. FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW – The applicant shall address all comments from the Fire Department’s preliminary review of the proposal and review of final plans and shall pay any outstanding fees for plan review, prior to issuance of any permits.

Prior to
Issuance of
Permits
Development
Services
Department/
Fire
Department

33. PRE-CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN – The applicant shall complete a pre-construction waste management plan. Forms can be obtained from the Development Services Department.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

34. PERMITS, BONDS, AND INSURANCE – The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit, posting the required bonds and insurance, for any work to be done in the City’s right-of-way. This encroachment permit shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit and prior to any work being done in the City’s right-of-way.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

35. MATERIAL HAULING – The applicant shall submit a proposed material hauling route and schedule. All material hauling activities including, but not limited to, adherence to approved route, hours of operation, dust control and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the applicant (as per Section 15.36.080 of the Municipal Code). Violation of the applicable may be cause for suspension of work.

Prior to
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 15 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09

Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
During Construction and Prior to Occupancy

36. CONSTRUCTION SITE INFORMATION – A construction contact person’s name, mobile phone number, and email address shall be posted on the project site during the duration of construction.

The property address shall be clearly marked during the project construction process.

During
Construction
Development
Services
Department

37. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY – The building permit holder shall ensure the following provisions to control noise, dust, and construction debris nuisance occur during construction:

A. Building construction activities shall occur only between 7:00A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday on non-federal holidays. Interior construction work may occur between 9:00A.M. and 6:00P.M. on weekends if requested and approved by the City as allowed under Chapter 15.02 of the City Municipal Code.

B. All construction vehicles shall be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers and meet State and Federal standards.

C. Newly disturbed soil surfaces shall be watered down regularly throughout the day and any construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions greater than 10 miles per hour.

During
Construction
Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 16 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)
D. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation.

E. All excavated or silty materials shall be covered with a tarp during transit to and from the site.

F. All construction debris shall be covered with a tarp during transit from the site.

G.The construction site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion and litter shall be contained and properly disposed of on a daily basis.

38. SITE MAINTENANCE – The construction site shall be cleaned of garbage and debris on a daily basis and maintained in an orderly fashion.

All construction equipment shall be secured at the end of each day of construction.

During
Construction
Development
Services
Department

39. INSPECTIONS – The applicant shall notify the Development Services Department at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading, or paving, as well as any work in the City’s right-of-way as per Section 15.36.230 of the Municipal Code.

The applicant shall arrange all inspections with the Building Division, Fire Department, and Public Works Division. All Building Division inspection requests shall be made at least 24 hours in advance.

During
Construction
Development
Services
Department

Exhibit A
Planning Commission Resolution 26-03 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL As Approved by Planning Commission 17 of 17 Uptown Yard at 2337 San Pablo Avenue February 23, 2026 Design Review (DR) 19-14 & Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19-09 Timing/
Implementation
Monitoring
Department /
Division
Verification
(date and
sign)

40. ACCESS TO SAN PABLO AVENUE – Project construction vehicles and vehicles belonging to construction workers shall not block access to San Pablo Avenue or any other public roadway.

During
Construction
Development
Services
Department

41. SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR – The applicant shall repair and replace to existing City standards, any damaged sidewalk, curb and gutter on or abutting the project site.

Prior to Final Development
Services
Department

42. POST-CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT Report – The
applicant shall complete a post-construction waste management report prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

Prior to Final Development
Services
Department

43. ONE YEAR REVIEW – These conditions of approval shall be brought back for review before the Planning Commission in one year to review the adequacy of the Conditional Use Permit and possible modification.

One Year After
the Start of
Operation
Development
Services
Department

C

1 October 26, 2020
1 2
3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
4 PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
5 6 October 26, 2020
7 8 DUE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA’S DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY – THIS 9 MEETING WAS HELD PURSUANT TO AUTHORIZATION FROM GOVERNOR 10 NEWSOM’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS – CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION MEETINGS 11 WERE NO LONGER OPEN TO IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE. THE MEETING WAS 12 HELD VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE.
13 14
15 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:05 P.M.
16 17 B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL
18 19 Commissioners Present: Flashman, Moriarty, Murphy, Wong, Chair Kurrent 20 21 Commissioners Absent: Ojeda
22 23 Staff Present: David Hanham, Planning Manager
24 Justin Shiu, Contract Planner
25 Alex Mog, Assistant City Attorney
26 27 C. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
28 29 Planning Manager David Hanham reported no comments had been received via 30 e-mail to be read into the record.
31 32 D. CONSENT CALENDAR
33 34 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 28, 2020 35 36 MOTION to adopt the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 28, 37 2020 as submitted.
38 39 MOTION: Flashman SECONDED: Moriarty APPROVED: 5-0-1 40 ABSENT: Ojeda
41 42 E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
43 44
45

D
2 October 26, 2020
1 1. Design Review DR17-10, Tentative Parcel Map TSM17-01, 2 Development Agreement DA17-01: Four new single-family 3 residences, four-lot subdivision, and Development Agreement for 4 public improvements.
5 6 Request: Consideration of a Design Review, Tentative Parcel Map, and 7 Development Agreement request to develop the vacant lot at 8 the end of Hazel Street. The project proposes the subdivision 9 of the lot into four new parcels, development of a single-family 10 residence on each new parcel, and execution of a Development 11 Agreement to make public improvements, including the 12 extension of Hazel Street. (Continued from the Planning 13 Commission meeting on August 24, 2020)
14 15 Applicant: Baljit Dhaliwal
16 1068 Turquoise Drive
17 Hercules, CA 94547
18 19 Location: Hazel Street (APN: 402-013-060 and -061) 20 21 Planner: David Hanham
22 23 Commissioner Murphy reported he would recuse himself from participating in the 24 discussion due to a potential conflict of interest. He asked the Assistant City Attorney 25 to provide clarification.
26 27 Assistant City Attorney Alex Mog explained that the item would be a recommendation 28 from the Planning Commission to the City Council. A Development Agreement (DA) 29 was part of the item which required approval via an ordinance and two public 30 hearings before the City Council for a first and second reading. As a result and due 31 to the timing of when those meeting dates may occur, which could occur after the 32 election of Commissioner Murphy to the City Council, Commissioner Murphy had 33 decided not to participate in the discussion.
34 35 Mr. Hanham provided a PowerPoint presentation of the staff report dated October 36 26, 2020, and recommended the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 2020-18 37 recommending approval to the City Council for Design Review (DR 17-10), Tentative 38 Parcel Map (TSM 17-01), and Development Agreement (DA 17-01). The DA was 39 currently in draft form and still under negotiation by the parties involved. The final DA 40 would be submitted to the City Council. If there were any significant changes to the 41 DA based on the language and/or terms of the DA, it would have to come back to the 42 Planning Commission prior to submittal to the City Council. 43 44 Responding to the Commission, Mr. Hanham and Mr. Mog clarified the following:
45

3 October 26, 2020
1 • An illustrative streetscape had not been provided although elevations had 2 been provided to illustrate what the homes would look like, as included in the 3 staff report.
4 5 • Curbs and gutters would be included as part of the project, although the 6 project had no responsibility for any improvements on the other side of the 7 street from the project site.
8 9 • There were some discrepancies between the colored renderings as 10 compared to the submitted plans which should be clarified by the applicant. 11 12 • Acknowledged a request that all renderings for a project be provided for future 13 Development Review Subcommittee meetings.
14 15 • The prior application proposed in 2007 (as detailed in the staff report) involved 16 a three-lot subdivision which had been designed differently, denied by the 17 Planning Commission at that time, and after review by the City Council had 18 been remanded back to the Planning Commission to meet certain criteria. 19 20 • The minimum lot size in the Low Density Suburban Residential District in the 21 City of Pinole was 5,000 square feet.
22 23 • The DA would be in good standing for up to ten years (a standard time period) 24 given the development, different infrastructure improvements required and 25 associated costs involved, unless brought back to the Planning Commission 26 or the City Council for review. Staff acknowledged it could take up to ten years 27 to build the project but understood the applicant was motivated to move 28 forward.
29 30 • The applicant would be required to pay a storm drain fee but not pay for the 31 construction of the storm drain and pump station which would be a Capital 32 Improvement Project (CIP).
33 34 • Any one of the four homes could be identified as an affordable unit to be 35 locked in at the time the City finalized its affordable agreement with the 36 developer.
37 38 • Two live oak trees were to be preserved, although one located farther north 39 on the property was to be removed due to root rot at the recommendation of 40 the project arborist, with the other live oak to remain. Walnut trees located at 41 the back of the site would be preserved.
42 43 • As a condition of approval and as part of the dedication of the Tentative Parcel 44 Map for the project the private drive would be dedicated to the City with the 45 City to have the easement and right-of-way (ROW).

4 October 26, 2020
1 • Pursuant to Condition of Approval 28 (A) of Exhibit A to the staff report, 2 building construction activities shall occur only between 7:00 A.M. and 5:00 3 P.M., Monday through Friday on non-federal holidays. Interior construction 4 work may occur between 9:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. on weekends if requested 5 and approved by the City, as allowed under Chapter 15.02 of the Pinole 6 Municipal Code (PMC).
7 8 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
9 10 Jagjeet Dhaliwal, 1068 Turquoise Drive, Hercules, speaking on behalf of her parents, 11 responded to concerns that the project could take up to ten years to complete. She 12 emphasized the intent to complete the project as soon as possible consistent with 13 City codes and requirements. She otherwise commented that staff had covered the 14 project in the staff presentation and the applicant had no further comments. 15 16 The following speakers submitted written comments via email that were read into the 17 record, to be filed with the agenda packet for this meeting: Rafael Menis, Duane 18 Jones, Subhana Ansari, Francesca Delgado-Jones and Don McKinney. 19 20 REBUTTAL:
21 22 Ms. Dhaliwal clarified the issue of the extension of Hazel Street, a through street 23 versus a private road, which issue had been raised early in the process and which 24 was part of the development of the storm drain and the need for a through street to 25 address firefighting safety concerns. The extension of Hazel Street had been a 26 request of the City of Pinole and the Pinole Fire Department, not the Dhaliwal Family. 27 Also, while the home sizes may appear small, the lots would be 6,000 square feet in 28 size and the homes would not appear to be tract homes. 29 30 Ms. Dhaliwal explained that the Dhaliwal Family had initially requested one, two and 31 then three homes, and over time in discussions with the City the request had ended 32 up with four homes, necessary given the required infrastructure improvements. 33 34 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
35 36 Mr. Hanham clarified that the Hazel Street extension had been at the request of the 37 City since Hazel Street was a through street in the General Plan and not a dead-end 38 street. Due to the infrastructure needs and the pump station, and since Parcel No. 39 59 must go across the Dhaliwal property to reach the driveway for Lot No. 59, Parcel 40 No. 60 travelled all the way across property on Parcel No. 59, and since the Dhaliwals 41 could technically block that property since it lacked an easement to the property, 42 those were other reasons for the City to request the Hazel Street extension. The 43 Hazel Street extension was also considered a clean-up item for the City requiring the 44 Dhaliwals to add additional lots to help pay for some of the improvements. He 45 acknowledged the City had opposed the three-lot subdivision proposal since it had

5 October 26, 2020
1 included a driveway that came up and in, preventing the completion of all the storm 2 drain improvements in the road.
3 4 Mr. Hanham again detailed the history of the project which had led to the current 5 iteration and lot sizes, with more than enough area to accommodate the proposed 6 lots, and with the project meeting all City setback and development standards. 7 8 The Planning Commission discussed DR17-10, TSM17-01, and DA17-01 and 9 offered the following comments and/or direction to staff:
10 11 • Sympathized with the neighbors’ concerns with the potential for an increase 12 in traffic and noise levels; clarified with staff regarding Condition 7 that the 13 applicant was not permitted to build an impervious driveway that covered 40 14 percent of the front yard; clarified that Condition 10 reflected the City’s recent 15 approval of an ordinance which matched the State Water Efficient Landscape 16 Ordinance requirements; recommended the last sentence of Condition 11 17 be revised since, as worded, it could make it too easy to lose trees on the 18 property and recommended verbiage similar to conditions imposed for the 19 Dr. Lee Optometry project; and suggested the proposed lot sizes would be 20 sufficient. (Moriarty)
21 22 The Planning Commission discussed Condition 11 related to tree protection under 23 the City’s Tree Ordinance and compared the proposed project to the Dr. Lee 24 Optometry project at length. By consensus, the Planning Commission revised the 25 last sentence of Condition 11, to read:
26 27 Any revisions to tree protection and tree removal details described in the 28 arborist reports shall be submitted to the Planning Manager for review prior 29 to work affecting trees in the field consistent with Pinole Municipal Code 30 Chapter 17.96.
31 32 Chair Kurrent and Commissioner Flashman briefed the Planning Commission on 33 their discussions during the Development Review Subcommittee meeting which 34 included concerns with a left-side half window on Lot 2 that did not appear to be 35 symmetrical, the darkness of the proposed blue color for Lots 1 and 2 that had been 36 found to be out of sync with the other homes, and a desire for renderings of the 37 homes next to one another that had not been provided. 38 39 • The intent for the left-side window for Lot 2 was confirmed by the applicant, 40 with the intent to build a canopy to create a shadow and overhang on top of 41 the window which would be a full window, and while not shown on the at-street 42 elevation that would be corrected on the plans. Recognition that the proposed 43 lots would be smaller in size, and while some lots in the area would be 44 comparable in size the community was concerned with the size of the homes 45 given that the project would be a change in the community and there was a

6 October 26, 2020
1 need for green space and parks. Expressed concern the proposed 2 development would effectively remove what had been considered green 3 space in the community. (Flashman)
4 5 • Found the size of the lots to be consistent and comparable with other lot sizes 6 in the area; recognized the concerns with the size of the homes but also 7 recognized the need to provide housing; and while the lots may be smaller in 8 size than others on the street suggested they would be sufficient in size. 9 (Kurrent)
10 11 • Clarified with staff that Lots 60 and 61 were owned by the applicant and the 12 property had been used as green space by the community but it was private 13 property that could be fenced to prevent trespassing. If the project was 14 ultimately not approved by the City Council encouraged the City Council to 15 consider purchasing the property to be used as a park. Would have opposed 16 the project if considered for the north side of Hazel Street given the lots on the 17 north side were 10,000 square feet in size or more while the homes on the 18 south size of Hazel Street were between 5,500 and 8,000 square feet in size. 19 Did not support the building colors, such as the dark blue, and supported 20 another alternative. If the project was not approved by the City Council there 21 was concern the area could be impacted by flooding if the storm drain 22 infrastructure was not repaired and the City could be held liable. The project 23 offered an opportunity for the applicant to develop the land, the City to address 24 long-standing issues, and while the community concerns with crime and traffic 25 were acknowledged they had not been supported by data from the Pinole 26 Police Department. Suggested the applicant had addressed the City’s 27 requirements. (Wong)
28 29 On the question of whether the City would be responsible for the storm drain 30 improvements if the City Council ultimately denied the project, Mr. Hanham explained 31 that would have to be prioritized by the City Council in the CIP with funds to be set 32 aside. He reiterated the project lent itself for that work to be completed faster. 33 34 • The Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) required each of the lots to have one 35 enclosed parking space and one non-enclosed parking space on the property, 36 and the units met that requirement. Opening the north side of the new Hazel 37 Street would provide additional parking for the neighborhood and there should 38 be no parking concern, and the reasons for extending Hazel Street had been 39 adequately addressed by staff. (Kurrent)
40 41 Mr. Hanham confirmed that the project would have to be wired for solar panels but 42 the installation of solar panels was not required. At this time, he advised an additional 43 public comment had been received after the close of the public hearing and it was at 44 the discretion of the Chair whether to re-open the public hearing. 45

7 October 26, 2020
1 Chair Kurrent re-opened the public hearing at this time. 2 3 Mr. Hanham read into the record additional public comment received via e-mail after 4 the close of the public hearing from Subhana Ansari to be filed with the agenda 5 packet for this meeting
6 7 In response to the most recent public comment, Mr. Hanham and Mr. Mog confirmed 8 that there had been no mention of endangered species in the environmental 9 documents.
10 11 Ms. Dhaliwal reiterated the background of the Hazel Street extension; the full window 12 design for Lot 2 had been clarified and the plans would be corrected; the dark blue 13 color for two of the lots had come from a recommendation made by a previous 14 committee, although the color could be changed back to be more muted; and the 15 property had been offered to the City as green space in the past but the City had not 16 accepted that offer. The property owners had owned the property for more than a 17 decade and had experienced illegal dumping, illegal trespassing, and an open storm 18 drain. The desire was to develop the property to clean it up and make it safer for the 19 surrounding community.
20 21 Chair Kurrent re-closed the public hearing.
22 23 MOTION by a Roll Call Vote to adopt Resolution 20-18, a Resolution of the City of 24 Pinole Planning Commission Recommending Approval to the City of Pinole City 25 Council for a Tentative Parcel Map, Comprehensive Design Review and a 26 Development Agreement Located at the South Side of the Western Terminus of 27 Hazel Avenue (APN 402-013-060 and 061), subject to Exhibit A: Planning 28 Commission Resolution 20-18, Conditions of Approval, and subject to a 29 modification to Condition 11, as follows:
30 31 Revise the last sentence to read:
32 33 Any revisions to tree protection and tree removal details described in the 34 arborist reports shall be submitted to the Planning Manager for review prior 35 to work affecting trees in the field consistent with Pinole Municipal Code 36 Chapter 17.96.
37 38 MOTION: Wong SECONDED: Moriarty APPROVED: 4-0-2
39 RECUSED: Murphy
40 ABSENT: Ojeda
41 42 Chair Kurrent identified the 10-day appeal period of a decision of the Planning 43 Commission in writing to the City Clerk.
44 45 Commissioner Murphy returned to the meeting via Zoom. 46

8 October 26, 2020
1 2. Design Review DR 19-14, Conditional Use Permit CUP 19-09: Artisanal 2 Garden: Outdoor Artisan and Vendor Space
3 4 Request: Consideration of a Design Review and Conditional Use Permit 5 request to make site improvements for an outdoor seating 6 space with fencing, a small structure, and a trash enclosure 7 redesign and to provide for hosting of artisan displays, events, 8 music, and food vendors, at 2337 San Pablo Avenue in the 9 CMU District (Continued from the Planning Commission
10 meeting on February 24, 2020)
11 12 Applicant: Raquel Contreras
13 714 Walker Avenue
14 Oakland, CA 94610
15 16 Location: 2337 San Pablo Avenue (APN: 401-162-002) 17 18 Planner: Justin Shiu
19 20 Commissioner Flashman reported she would recuse herself from the discussion of 21 the item due to a potential conflict of interest.
22 23 Contract Planner Justin Shiu provided a Power Point presentation of the October 26, 24 2020 staff report, and noted that after the applicant’s materials had been reviewed 25 and prepared, the applicant had requested a revision to Condition 15, Live Music 26 Schedule, as shown in Exhibit A to Resolution 20-01. The requested revision was to 27 expand the approval of music on the site from 20 days per year to 30 days per year, 28 with the Sunday hours to be revised from 12:00 P.M. to 4:00 P.M, to 12:00 P.M. to 29 8:00 P.M. The Planning Commission was asked to consider the request. 30 31 Mr. Shiu recommended the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 20-01, subject 32 to the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit A, approving Design Review 19- 33 14 and Conditional Use Permit 19-09, and a Similar Use Determination for 34 development of an outdoor artisan and vendor space at 2337 San Pablo Avenue. 35 36 Responding to the Commission Mr. Shiu and Mr. Hanham clarified:
37 38 • Hours of operation for special events had not been specified in the conditions 39 of approval, and while the applicant had indicated themes throughout the year 40 no specific hours of operation had been identified. Special events not listed 41 in the schedule would have to be approved by the Planning Manager pursuant 42 to Condition 5 of Exhibit A to Resolution 20-01.
43 44 • The conditions of approval submitted to the Planning Commission initially in 45 February 2020 when the project had first been considered included a

9 October 26, 2020
1 condition limiting the use of amplified music, and Condition 16 had been a 2 carryover condition. The current proposal included a request for amplified 3 music which required a modification to the conditions of approval. 4 5 • The Old Town Design Guidelines had not been considered for the subject 6 project. Staff had relied on the Three Corridors Specific Plan when reviewing 7 the design.
8 9 • Bicycle racks had not been included on the conceptual site plan but would be 10 required as part of the building plans pursuant to Condition 30. A minimum of 11 two bicycle racks would be required for a commercial property but could be 12 discussed further by the Planning Commission.
13 14 • The applicant would be required to identify the location for take-out waste 15 disposal and recycling, and to plan how much waste could be removed from 16 the site and the volume that could be recycled.
17 18 • Proposed trees on-site and the types of vendors to be clarified by the 19 applicant.
20 21 • There was an existing Porta Potti on the site and additional facilities could be 22 made available, if needed, to be open only during operations when the site 23 was in use.
24 25 • The Pinole Noise Ordinance did not specify a decibel level and was subjective 26 as related to noise disturbances and what constituted a nuisance. Any issues 27 with amplified music would be addressed via complaints during an event. 28 29 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
30 31 Raquel Contreras, 714 Walker Avenue, Oakland, advised that a representative from 32 the Pacific Coast Farmers’ Market Association and a representative from Kitchen at 33 812 were also present via Zoom to respond to questions. She explained that the 34 amplified music could be controlled, she had initially thought of using only acoustical 35 music, but some musicians had amplified music and she had seen similar uses at 36 other Farmers’ Markets. She preferred that amplified music be allowed until 8:00 37 P.M in the hopes she could create an ambience for the community. Due to COVID38 19, she also planned to have take-out only in the next few months in order to get a 39 feel for the business prior to bringing in tables and chairs. 40 41 Ms. Contreras also reported she had been in contact with the Contra Costa County 42 Environmental Health Department, which had suggested an agreement with an 43 establishment such as the gasoline station across the street or someone within 200 44 feet to allow a mobile vendor to use their restroom facilities as opposed to using Porta 45 Potties, which would entail an agreement in writing. She had been in contact with

10 October 26, 2020
1 her neighbors regarding that issue, and had also been in discussions with the 2 Farmers’ Market to coordinate the Porta Potties and the use of cleaning services, as 3 needed, at least twice a week.
4 5 Ms. Contreras explained that she had planned to use palm trees in colorful pots, or 6 Madrone, strawberry, or species that were native and drought tolerant. The intent 7 was to have the trees in large pots that could be easily moved and arranged as 8 needed. In terms of special events, she did not foresee large special events at this 9 time due to COVID-19 restrictions, the size of the City of Pinole, and due to the 10 competition from other cities. Her goal was to make the use effective in the 11 neighborhood to bring people in, but be community based through word of mouth, 12 and be self-sustaining. A wash station would be made available to facilitate the 13 handling of food items.
14 15 Waleska Ordonez, Kitchen at 812, a non-profit business incubator located in Pinole 16 Shores, worked with entrepreneurs who wanted to formally operate a food business, 17 and assisted those businesses in obtaining the required permits to operate. She 18 explained that food vendors during a festival or Farmers’ Market required a hand 19 washing station inside the facility independent of the outside Porta Potti. 20 21 Ben Palazzolo, Pacific Coast Farmers’ Market Association, confirmed that all food 22 vendors for on-site Farmers’ Markets had the same requirement with enclosed 23 certified kitchens and having a place for the staff to wash their hands with soap and 24 water, and the bleaching of any kitchen utensils pursuant to the requirements of the 25 Contra Costa Environmental Health Department.
26 27 Ms. Ordonez added that if food trucks were allowed on-site, the food trucks would 28 have to follow the Contra Costa County Environmental Health Department 29 Guidelines and have hand sanitizing stations.
30 31 Ms. Contreras advised that only certified mobile vendors from the Contra Costa 32 Environmental Health Department would be permitted. She understood that 33 temporary food vendors were not allowed in the City of Pinole at this time. 34 35 Responding to the Commission, Ms. Contreras and Ms. Ordonez clarified that the 36 business plan was close to a business called Off the Grid, a non-profit organization 37 that found locations for food vendors such as food trucks. The closest business was 38 located in the City of El Cerrito, which utilized a closed short street in that city to allow 39 the activity and to allow walking around the downtown. There was a Beer Garden in 40 the City of Berkeley but there were no plans to sell alcohol at this time. 41 42 Ms. Contreras acknowledged a recommendation to increase the number of bicycle 43 racks, and the concerns with the modern appearance of the use adjacent to the bank 44 building. A small office/shed at the back of the site would provide a work station for 45 her business. She had tried to tie the design of the shed in with the colors and slats 46 of historic Victorian homes in Pinole and planned to bring in old bricks from a local

11 October 26, 2020
1 building to be incorporated into the design of her business. She was open to other 2 ideas to maintain the historic presence of Pinole.
3 4 Ms. Contreras clarified that there would be palm trees at the entrance to the site and 5 she would be willing to plant a street tree to provide shade. The intent was to plant 6 drought resistant plant material. She would also like to incorporate a light show 7 during Christmas such as dancing and singing lights, as an example, something that 8 would garner interest, and asked whether that would be permitted. 9 10 Mr. Hanham understood there were no other palm trees in the downtown but staff 11 could work with the applicant on the landscaping. In terms of lighting, depending on 12 how the lights would be displayed would have to be reviewed by staff. 13 14 Ms. Contreras asked whether or not she would be permitted to have a mobile vendor 15 with a truck during the construction period given it may take some time for 16 construction to be completed. She suggested the shed could take more time since 17 she was working with the City regarding an easement. 18 19 Mr. Hanham advised that staff would like to see construction almost completed prior 20 to any mobile vendors brought in. He had reviewed the City code given the requests 21 for mobile vendors in Pinole and could find no language that allowed or disallowed 22 mobile vendors. Based on staff’s perspective, the construction should be almost 23 completed prior to bringing a vendor on-site since in the past there had been issues 24 with construction taking longer to be completed because of the needs of a vendor. 25 He would also like to see the tables and chairs installed prior to the siting of a mobile 26 vendor.
27 28 Ms. Contreras reiterated she planned to have take-out only in the next few months, 29 and to get a feel of the business prior to bringing in tables and chairs but Mr. Hanham 30 again advised of the staff opinion that no mobile vendors be allowed on-site prior to 31 construction being near completion.
32 33 Mr. Hanham recognized that it would be up to the Planning Commission to decide, 34 but if allowed, he would recommend a stipulation be imposed that a certain amount 35 of work must be completed prior to bringing a mobile vendor on-site. 36 37 Ms. Contreras also clarified there were some light poles that were part of the existing 38 easement which she planned to retain.
39 40 Mr. Shiu read into the record Condition 18 as follows:
41 42 LIGHTING – The owner shall ensure that lighting is available on site during 43 late-afternoon to evening hours and the entire lot has adequate lighting. 44 Lighting equipment shall include shields to project light downward and to 45 prevent light and glare impacts on adjacent properties and the right-of-way. 46 The proposed lighting set-up locations, including portable lighting

12 October 26, 2020
1 equipment, shall be identified in the final plan set for review by the Police 2 Department
3 4 As to the signage proposed, Ms. Contreras clarified the top sign would be a bridge 5 sign with letters above reading Casa Amada and a presentation sign proposed to 6 give directions and show the guest of the day and the event being hosted, to consist 7 of an announcement identifying who was performing in the garden on that date. She 8 was thinking of using magnetic letters with a vinyl inset and with illumination in the 9 vinyl sleeve.
10 11 Mr. Shiu read into the record comments from Ivette Rico and Rafael Menis. (As 12 reflected in the February 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting minutes). 13 14 Mr. Palazzolo explained that the applicant had reached out to the Pacific Coast 15 Farmers’ Market Association about the application, and while they had some 16 concerns he was confident those concerns could be resolved. The Farmers’ Market 17 operated from 9:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. every Saturday, vendors arrived two hours 18 before and left an hour after closure for clean-up. As long as no one was driving into 19 the adjacent parcel during the hours of the Farmers’ Market there should be no issue. 20 The Farmers’ Market operated many markets throughout the Bay Area, and 21 oftentimes other uses such as Off the Grid operated in the same market spaces but 22 at different times, which had helped the success of the Farmers’ Market. Any 23 activation, cultivation of local ownership, and participation worked out well for the 24 Farmers’ Market. While traffic and crowd concerns were relevant, the plot was small 25 and he did not see a lot of people would gather. He saw the application an added 26 feature to the space. He suggested the business would not create a significant 27 impact beyond what the Farmers’ Market did.
28 29 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
30 31 The Planning Commission discussed DR 19-14 and CUP 19-09 and offered the 32 following comments and/or direction to staff:
33 34 • Supported the project and the opportunities it would provide. (Wong) 35 36 • Supported the project but recommended the conditions related to Special 37 Events be modified to cap the time for such events or allow the Planning 38 Division to make that call. Would like more discussion on whether Condition 39 15 should be modified subject to the applicant’s requested modifications; 40 referencing Condition 27, encouraged the applicant to use native plant 41 material as much as possible; referencing Condition 30, recommended the 42 condition be revised to provide parking for at least five bicycles; encouraged 43 the applicant to consider the lettering style from the Pinole Bank Building to 44 tie the uses together and consider the color scheme of the adjacent building 45 to ensure compatibility with the historical nature of Old Town Pinole. (Moriarty)

13 October 26, 2020
1 2 • While intrigued by the idea of the project there was uncertainty as to how the 3 health issues, amplified music, sanitation, and special events would work. 4 Would like to see an additional condition to require review of the conditions of 5 approval after a year of operation to determine the use was operating 6 appropriately and whether or not any conditions must be modified. 7 Recommended a new Condition 43 to read: These conditions of approval 8 shall be brought back for review before the Planning Commission in one year 9 to review the adequacy of the Conditional Use Permit and possible 10 modification. Agreed that Condition 30 be revised to provide more bicycle 11 parking which could be reviewed in a year to ensure adequacy; and 12 recommended formation of a subcommittee to work with the applicant on the 13 design of the lettering for signage. (Kurrent)
14 15 Mr. Hanham suggested as an option an additional condition could be added, to read:
16 17 In one year this item will be brought back to the Planning Commission to re18 establish times and number of events. 19 20 Mr. Hanham added that by law all vendors were required to be certified prior to 21 events. He recommended the applicant be allowed to have a year to make this 22 happen with only four special events this year, with the new condition to allow staff 23 the opportunity to reassess based on how the business had operated during that 24 time. He recognized this would be a new use in Pinole and due to the ever changing 25 events, staff would defer to the applicant to ensure they were doing the right thing, 26 with any issues to be complaint driven, although spot checking could be done 27 throughout the year via code enforcement.
28 29 By consensus, the Planning Commission supported the additional condition given 30 the new type of use and to offer an opportunity for the applicant and the City to work 31 collaboratively.
32 33 Ms. Contreras expressed concern with additional conditions since the business must 34 be self-sustaining and attractive to the vendors.
35 36 Mr. Hanham understood the concerns but clarified the intent to allow the business to 37 operate in the first year subject to the conditions of approval with a review after the 38 first year. It was not an attempt to impose additional fees on the applicant other than 39 the payment of the annual business licenses fees. He also clarified the City’s 40 definition of a “special event” was different than the County Environmental Health 41 Department’s, which had defined special events as a “gathering”. 42 43 • Supported the project but asked that it be consistent with the rest of the 44 structures in Old Town Pinole in terms of events and the appearance of the 45 shed structure itself. (Murphy)

14 October 26, 2020
1 2 By consensus, the Planning Commission discussed a number of the conditions and 3 offered the following modifications:
4 5 • Condition 15 revised to read:
6 7 LIVE MUSIC SCHEDULE – The site may have live music no more than 30 8 days per year, with no more than three days per month, and only within the 9 following timeframes: Fridays – 5:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M.; Saturdays – 5:00 10 P.M. to 9:00 P.M.; Sundays –12:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M.
11 12 As to the request for amplified music, Chair Kurrent preferred the applicant work with 13 the Planning Manager as to what was acceptable.
14 15 Mr. Hanham expressed the willingness to work with the applicant to create 16 acceptable and reasonable language for Condition 16, with the Planning 17 Commission to be apprised of the discussions.
18 19 • Condition 16 to be retained at this time with the applicant to work with staff on 20 a possible modification.
21 22 • Condition 27 was not modified but the applicant was encouraged to use native 23 plant material as much as possible.
24 25 • Condition 30 revised to read:
26 27 BICYCLE PARKING – The applicant shall identify areas to accommodate 28 parking of at least five bicycles and clearly identify these locations with 29 markers or signs on site.
30 31 In response to concerns with the shed’s appearance, Ms. Contreras emphasized the 32 temporary nature of the shed. She was more than happy to work with the City but if 33 she were to be confined to the appearance of the adjacent building or the buildings 34 across the street, would be a concern given the numerous styles in the area. She 35 asked that the conditions not be so restrictive making the garden more historical and 36 less a garden. She suggested the historical elements could be realized through 37 letters or pottery. She also opposed the formation of a subcommittee which could be 38 difficult for the applicant.
39 40 Planning Commissioners clarified the discussion was about the frontage along San 41 Pablo Avenue, and Ms. Contreras suggested planting different material or using 42 pebbles or other design elements to address that concern. 43 44 There was no consensus for a subcommittee to be formed. Concerns were 45 expressed with the frontage along San Pablo Avenue given there had been some

15 October 26, 2020
1 issues in the past with inconsistencies of design in Old Town Pinole. There was a 2 desire from some Planning Commissioners for the project design to use some of the 3 design aesthetics from the Pinole Bank Building.
4 5 Chair Kurrent reported that Commissioner Wong was no longer present via Zoom. 6 Commissioner Wong had messaged the Chair via telephone reporting that he 7 needed to leave the Zoom meeting due to an emergency, and while he supported 8 the project he could not be present to vote.
9 10 Mr. Mog advised that Commissioner Wong needed to rejoin the meeting for there to 11 be a Planning Commission quorum. Absent a quorum the meeting must be 12 adjourned and the application continued to the next meeting. 13 14 On the discussion, Mr. Hanham reported Commissioner Ojeda was no longer a 15 Planning Commissioner, new Planning Commissioners had yet to be appointed by 16 the City Council, but staff anticipated new Planning Commissioners would be 17 appointed in time for the December 2020 or January 2021 meetings. 18 19 Given the inability to reach Commissioner Wong to rejoin the meeting, and due to 20 the lack of a quorum, Mr. Mog confirmed the Planning Commission meeting would 21 have to be adjourned to a date certain when there would be a quorum. A Notice of 22 Adjournment with the new date of the hearing would be posted on the City’s website. 23 24 By consensus, members of the Planning Commission currently present determined 25 to continue Design Review DR 19-14 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 19-09 for the 26 Artisanal Garden to an adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled 27 for Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 8:00 P.M. The remaining agenda items would be 28 continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for November 29 30, 2020.
30 31 Chair Kurrent apologized to the applicant for the inability to finalize the application at 32 this time.
33 34 F. OLD BUSINESS: None
35 36 G. NEW BUSINESS:
37 38 1. General Plan/Specific Plan Information Session: Growth Management 39 40 The item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting on November 30, 41 2020.
42 43 H. CITY PLANNER’S / COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT
44 45 1. Verbal Updates of Projects
46

16 October 26, 2020
1 The item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting on November 30, 2 2020.
3 4 I. COMMUNICATIONS: None
5 6 J. NEXT MEETING
7 8 The next meeting of the Planning Commission to be a Regular Meeting to be held 9 on Monday, November 30, 2020 at 7:00 P.M.
10 11 K. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 11:06 P.M due to the lack of a quorum 12 and to an Adjourned Meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for Tuesday, 13 October 27, 2020 at 8:00 P.M.
14 15 Transcribed by:
16 17
18 Sherri D. Lewis
19 Transcriber

1 February 24, 2020
1 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR
3 PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
4 5 February 24, 2020
6 7
8 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:02 P.M.
9 10 B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL
11 12 Commissioners Present: Kurrent, Moriarty, Murphy, Ojeda, Wong, Chair Brooks 13 14 Commissioners Absent: Flashman
15 16 Staff Present: David Hanham, Planning Manager
17 Justin Shiu, Contract Planner
18 Alex Mog, Assistant City Attorney
19 20 C. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
21 22 There were no citizens to be heard.
23 24 D. CONSENT CALENDAR
25 26 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from January 27, 2020 27 28 MOTION to adopt the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from January 27, 2020 29 as submitted.
30 31 MOTION: Kurrent SECONDED: Moriarty APPROVED: 6-0-1 32 Absent: Flashman
33 34 E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
35 36 1. Design Review DR 19-14, Conditional Use Permit CUP 19-06: Artisanal 37 Garden - Outdoor Artisan and Vendor Space
38 39 Request: Consideration of a Design Review and Conditional Use Permit 40 (CUP) request to make site improvements for an outdoor 41 seating space and to provide for hosting of artisan displays and 42 food vendors at 2337 San Pablo Avenue in the CMU District. 43 44
45 Applicant: Raquel Contreras

E
2 February 24, 2020
1 714 Walker Avenue
2 Oakland, CA 94610
3 4 Location: 2337 San Pablo Avenue (APN: 401-162-002)
5 6 Planner: Justin Shiu
7 8 Contract Planner Justin Shiu reported for the record that the applicant was not yet 9 present. He provided a PowerPoint presentation of the request for Design Review 10 and a CUP for Artisanal Garden: Outdoor Artisan and Vendor Space. He 11 recommended the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 20-01, approving Design 12 Review 19-14 and CUP 19-09, and make the findings for a Similar Use Determination 13 as provided in the February 24, 2020 staff report, subject to the Draft Conditions of 14 Approval contained in Attachment A for the development of an outdoor artisan and 15 vendor space at 2337 San Pablo Avenue.
16 17 Responding to the Commission, Mr. Shiu explained that the food vendor booths had 18 not been specified by the applicant but were not intended to be permanent structures; 19 the proposed fencing included different materials and the conditions of approval 20 required that the applicant install the fencing as shown in the submitted plans; the 21 property was privately owned with an easement on the rear of the property where the 22 parking was located and where there could be potential conflicts with parking for the 23 Farmer’s Market; the applicant was the owner of the property and had proposed a 24 Porta Potty restroom facility for the use, and while the Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) 25 did not identify specific requirements for restroom facilities for such a use, staff had 26 identified specific washing stations that could be expanded in the conditions of 27 approval. Public restroom facilities were located at Fernandez Park and visitors 28 could be directed to other restroom facilities in the area or additional Porta Potties 29 could be required.
30 31 Planning Manager David Hanham explained that oftentimes Porta Potties came with 32 washing stations and the applicant could be required to provide a hand washing 33 station.
34 35 Mr. Shiu also clarified the applicant had verbally expressed that the plans were 36 interim layout plans with a two to three year-timeframe for the use. As to the 37 proposed time schedule, the months of January and February had not been included, 38 and if approved, the use would only occur during the time schedule that had been 39 provided as shown in the staff report.
40 41 Mr. Shiu clarified that the only form of signage would be the address. The applicant 42 had not mentioned any desire for additional signage. In response to concerns with 43 parking, the conditions of approval could be modified to require the applicant to 44 identify nearby parking lots in the area while the Farmer’s Market was also in session, 45 which could be identified on the applicant’s marketing materials. 46 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED

3 February 24, 2020
1 2 IVETTE RICO, Pinole, supported anything that brought people to Old Town Pinole, 3 although she had concerns with the proposed outdoor venue whether the vendor 4 structures would be permanent, whether the vendors would pay a fee, and if food 5 vendors whether they would compete with existing businesses. Also, parking and 6 traffic would conflict with the year around Farmer’s Market and the existing Porta 7 Potties were for the use of the Farmer’s Market. She asked whether there would be 8 a focus on Pinole artisans, how trash and waste from the venue would be addressed, 9 whether nearby restaurants could be impacted by venue patrons wanting to use their 10 restroom facilities, and suggested many questions remained unanswered pending 11 the arrival of the applicant.
12 13 RAFAEL MENIS, Pinole, shared the concerns of the previous speaker, particularly 14 potential conflicts given the proximity and schedule of the Farmer’s Market, although 15 he acknowledged the applicant had received a positive letter from the Farmer’s 16 Market Association. He sought more information on the transitional nature of the site 17 and given the absence of the applicant, he urged the Planning Commission to 18 continue the item. Without some clarification of the concerns, he suggested the use 19 could be in conflict with Land Use and Economic Development Goal LU 3.3 given the 20 conflicts with the Farmer’s Market due to parking, the services offered, and the 21 potential overall pedestrian flow issues in terms of impacts to the ingress and egress 22 to the Farmer’s Market.
23 24 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
25 26 When asked, Mr. Shiu stated he had expected the applicant to be present. 27 28 The Planning Commission discussed DR 19-14 and CUP 19-09 and offered the 29 following comments and/or direction to staff:
30 31 • Supported the idea of bringing vitality and something interesting to Old Town 32 Pinole consistent with the desires of economic development in Old Town; 33 concerned the applicant appeared to have had minimal interaction with the 34 Farmer’s Market Association, and questioned whether the Association was 35 fully aware of the scope of the proposed use, which should be addressed in 36 the conditions of approval. Supported the project conceptually but supported 37 a continuance until such time as the applicant could be present to respond to 38 the questions raised. (Moriarty)
39 40 • Sought more information from the applicant on the proposal for an interim use, 41 clarification of the proposed Porta Potties and the cost of a permanent 42 restroom with hand wash basin, and a continuance of the application. 43 (Kurrent)
44 45 • Identified personal experience patronizing similar venues both in the United

4 February 24, 2020
1 States and in Australia and how those venues had addressed some of the 2 same concerns that had been expressed; agreed the applicant should be 3 present to identify the vision/concept; and approval should include a condition 4 to ensure the site was maintained and cleaned after the completion of the 5 event, including removal of the Porta Potties. If any landscaping was 6 proposed, questioned how it would be maintained and would like greater 7 details and clarity on the parking. Questioned whether the application should 8 be considered as an interim event application or a business application, 9 suggested the use was more a business event, and agreed there should be 10 greater coordination with the Farmer’s Market. Supported a continuance of 11 the application. (Wong)
12 13 • Supported the idea in concept as part of a future potential solution to beautify 14 the subject property; opposed restrictions on the parking; was not convinced 15 such a venue would attract hundreds of people, but if successful suggested 16 people would find a way to park but could also walk and bicycle to the venue; 17 and supported a continuance as discussed. (Ojeda)
18 19 • Supported the idea in concept and was confident the venue would work well 20 with the Farmer’s Market subject to coordination, and agreed the applicant 21 needed to be present to respond to questions related to sanitation and 22 maintenance of the site itself. (Brooks)
23 24 Mr. Hanham summarized the consensus of the Planning Commission to continue the 25 item to allow the applicant to be present to respond to the questions specifically 26 related to: parking, sanitation/Porta-Potty, business plan/vision, interaction with the 27 Farmer’s Market, and proposed signage.
28 29 MOTION to continue Design Review DR 19-14, Conditional Use Permit 19-09:
30 Artisanal Garden - outdoor artisan and vendor space, to a date certain of March 23, 31 2020.
32 33 MOTION: Wong SECONDED: Kurrent APPROVED: 6-0-1
34 Absent: Flashman
35 36 F. OLD BUSINESS: None
37 38 G. NEW BUSINESS:
39 40 1. General Plan/Specific Plan Information Session: Land Use Element 41 42 Planning Manager Hanham explained that the item was a continuation of the January 43 27, 2020 Planning Commission discussion of the General Plan. 44 45 Mr. Hanham provided an overview of the Land Use and Economic Development

5 February 24, 2020
1 Elements of the General Plan and highlighted the associated policies, as outlined in 2 the February 24, 2020 staff report.
3 4 In response to Commissioner Moriarty, Mr. Hanham clarified how the Strategic Plan 5 for 2020 to 2025, which had recently been presented to the City Council, may impact 6 the Land Use and Economic Development Elements. He also clarified that the City 7 Council had the authority to amend the General Plan and offered some examples. 8 The Strategic Plan also called for updates to the General Plan and Three Corridors 9 Specific Plan. The Final Draft of the Old Town Subarea Parking Study and 10 Pedestrian Plan was currently under review by staff to be presented to the Planning 11 Commission in the next month or two prior to being submitted to the City Council. 12 13 The status of Measure J on the March 2020 ballot was also noted and would be the 14 subject of further discussions at West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory 15 Committee (WCCTAC) meetings. The San Pablo Bridge had been identified as 16 WCCTAC’s main project at this time.
17 18 The Planning Commission discussed with staff the differences and details between 19 the current Measure J, which had a sunset date of 2036 and where the half cent 20 sales tax for that measure would continue to be collected, and the Measure J on the 21 March 2020 ballot proposed by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). 22 23 In response to Commissioner Moriarty who pointed out the numbers on Page 14 of 24 the Land Use Element were old, had been based on 2007 and 2009 figures, and 25 needed to be updated, Mr. Hanham referenced the City’s Regional Housing Needs 26 Allocation (RHNA) from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), with new 27 numbers to be released shortly. He described the General Plan as more projection 28 oriented, and clarified that the 2020 Census Survey would provide additional data 29 allowing the numbers in the Housing Element to be updated. 30 31 Mr. Hanham clarified in response to Commissioner Murphy that any references to 32 the Redevelopment Agency in the documents referred to the City Council, and 33 although the City had a Successor Agency pursuant to Redevelopment Law, the City 34 of Pinole was no longer allowed to accrue debt. The City was in the process of selling 35 properties it had through the Redevelopment Agency. The state was also realizing 36 that tax increment funding was an important tool for cities to complete infrastructure 37 projects and the state was using some tax increment funding laws to assist cities with 38 what redevelopment had done in the past.
39 40 In addition, Mr. Hanham explained that references to the Parks and Improvements 41 Plan in the Land Use Element was a plan yet to be created and implemented, and 42 the Waterfront Plan did not yet exist but had been identified as a goal in the Land 43 Use Element.
44 45
46 Mr. Hanham explained that references to historical resources and sites, particularly

6 February 24, 2020
1 Native American sites, may have been discussed in the Cultural Element of the 2 General Plan. He also highlighted the Mills Act, which required definition as to what 3 was historic and whether state or federally listed since there were separate design 4 guidelines and restrictions for any improvements.
5 6 Commissioner Kurrent commented that the State Department of Housing and 7 Community Development (HCD) looked at affordable housing and it was understood 8 that high density development of 35 units an acre or more qualified as Low Income 9 housing. He noted that the General Plan included a background report that provided 10 the history of the City of Pinole, a worthwhile document to read offering insights into 11 what the city wanted to be.
12 13 Commissioner Ojeda thanked Commissioner Murphy for suggesting a review of the 14 General Plan. He liked the discussions of the City’s history and referenced the Point 15 Pinole Regional Shoreline which had a lot of plaques detailing the history of Pinole. 16 17 H. CITY PLANNER’S / COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT
18 19 1. Verbal Updates of Projects
20 21 Mr. Hanham reported the Bike and Pedestrian Plan was in the final stage of review 22 to be presented to the Planning Commission at its next meeting; the environmental 23 review for Pinole Square was being finalized to be distributed in the next week for the 24 30-day state clearinghouse review period to be presented to the Planning 25 Commission in April/May; a number of building permits for remodels and Accessory 26 Dwelling Units (ADUs) had been received; and applications had been received for a 27 small parcel map, and a small subdivision map with design review on Hazel Street 28 anticipated to be presented to the Planning Commission at a future meeting. He 29 reported that the April/May Planning Commission meetings would be very busy. 30 31 Commissioner Moriarty inquired of the status of the application for Making Waves, 32 and Mr. Hanham advised the applicant had formally withdrawn the application and 33 the project had been closed out. Making Waves continued to be the owner of the 34 property. As to the status of the condition of the property, it could be reviewed by 35 code enforcement.
36 37 Mr. Hanham reported that staff had made the arrangements for those 38 Commissioners planning to attend the March 4-6 Planner’s Academy, with 39 information to be forwarded to each Commissioner.
40 41 Commissioner Moriarty reported she and Commissioner Murphy were members of 42 the Beautification Ad Hoc Committee and the first meeting had been scheduled for 43 Wednesday, February 26.
44 45
46 Mr. Hanham also reported that staff was in the process of reviewing the PMC and

7 February 24, 2020
1 considering amendments with assistance from the City Attorney’s Office, to be 2 presented to the Planning Commission later in the year. 3 4 Commissioner Murphy reported he had been invited to the Pinole Senior Center, 5 described it as a jewel for the City, and identified some of the various activities 6 provided. He brought to staff’s attention the limited parking accommodations for that 7 facility.
8 9 M. Hanham suggested the Parking and Pedestrian Plan could address some of those 10 concerns in that it had identified some of the needed improvements in the community. 11 12 Commissioner Murphy also spoke to his background as a digital marketing strategist 13 and announced the creation of an online campaign known as #visitpinole. He 14 encouraged those interested to use the hashtag to provide photos of activities, hiking 15 or walking around the city, which he suggested was a fun way to build a community. 16 17 Commissioner Kurrent understood that three Commissioners would have terms 18 expiring and urged Commissioners to either reapply or staff to consider a recruitment 19 process. He referenced a Facebook Group called Walk and Talk Pinole, with a walk 20 scheduled for Saturday, February 29 at 9:15 A.M. at the Mariotti Mansion at 100 21 Tennent Avenue.
22 23 Commissioner Wong commented on the new East Bay Regional Park District 24 (EBRPD) Trail Bridge which the community had been enjoying. 25 26 I. COMMUNICATIONS: None
27 28 J. NEXT MEETING
29 30 The next meeting of the Planning Commission to be a Regular Meeting to be held 31 on Monday, March 23, 2020 at 7:00 P.M.
32 33 K. ADJOURNMENT: 8:45 P.M
34 35 Transcribed by:
36 37
38 Sherri D. Lewis
39 Transcriber
40 41

F
Casa Amada
G a r d e n
Artisanal eats meet the outdoors 2 3 3 7 S a n P a b l o A v e n u e P i n o l e , C a l i f o r n i a

G
APN: 401-162-002
PAGE

LANDSCAPE PLAN
2337 SAN PABLO AVE PINOLE CA 94564

RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras

PROPOSAL - LANDSCAPE

SAN PABLO AVE

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
AREA
N
TRASH

ENCLOSURE
1 2

WOOD FENCE
3 PLANTING AREA
4 WOOD PLANTERS
5 WOOD FENCE
7 SWING GATE
119'-10"
30'-0"

SAN PABLO
AVE
Z1

RAIN WATER BARREL
9'-7"
water meter
8 PAVERS
9 ELECTRICAL POINT

ENCLOSURE
10 SLIDE GATE

PLANT PALATTE

BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SUNSE
T ZONE
PF IRR
GROUP
Lagerstoemia Crapemyrtle 17 M 1
Arbutus Marina Strawberry tree 17 M/L 2
Rhamnus alaternus Itallian buckhorn 17 M 2
Thunbergia alata Black eyed susan 17 M 2
Trachelospermum jasminoides Star jasmine 17 M 1
Cordyline australis Pink cordilne 17 M 1
Agave Attentua Agave 17 L/VL 2
Euphorbia tirucalli Firesticks 17 ML 2
Senecio serpens Blue Chalksticks 17 L/VL 2
Aeoniums succulent 17 L/VL 2
Calandrinia spectablilis rock purslane 17 L/VL 2
Aeonium starburst 17 L/VL 2
Lavandula stoechas Lavender 17 M/L 2
Sedum Purple emperor 17 L/VL 2
Leucadendren Safari sunset 17 M/L 2
Wodyetia bifurcata Fox tail palm 17 M/L 1
66'-6"

PROPOSAL - IRRIGATION PLAN

ZONE HYDROZONE IRRIGATION METHOD
1 low water in line drip
2 low water use in line drip

MATERIAL LEGEND

SYMBOL ITEM TYPE/ SIZE
1 wood fence 6” Pine wood siding / 10’ 6”w x 6’ h
2 utility cover Metal / 1’ 6” x 2’ x 2’
3 plantings Brown bark mulch
4 planters typ./Rewood/ recycled 3’ x 3’
5 fence
cable wire trellis
4”x4” posts PT./ 1”x6” typ. redwood planks/recycled, 6’ high
6 trash bins, compost
& recycle enclosure
stucco & - fiber cement based siding
size 6’d x 8w x 7’ h
7 swing gate Galvanized metal & steel posts/ 10’w x 6’h 8 pavers porcelain 2cm 24” x24”
9 ground Decomposed granite
10 slide gate galvanized metal / 12’w x 6’h
11 storage enclosure top wall fiber cement siding &metal roof 12 pergola 4”x4” PT. wood posts, 12” wood rafters
10’-6”w x 12’-0”h
1 OF 3
OWNER / APPLICANT DATE:10-11-20
SCALE: 1’ = 1/8”

PROJECT TITLE / ADDRESS
0’ 8’ 16’ SCALE 1=1/8”

ENTRANCE

ENTRANCE

PUBLIC PARKING
water meter

DESIGN INTENT
To create an outdoor commercial gathering space designed to promote local micro businesses in the food industry and local artists that make their own crafts.

A place where locals come to meet, socialize, eat, explore the downtown, and shop locally.

PROPOSAL - SITE PLAN

LIGHT POST
34'-10"
12 WOOD
PERGOLA 10'-7"
5 TRELLIS
metal/wire
R
W W

STORAGE

ENCLOSURE
waste compost
recycle
portable
TOILET
& wash

STORAGE/

OFFICE/GARDEN
SHED
11 10’-0 X 20’-0”
6 RAIN WATER BARREL
8 PAVERS
R
W C
portable
TOILET
10’-0 X 20’-0”
6'-0"
14'-0"
C

BICYCLE RACK

APN: 401-162-002
PAGE

GRADING PLAN
2337 SAN PABLO AVE PINOLE CA 94564

RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras

EXISTING SITE
66'-6"
119'-10"
30'-0"

SAN PABLO AVE
10'-0"

GRADING PLAN

PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA
PLOT 002
2778 SQ FT

EXISTING ESPOSED DIRT
(PLOT TO BE LEVEL )

20.11’

20.11’

21.00’

21.00’

21.25’

20.06’

21.00’

EXISTING SIDEWALK

EXISTING BANK BUILDING
2361

EXISTING BANK BUILDING
2331

TENNENT AVE
2301
2 OF 3
OWNER / APPLICANT DATE: 10-11-20
SCALE: 1’ = 1/8”

PROJECT TITLE / ADDRESS
0’ 8’ 16’ SCALE 1=1/8”
N
8’-7" 16’ 2"
shutoff
valve
24’-4"
electrical
connection point
sewer
line
public parking
water meter
fire hydrant
15'-6"

EASEMENT
37'-0" EASEMENT
R
W C
10’-0 X 20’-0”
5'-6"

20'-0"
APN: 401-162-002
PAGE

ELEVATIONS
2337 SAN PABLO AVE PINOLE CA 94564

RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras 3 OF 4
OWNER / APPLICANT DATE: 10-11-20
SCALE: 1’ = 1/8”

PROJECT TITLE / ADDRESS
0’ 8’ 16’ SCALE 1=1/8”
N

EAST SIDE ELEVATION
E

WEST SIDE ELEVATION
W

NORTH SIDE ELEVATION N
SOUTH SIDE ELEVATION: GATE AND FENCE S

STORAGE SHED CONSTRUCTION
2X4 FRAMING WITH HARDI PANELS/ FIBER CEMENT

GALVANIZE METAL ROOF

WASTE STORAGE

INSTALL METAL MESH PANEL AT BACK WALL FOR TRAILING VINES

WASTE STORAGE TYP FRAME AND STUCCO WALLS

METAL DOOR SWING OPEN
9'-5"
6'-0"
10'-0"
8'-0"

FENCE, TRAILING VINES AND HEDGES

APN: 401-162-002
PAGE

MATERIAL BOARD
2337 SAN PABLO AVE PINOLE CA 94564

RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras 4 OF 4
OWNER / APPLICANT DATE: 10-11-20
SCALE: 1’ = 1/8”

PROJECT TITLE / ADDRESS
1 6
WOOD FENCE AND PLANTERS - 6” TYP.

TYP - PINEWOOD/ REDWOOD/RECYCLED

OR SIMILAR
COLOR: CEDAR NATURAL TONE

DECOMPOSED GRANITE HARDI PLANK - FIBER CEMENT SIDING
COLOR: TYP. (EARTHTONE COLOR)
COLOR:

STONE PAVERS:

SIZE: 12X24 - TYP.

TRAVERTINE, DURANGO CREAM
WOOD FENCE & PLANTERS - 6” PINEWOOD SIDING
COLOR: CORDOVA BROWN

Lot Descripon Address Number of spaces
Lot 1-Main City Hall Public 2180 Prune St 77
Lot 2-Post Office Parking - right of 2101 Pear St 21
Lot 3-City Hall Parking - 2169 Pear St - 20
Lot 4-In front of City Hall 836 Tennent Ave - 11
Lot 5-Bank of the West 2372 Pear St 47
Lot 6-Area N. & E of Mechanics Bank- 2401 San Pablo Ave 21 Lot 7-Area South of Mechanics Bank 813 Fernandez Ave 43 Lot 8-Captains Coage 2548 San Pablo Ave 10
Lot 9 A-East Charles St Upper Area 2560 Charles Ave 8
Lot 9 B-East Charles St Lower Area 2572 Charles Ave 16
Lot 10-Senior Center 2518 Charles Ave 70
Lot 11-Tennent Avenue Parking 648 Tennent Ave 35
Lot 12-Christ the Lord Church 592 Tennent Ave 22
Lot 13-New Youth Center 635 Tennent Ave 35
Minimum of total public parking spaces available 436
*Addional parking is available along Pablo Ave (2400 lf) and side streets Parking Public transportation Bicycle Walking Surrounded by 436 designated
public parking spaces and over
2400 linear feet of street parking
along San Pablo Ave.

Hercules Transit Center is 1.7 miles
from 2337 San Pablo and
accessible by train and a 4 min
walk . Estimate time of arrival is 14
min.

Bicycle route from Hercules Transit
Center, via I-80 Bikeway/San Pablo
Ave and Willow Ave. Estimated
time of arrival is 13 min.
15 minute from
residential
community
Parking
Exhibit A
Map provided by Westcat.com
additional transportation maps for lynx,local bus,& ADA paratransit can be seen online https://www.westcat.org/Content/Pdf/COVIDSchedule.pdf
Bicycle Parking Public Transportation
2 bicycle racks will be
provided on location
bicycle lockers located
at Hercules Transit Center

PARKING

PARKING

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

SOCIAL DISTANCING VENDOR SETUP

SOCIAL DISTANCE SINGLE VENDOR LAYOUT RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

OPEN TO PEDESTRIANS

AFTER VENDOR SET UP

ENTRANCE
R
W
C

STORAGE

ENCLOSURE
waste compost
recycle
portable
TOILET

STORAGE/
GARDEN
SHED
10’-0 X 12’-0”
FOOD
VENDOR
P1

OCCUPANCY LOAD
standing =119
sitting = 20
wash
station
W

PAGE TITLE ADDRESS OWNER
2337 San Pablo Ave
Pinole, CA94564
APN: 401-162-002

PARKING

PARKING

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

SINGLE VENDOR SET UP

EATING AREA

SINGLE VENDOR LAYOUT RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

OPEN TO PEDESTRIANS

AFTER VENDOR SET UP

ENTRANCE
R
W
C

STORAGE

ENCLOSURE
waste compost
recycle
portable
TOILET

STORAGE/
GARDEN
SHED
10’-0 X 12’-0”
FOOD
VENDOR
ARTIST
ARTIST
ARTIST
ARTIST
P2

OCCUPANCY LOAD
standing =119
sitting = 20
wash
station
W

PAGE TITLE ADDRESS OWNER
2337 San Pablo Ave
Pinole, CA94564
APN: 401-162-002

FOOD
VENDOR
FOOD
VENDOR
FOOD
VENDOR

PARKING

PARKING

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

MULTIPLE VENDOR SET UP

PEDESTRIAN

ENTRANCE

OPEN TO PEDESTRIANS

AFTER VENDOR SET UP

ENTRANCE
R
W
C

STORAGE

ENCLOSURE
waste compost
recycle
portable
TOILET

STORAGE/
GARDEN
SHED
10’-0 X 12’-0”
FOOD
VENDOR

OCCUPANCY LOAD
standing =119
sitting = 28
wash
station
W

MULTIPLE VENDOR LAYOUT RAQUEL CONTRERAS
714 Walker Ave Oakland Ca 94610
L a n d s c a p e D e s i g n Ph. 510.418.1595 E. [email protected] Contreras P3

PAGE TITLE ADDRESS OWNER
2337 San Pablo Ave
Pinole, CA94564
APN: 401-162-002

ARTIST ARTIST

Request for Modifications to Conditional Use Permit – Uptown Yard Marketplace Dear City of Pinole Planning Department and Planning Commission, I am writing to formally request modifications to the Conditional Use Permit for Uptown Yard to allow for expanded hours of operation and enhanced use of the space as a curated marketplace that supports local businesses, artisans, and creatives.

Expanded Marketplace Use and Hours
Uptown Yard seeks approval to extend hours of operation to Monday through Sunday, 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. This expanded timeframe would allow additional businesses, crafters, and artists to vend during extended hours, creating a more dynamic and accessible marketplace.

Hosting a consistent marketplace at Uptown Yard will attract new and returning visitors, support small businesses, and generate additional economic activity for the City of Pinole—contributing to a more vibrant and thriving downtown shopping experience.

Mobile Food Vendors
We are also requesting approval to allow one to two mobile food vendors to operate during Saturday markets and special events. Mobile food vendors help alleviate the logistical and financial hardship associated with recurring booth setup and quarterly health permit fees currently required for individual food booths. Food vending in this area can be challenging due to limited foot traffic, which often results in low sales volume. Mobile food trucks serve as an effective event activation and marketing tool, bringing an established customer following that may not otherwise visit the City of Pinole, thereby increasing visibility, attendance, and overall economic impact.

Music and Performing Artists
To further enhance the visitor experience, Uptown Yard requests approval for limited live music programming under the following conditions:
● Acoustic music: Wednesday through Sunday, 11:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. ● Occasional amplified music during special events:
○ Friday through Sunday, 11:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m
● Frequency limitations:
○ Live music limited to three (3) days per month
○ A maximum of thirty-six (36) days per year
○ All performances limited to the hours stated above
Approved music genres would include world music, jazz, rhythm and blues, bluegrass, latin, salsa, cumbia, rock and roll, flamenco, mariachi, bossa nova, Latin jazz, reggae, instrumental, ambient, and easy, listening—styles intended to complement the community-oriented atmosphere of Uptown Yard.

H
These proposed modifications are designed to thoughtfully activate the site while remaining sensitive to surrounding uses. Uptown Yard is committed to operating responsibly, supporting local entrepreneurs, and contributing positively to the economic and cultural vitality of downtown Pinole.

Thank you for your consideration of this request. I welcome the opportunity to discuss these proposed changes further and am happy to provide any additional information needed to support the review process.

Sincerely,
Raquel Contreras