A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Design review panel requests detail drawings for Oceana’s proposed Bonanza Street restaurant

March 05, 2026 | Walnut Creek City, Contra Costa County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Design review panel requests detail drawings for Oceana’s proposed Bonanza Street restaurant
Jessica Gonzales, the city’s senior planner, opened the DRC study session for Oceana, a proposal to reuse the former yacht‑club building at 1555 Bonanza Street as a seafood bar on the ground floor with office space above. Gonzales said planning staff has already issued an Alcohol Use Permit and asked the commission for design input before the project advances to the Planning Commission for final action.

Rola Gabin, representing the applicant family, told commissioners her family has run restaurants in Walnut Creek since 1980 and described the Oceana proposal as “rooted in respect for Walnut Creek character.” She said the project would include a first‑ and second‑floor addition, exterior remodeling, a new trash enclosure, landscaping and roughly a 400‑square‑foot outdoor dining patio on Bonanza.

Brandon Marshall, the project architect with VOG Studio, outlined the team’s approach: relocating a stair to improve kitchen operations, replacing and extending curtain‑wall glazing, adding a sloped parapet to conceal rooftop mechanical equipment, installing a decorative laser‑cut metal scrim informed by a nautical theme, and using seafoam green, bronze and gold accents with blue‑and‑white mosaic tile details. “As an architect, I don't see it a lot, and not cut corners,” Marshall said, praising the applicant’s investment in quality.

Commissioners broadly praised the design’s respect for the existing yacht‑club massing and the effort to break the long storefront into smaller, pedestrian‑scaled parts. At the same time they asked for several clarifications and changes before the DRC makes a formal recommendation:

- Scrim and curtain‑wall details: Commissioners requested section drawings and connection details showing how the laser‑cut scrim will attach to both the two‑story curtain wall and the CMU wall behind it, and asked the applicant to show any outriggers or frame work needed to reconcile differences in support systems.

- Rooftop equipment and ducting: Commissioners asked that plans show rooftop mechanical equipment and duct routing, and that the team explore screening so ductwork and HVAC components are not visible from the street.

- Glazing/privacy at restrooms: One commissioner raised concerns that windows wrapping a corridor near restrooms could expose restroom doors or fixtures; commissioners asked the team to study interior treatments and consider fritting or other graphic glass treatments to obscure direct views from the sidewalk.

- Landscaping and ficus planting: Commissioners sought clarification on planter cutouts and soil depth required for ficus to climb the scrim; the applicant confirmed an existing planter on Locust and said the team will show small cutouts and cultivation details so vines can establish and be maintained.

- Plant species and mature sizes: Commissioners asked staff and the applicant to confirm mature sizes for proposed grasses (a comment noted that miscanthus can get large) and to ensure planting choices fit the narrow planters.

Jessica Gonzales told the commission that staff recommends the DRC provide comments on building design, colors and materials, the outdoor dining area and landscaping to guide Planning Commission review. The DRC did not take a formal vote on the design tonight; instead commissioners recorded a set of consensus items and asked the applicant to return with revised drawings that include the requested sections, details and planting clarifications.

The project team emphasized that interior design and final materials remain in development but committed to returning with the technical details the commission requested. The Planning Commission will review the design review application at a later hearing for final action.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee