* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:02]
          GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. 
          WE'RE JUST GONNA 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. 
          I'D LIKE TO ASK ARIEL TO PLEASE TAKE ROLE. 
          COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN HERE. 
          GOOD MORNING IN PROGRESS. 
          VICE MAYOR CATER THOMPSON. 
          HERE. 
          CHAIR HOOPER. 
          HERE. 
          WE HAVE A QUORUM. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND WE APPEAR TO HAVE A BIT OF AN ECHO OR HAVE WE, IT APPEARS WE HAVE RESOLVED THE ECHO. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, 
          [GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT]
NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          DURING GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO MAKE COMMENTS ON ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTERESTS THAT ARE WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, AND ARE NOT LISTED ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO UP TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. 
          DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          TIME WILL BE ALLOCATED IN EQUAL SHARES TOTALING NO MORE THAN 15 MINUTES. 
          AN OPEN, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, ASK SPEAKERS TO BRING THEIR CARDS TO THE CLERK'S DESK IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE I HAVE ONE GENERAL COMMENT. 
          FAIR ENOUGH. 
          I JUST WANNA ASK, UH, ARIEL, DO WE GET ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING RECORDING IN PROGRESS CHAIR? I CAN RESPOND FOR HIM. 
          WE DID RECEIVE ONE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          IT WAS, UH, PUBLISHED TO THE AGENDA PRIOR TO THE MEETING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, I'M GONNA CALL FOR IN-PERSON, PUBLIC SPEAKERS WHO HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, TO PLEASE TURN IN THEIR CARDS. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE'LL GET STARTED WITH NICOLA. 
          THE ONE CARD I HAVE SO FAR TODAY, I'D LIKE, AM I LOUD ENOUGH? TODAY I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS A MATTER OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE, THE NEEDS AND ISSUES OF SENIORS AND THE HANDICAPPED IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          WE ALL NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS CRUCIAL CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CHALLENGES FACED BY SENIORS. 
          AND WE NEED TO EXPLORE ACTUAL SOLUTIONS TO ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THESE WHO REPRESENT 32% OF OUR PETALUMA POPULATION. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AWARE OF THE CURRENT AND POOR UNDERSTANDING THERE IS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF OLDER ADULTS. 
          AT LEAST ONE IN SIX SENIORS LIVE IN POVERTY. 
          96% LIVE INDEPENDENTLY. 
          ONLY 4% RESIDE IN AGGREGATE HOUSING THAT PROVIDES CARE. 
          30% LIVE ALONE. 
          MORE THAN 20% DO NOT DRIVE OR OWN A CAR. 
          ONE IN NINE LIVE WITH MILD TO SEVERE DEMENTIA. 
          20% NEED HELP WITH AVERAGE DAILY NEEDS. 
          SHOPPING, CLEANING, COOKING. 
          40% HAVE AMBULATORY LIMITATIONS, AND 80% HAVE TWO OR MORE CHRONIC MEDICAL ISSUES. 
          THESE AND OTHER FACTS LEAD THEIR LIFE TO OLDER ADULTS BEARING THE BRUNT OF ANY DISASTER THAT HAPPENS IN THE 2021 HEAT WAVE. 
          IN OREGON, THE MEDIAN AGE OF THOSE WHO DIED WAS 67 IN THE CAMPFIRE. 
          IN 2018, 85% OF THOSE WHO DIED WERE OVER 60. 
          AND DURING THE 2023 FIRE IN LAINA, 73% OF THOSE WHO PERISHED WERE OVER THE AGE OF 60. 
          THINK OF THESE EXAMPLES AND ASK YOURSELF, WHAT ARE WE DOING FOR PETALUMA SENIORS? AS AN EXAMPLE, PETALUMA HAS 47 PARKS AND MILES OF TRAILS AND SIDEWALKS, BUT KNOWS MOST ARE NOT SENIOR OR HANDICAPPED. 
          FRAIL, FRIENDLY. 
          40% OF OUR PARKS HAVE DESIGNATED FACILITIES FOR THOSE UNDER THE AGE OF 18, INCLUDING A NEWLY PROPOSED $2.8 MILLION SKATE PARK. 
          WHILE WE SENIORS HAVE ONE PARK FACILITY, THE SENIOR CENTER AT LUCCHESE, AS SOMEONE TOLD ME IN A RECENT MEETING, SENIORS CAN USE ANY PARK THEY WANT, JUST GO AND SIT ON A BENCH. 
          OUR TRAILS AND SIDEWALKS ARE DIFFICULT TO DIVERSE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU UTILIZE THE MOBILITY ASSISTIVE DEVICE, A CANE, A WALKER, OR A WHEELCHAIR. 
          THE MAJORITY OF TRAILS START WITH A PAVED ENTRANCE AND THEN GO TO A GROUND COVER THAT IS GRAVEL OR DIRT. 
          OUR SIDEWALKS, YES, I KNOW THAT INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING OUR SIDEWALKS, BUT JUST TRY WALKING BETWEEN THE NEWLY INSTALLED CORNER, A DA RAMPS. 
          AS SENIORS, WE ARE LUCKY IN THAT WE HAVE SOME FACILITIES AND RESOURCES OF SOME EXCELLENT PETALUMA NON-PROFITS. 
          WE HEAR AT MANY MEETINGS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND WORKING HARD TOWARDS ADDITIONAL BICYCLE PATHS. 
          THE IMPORTANCE OF PLANTING MORE TREES AND THEY NEED FOR MORE ART IN PETALUMA. 
          BUT WHILE OF THE, ALL OF THESE ARE GREAT OBJECTIVES AND WILL HAVE SOME EFFECT ON SENIORS, 
          [00:05:01]
THEY DO NOT REALLY ADDRESS THE ACTUAL NEEDS AND ISSUES WE LIVE WITH EVERY DAY. 
          WE, AS THE SENIOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE, FIND THAT THE PLANS AND PROPOSALS THAT CITY OF PETALUMA DEALS WITH ON A DAILY BASIS DO NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE NEEDS AND ISSUES OF PETALUMA SENIORS. 
          WE ARE NOT ASKING, AND WE ARE NOT BEING ASKED TO PROVIDE INPUT INTO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH PLANS AND PROPOSALS WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR SO. 
          THE NUMBER OF THOSE OVER 55 WILL ECLIPSE THE NUMBER OF THOSE UNDER 18. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. 
          VERY POINTED AND UNDERSTOOD PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER FOLKS WHO WISH TO GIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE CLOSE OUT? NOT SEEING ANY. 
          I WILL CLOSE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          WE'LL CONTINUE THROUGH THE AGENDA. 
          I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. 
          UH, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT OKAY. 
          THE SCREEN HAS BEEN FIXED. 
          WE HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. 
          SO WE'LL CLOSE OUT THIS AGENDA ITEM. 
          AND 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
NOW WE WILL GO TO ITEM ONE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 14TH, 2023. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE COMMISSIONERS, PROVIDE ANY AMENDMENTS, IF ANY. 
          NO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT THEN. 
          OKAY. 
          SO MOVED. 
          AND I WILL SECOND COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES? ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN? YES. 
          VICE MAYOR CATER THOMPSON? YES. 
          CHAIR HOOPER? YES. 
          THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          NOW MOVING ON TO MEETING ITEM TWO, APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM OUR NOVEMBER 28TH MEETING. 
          I'D LIKE TO INVITE ANY COMMISSIONERS TO PROVIDE AMENDMENTS. 
          I'LL BE ABSTAINING 'CAUSE I WASN'T AT THE MEETING. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          OH, CAN WE, CAN WE MOVE THIS? CAN WE MOVE THIS WITH ONLY TWO PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO VOTE? NO, I DON'T THINK SO. 
          LET'S PUSH THIS. 
          OR MAYBE WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE IT FOR WHEN WE HAVE A QUORUM, UH, AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          NEXT TUESDAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION. 
          I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ARIEL, IF YOU COULD DO THE ROLL CALL. 
          COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN? YES. 
          VICE MAYOR GARRETT THOMPSON. 
          YES. 
          CHAIR HOOPER. 
          YES. 
          THE VOTE IS PASSED. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE WILL NOW MOVE TO 
          [PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION]
PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          AND OUR FIRST ITEM WILL BE ITEM THREE. 
          IT'S THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER FIVE OF THE PETALUMA IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD SECTION 5.080 ESTABLISHING A FAIRGROUNDS OVERLAY ZONE AND AUTHORIZING A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO, TO ZONE A PORTION OF TWO EXISTING PARCELS LOCATED AT 8 66 EAST WASHINGTON STREET AND ZERO EAST WASHINGTON STREET. 
          PARCEL NUMBERS 0 0 7 DASH 0 3 1 DASH 0 0 4 AND 0 0 7 DASH 0 3 1 DASH 0 0 5. 
          THE PROPOSED FAIRGROUNDS OVERLAY ZONE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OR CQA PURSUANT TO CQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15 3 0 1 AND SECTION 15 3 0 5. 
          I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRING THE COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE ANY PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. 
          I'M JUST GONNA DO A QUICK LOOK. 
          OKAY. 
          WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'D LIKE TO INVITE OUR STAFF TO PRESENT BRIAN O, OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          THANK YOU, CHAIR HOOPER, MEMBERS OF PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UM, IN ATTENDANCE. 
          MY NAME IS BRIAN O, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY OF PETALUMA. 
          AND WE ARE APPRECIATIVE OF THE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THIS RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO YOU THIS EVENING. 
          AND SO FOR BACKGROUND HERE, UH, THE TWO PARCELS THAT THE CHAIR, UH, JUST, UH, CALLED OUT, UH, ARE WHAT MAKES, UM, YOU KNOW, IN MANY WAYS THE HEART OF, OF THE CITY. 
          AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          UH, THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF, UH, CONVERSATIONS BOTH, UM, WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND WITH CITY COUNCIL OVER THE PAST YEAR 
          [00:10:01]
AND A HALF, UH, TO GET US TO THIS POINT. 
          UM, AND SO JUST A QUICK BIT OF BACKGROUND HERE. 
          UH, FOR A, UH, NUMBER OF DECADES, WE HAVE BEEN LEASING THE FAIRGROUNDS PROPERTY TO A STATE ENTITY, THE FOURTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION. 
          THAT LEASE IS SET TO EXPIRE AT THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR. 
          AND STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY OVER THE PAST YEAR, UH, TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S A SMOOTH TRANSITION AS PART OF THE CITY, UH, TAKING, UM, MANAGEMENT AND DAILY, UH, DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF ALL THINGS, UH, THAT HAPPEN ON OUR FAIRGROUNDS. 
          AND SO, BACK IN 20 OCTOBER OF 2022, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A SET OF GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE, UH, REALLY SET OUR COURSE IN HOW WE'VE APPROACHED, UM, WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY, WORKING WITH THE FOURTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION, UH, TO ENSURE THAT, UM, A WE HAVE A, THE COMMUNITY, UM, HAS A FAIR THAT WILL CONTINUE. 
          UM, PART OF WHAT THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES IDENTIFIED WAS ALSO TO, UM, ENSURE CONSISTENCY, UH, WITH THE EXISTING TENANTS. 
          AND SO THERE WAS A RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED EARLIER THIS YEAR TO EXECUTE THE LICENSE AGREEMENTS WITH THE EXISTING TENANTS. 
          UH, THERE'S A, UM, CHART IN THE STAFF REPORT, AND THEN I'LL, UM, WALK THROUGH EACH OF THOSE TENANTS. 
          UH, BUT THERE ARE CURRENTLY NINE EXISTING TENANTS THERE THAT WE, UM, HAVE NOW EXECUTED, UM, OR WORKING TOWARDS, UM, FINAL EXECUTION OF LICENSE AGREEMENTS. 
          AND SO THESE WILL BE THREE YEAR LICENSES, UH, WITH AN OPTION TWO ONE YEAR OPTIONS, UH, FOR A TOTAL OF FIVE YEARS. 
          AND SO, AGAIN, WE'RE GETTING READY TO ASSUME PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS COME, UH, THE TURN OF THE YEAR. 
          SO JANUARY 1ST, 2024. 
          UM, ALSO WANNA MENTION, THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, REALLY GREAT OUTREACH, UM, THAT'S BEING SPEARHEADED BY OUR PARKS AND RECS DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THE REVITALIZATION OF KENNELWORTH PARK. 
          UM, AND SO THAT, UH, THERE'S AN ONGOING SEPARATE PROCESS THERE, UH, THAT WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT, UM, UH, PROGRAMMING AND INVESTING IN ONE OF OUR, UH, CORE PARKS, UM, IN CENTRAL PETALUMA. 
          AND THEN PART OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND, UM, THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY IS TO MASTER PLAN, UH, THE SITE, THE FAIRGROUND SITE. 
          AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE, UH, WILL START IN EARNEST IN THE NEW YEAR. 
          AND THAT SHOULD TAKE US, UH, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE NEXT FEW YEARS. 
          AND SO DURING THAT TIME, UM, I'M JUST, THESE ARE A FEW, UH, VISIONS THAT, UH, THE COMMUNITY WENT THROUGH. 
          THE CITY WENT THROUGH, UH, FIRST OF ITS KIND, UM, HERE IN THE STATE, UH, HEALTHY DEMOCRACY PROCESS. 
          AND SO THERE WAS, UM, DEMOCRATIZATION OF THE PARTICIPATION. 
          UM, AND WE HAD, UH, A REALLY, UH, UH, DIVERSE SET OF STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY RESIDENTS THAT CAME TO CONCLUSION. 
          UH, AND SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE ON THIS SCREEN, UH, A SET OF VISIONS THAT, UM, OUR COMMUNITY, UM, WANTS TO ENVISION, UH, WANTS, UH, UH, FOR THE CITY AND FOR THE COMMUNITY TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS MASTER PLANNING EFFORT. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, DETAILED, UM, STAFF REPORT AND INFORMATION ABOUT THE HEALTHY DEMOCRACY PROCESS. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, THIS IS JUST ILLUSTRATIVE AT THIS POINT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, AND SO IT'S NOT LOOKING TO DO A DEEP DIVE OF WHERE, UH, A CERTAIN, UM, UH, PROPOSAL MIGHT BE. 
          UM, AND SO AT THIS POINT, IT'S, IT'S SORT OF AT THE VISION LEVEL AND HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT WHEN WE GET FROM VISION TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTATION, UM, WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THE FAIRGROUNDS IS FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ABLE TO, UM, ENJOY HERE AS RESIDENTS, UM, ALONGSIDE, UM, ENSURING THAT WE HAVE OUR FIVE DAY FAIR MOVING FORWARD. 
          AND THESE ARE THE EIGHT GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED BACK IN 2022. 
          UM, NUMBER THREE, I JUST BOLDED THIS ONE, UM, AS MOST RELEVANT TO THE TOPIC. 
          UM, AND WHAT LED US TO THE PROPOSAL FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS OVERLAY, AND THAT WAS TO PROVIDE CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL STABILITY DURING THIS TRANSITION PERIOD AND BEYOND, SO THAT THE FAIR EVENT AND OTHER KEY USES WILL CONTINUE. 
          I MENTIONED 
          [00:15:01]
THE NINE TENANTS. 
          UM, AND SO THEY'RE LISTED HERE, UH, IN THE FIRST COLUMN. 
          THE, THE NAMES, UM, THE ONLY ONE THAT MAY NEED CLARIFICATION AS THE FINAL ONE. 
          GLAD ENTERPRISES, AND THAT'S THE SPEEDWAY. 
          UH, THE CHAIR MENTIONED THE TWO, UH, SEPARATE ZONING DESIGNATIONS. 
          SO THE ACTUAL FAIRGROUNDS PROPERTY IS ZONED CIVIC FACILITY. 
          SO THAT HAS IN AND OF ITSELF ITS OWN SET OF PERMITTED USES. 
          UM, AND THEN THE PARKING LOT ESSENTIALLY IS ZONED MIXED USE. 
          UM, ONE OF OUR MIXED USE DESIGNATIONS. 
          AND SO WHEN WE, UM, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, AS WE START TO TRANSITION THE PROPERTY, UM, UH, TO MANAGEMENT BY THE CITY, WE LOOKED AT WHAT'S EXISTING, HOW WOULD OUR ZONING CODE HERE DEFINE IT AND CLASSIFY IT. 
          UM, AND THEN HOW DO WE ADDRESS THAT? UM, HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT THERE'S CONSISTENCY COME JANUARY 1ST, UH, WHEN WE DO TAKE OVER MANAGEMENT, UM, OF THE SITE. 
          AND SO THE FINAL COLUMN THERE, IT'S THE EXISTING REGULATIONS. 
          SO WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE, UH, THOSE TOP THREE, UH, THE ONE PERMITTED, UM, USE WOULD BE JAVA HUT. 
          UM, AND THEN A SIMILAR, UM, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE CIVIC FACILITIES, UM, HAPPY HEARTS PRESCHOOL AS A CHILDCARE CENTER, ONE OF THE PERMITTED USES, UM, REBUILDING TOGETHER HAS A SMALL FOOTPRINT OFFICE ALONG PAY RAN, AGAIN, A PERMITTED USE BY OUR CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          AND THEN WHERE I, UM, DID THE HYPHENS, UH, THIS IS WHERE, UM, THERE ARE USES THAT OUR CODE DOESN'T, UM, UM, CURRENTLY PERMIT, UH, WITHIN EACH OF THOSE DESIGNATIONS. 
          SO AGAIN, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED THIS EVENING IS AN OVERLAY, A ZONING OVERLAY PURPOSE BEING TO ALLOW THE INTERIM OPERATION OF THE EXISTING NINE TENANTS. 
          UM, THIS WILL HELP US ACHIEVE THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT WERE SET OUT BY CITY COUNCIL, UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR. 
          THIS ENSURES THE OPERATION OF THE SITE, UM, AND ANY FUTURE TEMPORARY USES OVER THIS TRANSITION. 
          UH, INTERIM PHASE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST AND THERE'S A PUBLIC BENEFIT, UH, TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND THEN THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO REGULATE AND PERMIT OTHER CIVIC USES. 
          AND SO WE'LL SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME ON WHY, UH, THE OVERLAY PROPOSES SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, POLICIES, UM, AND REGULATIONS. 
          UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY, UH, WHAT WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THROUGH THIS VISION VISIONING EXERCISE AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES IS THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS, UH, TO TEST AND, UM, LOOK AT WHAT POTENTIAL TEMPORARY USES, UH, MAY WORK FOR THE SITE, MAY WORK FOR THE COMMUNITY, UM, AND THAT'LL HELP US, UH, DETERMINE WHAT THE, THE FUTURE LONG-TERM USES MAY BE, UM, FOR OUR CITY PROPERTY. 
          SO THE OVERLAY HERE CARVES OUT. 
          UM, SO THERE'S TWO ARROWS THAT I'LL JUST DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO. 
          THIS IS OUR SWIM CENTER. 
          AND SO THAT IS, UH, THAT WILL REMAIN. 
          UM, AND SO THE PROPOSAL IS TO, UH, KEEP THAT OUT OF THE OVERLAY, UM, AS WELL AS KENILWORTH PARK HERE WITH THE OSP UM, DESIGNATION. 
          THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE LIBRARY AS WELL AS OUR TEEN CENTER. 
          UM, AND SO THIS IS A VERY, UH, VERY, UM, SURGICAL TOOL TO ENSURE THAT THE OVERLAY ENCOMPASSES, UM, ALL THE POTENTIAL USES THAT WE COULD SEE, UH, BOTH ON THE FAIRGROUNDS PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE PARKING LOT THAT, UM, UH, SUPPORTS THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          SO JUST A, A QUICK SUMMARY OF, UH, THE, THE KEY, UH, TOP LEVEL PROVISIONS OF THE OVERLAY. 
          SO THIS, YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG. 
          ATTACHMENT A STARTS ON PAGE SEVEN. 
          UM, AND SO NUMBER ONE, AGAIN, JUST REAFFIRMING EXISTING TENANTS TO OPERATE DURING THE TRANSITION INTERIM PHASE. 
          UH, THIS ALSO, UM, IS CLEARLY OUTLINES, UM, THE INTENT FROM THE CITY, UH, TO CONTINUE, UM, AND DELIVER AN ANNUAL FAIR, UH, FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          UM, AND THEN ALSO IDENTIFIES, UM, AND WE'VE ESSENTIALLY PULLED SOME OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT OUR ZONING CODE ALLOWS US TO PERMIT TEMPORARY USES. 
          SO EVERYTHING FROM A TEMPORARY ZONING PERMIT THERE 60 DAY, AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S IN OUR CODE. 
          AND SO WE'VE PULLED THAT INTO THE OVERLAY. 
          UM, NEW PUBLIC BENEFIT 
          [00:20:01]
USES, AGAIN, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY POTENTIALLY TO TEST OUT, UM, UH, DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT THE COMMUNITY MAY, UH, FIND APPEALING. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, WE'VE HEARD A NUMBER OF, UH, INTEREST AROUND A, UH, COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE, UH, UM, UH, FARMER'S MARKET, UM, A LOT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, INTEREST TO, UM, MAXIMIZE PUBLIC USE OF THE SPACE. 
          AND SO, UM, AS NEW IDEAS EMERGE, UM, WE COULD SORT OF FIT THESE, FIT THOSE PROPOSALS WITHIN ONE OF THESE FOUR BUCKETS. 
          SO A TEMPORARY USE, A NEW PUBLIC BENEFIT USE. 
          AND SO AGAIN, A SET OF FINDINGS THAT, UM, THE STAFF WOULD HAVE TO MAKE. 
          UM, AND THEN THE, THE FINAL TWO HERE, UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EXISTING USES, UH, BOTH PERMITTED AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED THAT ARE CODE ALLOWS, UM, ON BOTH MIXED USE AND CIVIC FACILITIES. 
          UM, AND SO TYPICALLY A USE PERMIT WOULD BE APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, AND SO WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING HERE IS AN ADDITIONAL LAYER, UM, OF PROCESS AND, UM, ASSURANCE. 
          AND SO RECOMMENDATION BY PLANNING COMMISSION, FINAL APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL. 
          UM, AND THIS WOULD ALSO APPLY WITH ANY MAJOR SITE IMPROVEMENTS. 
          AND SO WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH SPAR. 
          UM, TYPICALLY PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE THE, UM, APPROVING BODY. 
          UH, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE IS IF THERE WERE ANY, UM, POTENTIAL, UH, PROPOSALS, UM, THAT THE CITY MAY WANT TO DO, UM, IT WOULD GO THROUGH, UM, UH, A MORE DETAILED AND MORE ROBUST PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. 
          AND WITH THAT, I WILL JUST END WITH, UM, WITH WHAT WE STARTED OFF WITH. 
          THIS IS A TIME OF TRANSITION, UM, FOR THE CITY, UM, AS WE EMBARK ON TAKING, UH, OVER MANAGEMENT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE CAN ALL, UM, POINT TO THE WAYS THAT WE'VE INTERACTED WITH THE FAIRGROUNDS, UM, UH, THROUGHOUT OUR TIME HERE AS RESIDENTS. 
          UM, AND WHAT WE'RE EXCITED, UH, TO BE PRESENTING HERE THIS EVENING, UM, AS CITY STAFF IS, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE BUILD OFF OF THAT? HOW DO WE BUILD OFF OF THE COMMITMENT THAT WE'VE MADE TO THE CITY, TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, THAT THE FAIRGROUNDS IS, UM, UH, WILL BE PROGRAMMED, WILL BE, UH, SOMETHING THAT IS, UM, IS A PLACE THAT ALL OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS CAN GATHER, UM, 365 DAYS POTENTIALLY OUT OF THE YEAR. 
          UM, AND SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU CHAIR HOOPER FOR Q AND A. 
          REALLY QUICK, BLAKE, I'M GETTING A MESSAGE FOR FOLKS ON YOUTUBE THAT THEY'RE GETTING NO SOUND AS OF THE LAST COUPLE MINUTES. 
          I'M CHECK . 
          YEAH, YOU SET? YEP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, WE'RE GONNA PAUSE REAL QUICK WHILE WE ADDRESS THAT. 
          I DON'T WANT ANYBODY WATCHING AT HOME TO FEEL LIKE THEY'RE, THEY'VE BEEN DISCONNECTED FROM THE IMPORTANT PART, WHICH IS ARGUABLY BEING ABLE TO HEAR WHAT'S BEING SAID AND NOT ACTUALLY SEE US. 
          IN THE MEANTIME, THERE ARE SOME QUITE TALENTED ARTISTS BEHIND THE VISIONS PRESENTED TODAY. 
           
          [00:25:37]
TESTING, DO SOME TESTING. 
          HELLO? HELLO. 
          HEY, BLAKE. 
          HEY, HOW YOU DOING? NO, THE STRANGEST TECHNICAL ISSUE THAT I'VE SEEN SO FAR IS WHEN THE VIDEO CUT OUT, THEN THE SOUND CUT OUT AND THEN BOTH CUT OUT . 
          THAT WAS KIND OF THE WIN, I THINK. 
          WELL, NOT THAT LONG AGO WE COMPLETELY LOST POWER. 
          OH, THAT, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          WE HAD A MEETING MIDWAY THROUGH JUST COMPLETELY LOST POWER IN THE WHOLE BUILDING, SO IT FELT LIKE PG E REALLY HEADED OUT FOR US. 
           YOU THE VERY FIRST EPISODE,  IN LIGHTS. 
          YEAH, I DON'T HOPE SO. 
          YEAH, I JUST, I DON'T THINK WE CAN REALLY GET STARTED WITHOUT THAT PUBLIC FEED. 
          BRIAN, DOES THIS HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE TELEPHONES GOING UP MAIN INTERNET AND CITY HALL? NO, BUT I HEARD ABOUT IT, SO MAYBE IT JUST NEEDS TO BE REROUTED IN THE CLOSET SOUND. 
          THE, THE SOUND IS WORKING ON CHANNEL 28 IF PEOPLE GET CHANNEL 28. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          PEOPLE, PEOPLE LEFT. 
          I'LL SHUT MY PHONE OFF. 
          , FOR ANYONE WHO'S WATCHING ON CHANNEL 28, WE'RE JUST WAITING UNTIL WE GET THE YOUTUBE FEED WORKING AGAIN. 
          WE CAN SAY HI TO CHRIS RIBOT, . 
          HELLO CHRIS. 
          BECAUSE WE KNOW SHE'S WATCHING . 
          WE'RE LISTENING. 
          I MADE SOMETHING TODAY AND I THINK I GOT IT ALL OVER MY SHIRT. 
           NO ONE. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, , 
          [00:30:31]
I MEAN, I'LL, I'LL SAY THIS, SINCE YOUTUBE IS THE MAJORITY METHOD, I THINK AT THIS POINT THAT THE PUBLIC IS USING TO VIEW OUR MEETINGS, IT FEELS LIKE WE HAVE TO GET THAT WORKING AGAIN TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          YEAH. 
          COVER YOUR CALL, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'RE COVERING BOTH OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND AN OVERLAY. 
          I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY SENSE OF ISSUE. 
          SO CHAIR, I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND WE JUST GO ON RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. 
          WHAT I WILL CONFIRM, WE ARE GONNA GO ON RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES WHILE WE CONFIRM THE TECHNICAL SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM. 
          OKAY, EVERYONE, WE'RE GONNA COME BACK FROM RECESS. 
          UH, THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR PATIENCE WITH THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY. 
          UH, HOW WE'RE GONNA RESOLVE THIS. 
          WE'VE GOT THE RECORDING 
          [00:35:01]
FROM UP UNTIL THE TECHNICAL ISSUE AND THE, THE PAUSE, AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER RECORDING THAT'S TAKING PLACE FOR THE REST OF THIS MEETING. 
          OUR IT STAFF WILL POST THE FULL, I GUESS, MERGED RECORDINGS TOMORROW FOR FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO WATCH. 
          BUT WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT IF YOU'RE ON YOUTUBE, AND I KNOW I'M SAYING THIS AND NO ONE ON YOUTUBE WILL HEAR IT, BUT IT'S MORE FOR THE RECORD OF IT. 
          IF YOU'RE ON YOUTUBE NOW, BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT TECHNICAL ISSUE WITH OUR STREAM TO YOUTUBE, IT WILL APPEAR AS THOUGH THE MEETING HAS GONE DEAD. 
          IN REALITY, IT WILL JUST GET POSTED IN A FRANKENSTEIN FORMAT TOMORROW. 
          TOMORROW. 
          UH, SO FOR ANY, FOR AT LEAST ONE PERSON WE KNOW WHO'S WATCHING ON CHANNEL 28, UH, PLEASE TELL YOUR FRIENDS IF THEY'RE ON YOUTUBE RIGHT NOW, UH, TO HEAD TO CHANNEL 28. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE WILL GET BACK TO THE AGENDA WHERE WE WERE BEFORE. 
          OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HAD JUST FINISHED GIVING A GREAT PRESENTATION ON OUR CURRENT ITEM, WHICH IS THE PROPOSED OVERLAY FOR OUR FAIRGROUNDS. 
          AND NOW WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE COMMISSIONERS CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AND ASK THAT WE STICK MOSTLY TO QUESTIONS. 
          THEN WE WILL OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK FOR DISCUSSION. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'M GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONER WIMAN. 
          JUST A FEW CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. 
          I THINK, UM, DO, UM, DO WE HAVE AN IDEA OF THE, THE EXISTING TENANTS? UM, WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE FUTURE LICENSE WILL BE, UM, WHAT, WHAT IS THEIR DURATION, UM, TO DATE? DO WE KNOW THAT? SO THE RECORD KEEPING, UM, IS SOMEWHAT SPOTTY. 
          UH, SO WE DON'T HAVE, WHAT WE DO KNOW IS ESSENTIALLY EACH OF THE NINE TENANTS, UH, OPERATED ON ONE YEAR CONTRACTS, UM, OKAY. 
          MOST RECENTLY. 
          AND THAT WAS WITH DAA? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND THEY HAD CYCLING ONE YEAR CONTRACTS JUST CORRECT. 
          AND NONE OF THEM HAD LONGER CONTRACTS THAN THAT? YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          MOST OF THEM APPEAR TO BE, YOU KNOW, ANECDOTALLY LONGER TERM, UH, OCCUPANTS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, OKAY. 
          UM, YEAH, TO BE HONEST, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAD TO CLARIFY RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER AKI. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR HOOPER. 
          UM, I'VE SENT SOME QUESTIONS TO STAFF BEFORE THIS. 
          I'M GONNA CALL SOME OF THESE OUT AGAIN. 
          UH, THE FIRST, ONE OF THE BIG THINGS I NOTICED IN LOOKING AT, UM, FAIRGROUNDS, OVERLAYS THAT DO EXIST IN OTHER CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY, UH, CAN YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DECISION TO CRAFT WHAT LOOKS LIKE A MORE OPEN-ENDED LIST OF PERMITTED USES WHERE WE KIND OF REFER BACK TO THAT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 20 22, 1 67, AND THEN HAVE EITHER PLANNING STAFF OR DISCRETIONARY BODIES REVIEW TO MAKE SURE IT FOLLOWS GUIDELINES. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF A MORE OPEN-ENDED MODEL COMPARED TO SOME OTHER AREAS. 
          SOME OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE GONE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE WITH THEIR LIST OF USES AND MADE A LONG LIST OF HERE IS WHAT ALLOW WHAT IS ALLOWED. 
          ANYTHING ELSE IS DISALLOWED. 
          CAN WE JUST TALK THROUGH THAT, UM, CHOICE? CERTAINLY, COMMISSIONER? SO, UH, I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE THERE IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THROUGH THIS PROCESS WAS THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REIMAGINE. 
          UM, AND SO I, I BELIEVE THAT'S ONE OF THE SLOGANS TO REIMAGINE THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          UM, THAT IS ONE APPROACH WHERE YOU CLEARLY IDENTIFY PERMITTED USES, WHICH WE CURRENTLY DO. 
          UM, AND SO I'M PREPARED TO, UH, SCREEN SHARE, UH, THE LAND USE TABLE FOR BOTH CIVIC FACILITIES AND MIXED USE DESIGNATION. 
          UM, WHAT BECOMES CLEAR IS, UM, AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN SOME FLEXIBILITY, UM, UH, ON TOP OF IT IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A NUMBER OF REALLY, UM, OUR ZONING CODE IDENTIFIES A NUMBER OF PERMITTED USES. 
          UM, AND THIS WOULD BE, AGAIN, AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE SOME OTHER USES THAT, UM, WOULD BE TEMPORARY. 
          UM, AND SO AGAIN, WE'RE BEING RESPONSIVE TO COUNCIL DIRECTION ON, UM, ENSURING AND, AND MAINTAINING, UH, THE MOST FLEXIBILITY DURING THIS TRANSITION IN INTERIM PERIOD. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          IN THAT VEIN, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO POTENTIALLY HAVE ANY SPECIFIC USES DISALLOWED, UH, AND THE ONE THAT FLIES INTO MY HEAD, AFTER ATTENDING THAT MEETING IN OCTOBER, 2022 AND LISTENING TO A LOT OF THE VISIONING PROCESS AND HEARING COUNCIL MEMBERS SPEAK ABOUT IT SINCE THEN, IT SEEMED 
          [00:40:01]
PRETTY UNANIMOUS THAT SOMETHING LIKE HOUSING THEY DIDN'T WANT ON THE SITE, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE, BECAUSE THIS IS KIND OF A TEMPORARY MEASURE UNTIL THE MASTER PLAN, UNTIL OUR UPDATING ZONING CODE WHEN CONVERSATIONS KIND OF ABOUT EVERYTHING CAN HAPPEN. 
          UH, WOULD YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND REFLECTIVE OF DISCUSSIONS THUS FAR? HAD STAFF TALKED ABOUT THAT AT ALL? UH, NO, BUT WE ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT'S, WE EXPECT THAT TO BE PART OF THE MASTER PLANNING DISCUSSION. 
          UM, AND JUST BEING RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY AND SOME OF THE IDEAS THAT THEY HAVE FOR THE SITE. 
          I THINK, UH, THAT COULD BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT PLANNING COMMISSION COULD MAKE TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          UH, BUT AGAIN, THE WAY THAT WE'RE PROPOSING THIS ORDINANCE, UM, AND THIS IS AGAIN, CITY PROPERTY, UM, THERE'S ENOUGH, UH, MEASURES AND MECHANISMS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, UM, THAT NO, UH, NO ADDITIONAL, NO U NO NEW USES, UM, WOULDN'T NEED THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL. 
          SO ULTIMATELY IT WOULD COME BEFORE COUNCIL FOR FOR APPROVAL, UM, OF ANY, FOR ANYTHING OF THAT MAGNITUDE. 
          OKAY. 
          THA THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UH, AND THEN CAN YOU TALK ABOUT JUST HOW THIS DOVETAILS INTO THE IZO AND GENERAL PLAN? UM, YOU KNOW, WILL THIS BE CARRIED OVER? WILL WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE AN OVERLAY IN THE GENERAL PLAN? DO WE HOPE TO JUST SOLVE IT AND HAVE THE MASTER PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN LAY OUT A LOT OF THE POLICIES HERE AND NOT NEED AN OVERLAY? OR HOW WILL THAT WORK? GREAT QUESTION. 
          SO TIMING IS EVERYTHING. 
          AND SO IN A, IN A PERFECT WORLD, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, UM, ON TRACK TO COMPLETE THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, UH, MID NEXT YEAR, OR SORRY, MID 2025. 
          UM, AND THE INTENT WOULD BE FOR US TO UPDATE THE ZONING CODE, UM, AT THE SAME TIME. 
          UM, AND SO ANY CHANGES THAT WE MAKE AS PART OF THE ZONING CODE WOULD, UM, POTENTIALLY CARRY OVER, UM, EXISTING, UM, UH, EXISTING CODE. 
          AND SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF COUNCIL WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, ADOPT THE OVERLAY, UM, THAT WOULD BECOME PART OF OUR ZONING CODE. 
          AND SO AGAIN, WE WOULD TAKE A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO, UM, UPDATING THE CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS. 
          UM, AS, UH, MANY OF THE COMMUNITY KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, UM, CURRENTLY TALKING WITH THE GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ABOUT LAND USE AND LAND USE ALTERNATIVES. 
          UM, AND SO THIS IS A TOPIC THAT HAS COME UP. 
          THERE'S INTEREST NOT JUST FROM THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUT FROM THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE, UM, TO HAVE A MUCH MORE DETAILED CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FAIRGROUNDS, UM, WITH RESPECT TO A GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO AGAIN, I THINK THERE'S, THIS IS THE START OF A, A MUCH MORE, UH, DETAILED, UM, ENGAGEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW TO REIMAGINE THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR, FOR THAT DETAIL. 
          UM, AND THEN I, I DON'T WANNA DELVE INTO ANY OF THE ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS OR, OR RELATIONSHIPS WITH FOLKS WHO HAVE MANAGED THE PROPERTY OR ANYTHING, BUT I NOTICED THAT, UH, THE FOURTH DIS DAA WAS NOT LISTED AS A TENANT ON THIS LIST, BUT I BELIEVE THEY HAVE OFFICES ON SITE. 
          ARE THEY NOT LICENSED MOVING FORWARD, OR IS THAT JUST STILL GETTING WORKED OUT? SO THE FOURTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION, UM, HAS TENTATIVELY IN PRINCIPLE, UM, AGREED, UM, TO CONTINUE, UH, MANAGING AND OPERATING A FIVE DAY FAIR. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE SORT OF IN FINAL NEGOTIATIONS. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE WORKING, UM, IN GOOD FAITH, UH, TO ENSURE THAT THE FOURTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION WILL BE THE MANAGERS OF THE UPCOMING, UM, FAIR IN 2024. 
          AND IN TERMS OF THEIR TENDENCY, THAT WOULD BE PART OF WHATEVER THAT ARRANGEMENT WORKS OUT TO BE? EXACTLY. 
          SO EACH OF THESE WOULD HAVE A LICENSE OR DO HAVE A LICENSE AGREEMENT. 
          UH, SO FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH, UM, UH, WITH LIVE OAK, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL THE NINE, UM, TENANTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, UM, IN THE STAFF REPORT. 
          AND SO WE WOULD TAKE A SIMILAR WOULD BE TAKING A SIMILAR APPROACH TO THE FOURTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION. 
          WELL, THANKS FOR THAT CONTEXT. 
          'CAUSE I NOTICED FAIR OPERATOR WAS IDENTIFIED RATHER AGNOSTICALLY, SO THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD CONTEXT TO HAVE. 
          UM, AND THEN WHEN WE THINK ABOUT LAND USE ON THE SITE, DO WE HAVE THE GUIDANCE FROM THE ORIGINAL BOND MEASURE? AND I KNOW I THREW THAT OUT TO STAFF KIND OF RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING, BUT I WONDERED IF WE HAD THAT TO KIND OF MARRY WITH THE VISIONING THAT, THAT WE'VE DONE RECENTLY. 
          YES. 
          SO THERE WAS A DEEP DIVE THAT THE CITY TOOK. 
          UM, AND SO I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THE OCTOBER 24TH, 2022 
          [00:45:01]
STAFF REPORT THAT DID, UM, THE BACKGROUND CHECK ON THAT. 
          AND SO THE, I'LL JUST READ, UM, UH, READ THIS TO YOU. 
          SO, UM, THE INTENT, SO 1911, UH, WITH THE PROCEEDS OF A VOTER APPROVED BOND FOR FUNDING PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY AS PARKLAND. 
          AND SO AGAIN, BETWEEN NOW BETWEEN THEN AND NOW, UM, WE'VE DONE, UH, QUITE A BIT OF RESEARCH INTO THIS. 
          AND SO, UM, I'LL JUST READ THIS PART. 
          THE INDENTURE INCLUDED NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE LAND'S USE, NOR WERE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS ON THE LAND'S USE RECORDED AGAINST THE PROPERTY. 
          AND SO STAFF CONCLUDES THAT, UM, AGAIN, THERE, THERE WOULD THEORETICALLY BE NO RESTRICTIONS. 
          IT'S CITY, IT'S PUBLIC PROPERTY ZONED CIVIC FACILITIES AT THE MOMENT. 
          AND SO ANY REGULATIONS, UM, IN TERMS OF USE, UM, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UH, WE WOULD BE EITHER REFLECTED IN THIS OVERLAY OR THE EXISTING, UM, REGULATIONS WITHIN, UH, THE ZONING CODE, UM, FOR EACH OF THOSE SITES. 
          IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT RUNNING COUNTER TO ANYTHING LISTED THERE FROM THAT ANALYSIS. 
          UM, AND I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION REALLY WAS ANSWERED WITH THE NOTE ABOUT THE FOURTH, UH, DAA AND I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM FOR THE RECORD, MY QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, IS THE SPEEDWAY A LICENSED TENANT? YOU SAID IT IS. 
          SO I ASSUME THEY'RE LICENSED FOR THEIR EXISTING USE FOR THE TERM OF THE, THE LICENSURE THAT'S BEEN WORKED OUT? YES. 
          SO NO IMPACTS ON THEM. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          UH, I THINK I'M GONNA END UP BEING THE ONE WHO HAS A LONGER LIST OF QUESTIONS THIS TIME. 
          PART OF IT IS 'CAUSE I WANNA MAKE SURE CERTAIN THINGS GET ANSWERED ON RECORD IN THE COURSE OF THE MEETING. 
          UH, AND JUST TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS FROM THE REPORT. 
          SO DOVETAILING OFF OF COMMISSIONER SEN'S QUESTION ABOUT, UH, HOW THE EVENTUAL MASTER PLAN PROCESS IS GONNA LOOK. 
          UH, HAVING NOTICED THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OCTOBER 24TH RESOLUTION FROM 2022, IT LAID OUT THE EIGHT PRINCIPLES THAT THE COUNCIL AGREED TO AT THE TRANSFER PROCESS. 
          THE OCTOBER 2ND RESOLUTION FROM EARLIER THIS YEAR, UH, LAID OUT THE NINE LEASES THAT THEY WANTED TO CONFIRM WOULD GET CARRY OVER FOR THREE TO FIVE YEARS. 
          UH, THIS OVERLAY LARGELY ENABLES THAT EXISTING LAND USE WITH SOME BROADLY DEFINED EXPANDED USE TO ENABLE EXPERIMENTATION, ALL THAT. 
          BUT THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS THAT'S REFERENCED WHERE I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED IS IT, IS THE IDEA TO HOPEFULLY GET AS MUCH ENGAGEMENT DONE THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS FIRST AND THEN ENGAGE IN A KIND OF BROAD COMMUNITY WIDE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS AFTER THAT, IF YOU DON'T GET THROUGH THE VISIONING THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN? OR IS THE GOAL TO DO BOTH FROM THE OUTSET? SO THE GOAL WOULD BE JUST GIVEN THIS TOPIC, IT DOES NEED, UH, A MUCH MORE, UH, FOCUSED AND ROBUST, UM, ENGAGEMENT, UH, THAT GOES BEYOND JUST THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          UM, BUT OF COURSE, IN THE CONTEXT OF LONG RANGE PLANNING, UM, EVERYTHING FALLS UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO AS PART OF OUR STRATEGY OVER THIS NEXT YEAR AS WE TALK WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT LAND USE ALTERNATIVES, UH, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A, UM, WOULD JUST BE A COMPONENT OF IT. 
          SO, UH, MAKING SURE THAT IT'S CONNECTED, INTERRELATED, YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S GOING THROUGH A A GENERAL PLAN PROCESS. 
          THIS IS GONNA DICTATE, UM, THE LAND USE FOR THE NEXT 25 YEARS. 
          AND AS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION, UM, HAVING A MUCH MORE FOCUSED, UM, DIALOGUE ON WHAT THE COMMUNITY OR HOW THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO REIMAGINE THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          UM, SO THERE WOULD BE SOME DOVETAILING, BUT, UM, THIS ABSOLUTELY, I MEAN, JUST WITH THE AMOUNT OF ENGAGEMENT, UM, THAT WE ENVISION, UM, TYPICALLY WOULD HAVE ITS OWN, UM, OUTREACH AND, UM, OKAY. 
          PROCESS AND STRATEGY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT PROPOSING TONIGHT OR PASSING ON TO COUNCIL TONIGHT IS REALLY THE STOP CAP TO ENABLE USE THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          THE GENERAL PLAN WILL THEN COME WITH ITS OWN MODIFICATIONS, WHETHER IT'S KEEPING WHAT WE HAVE OR MAKING CHANGES THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          AND THEN THERE WILL BE A PURPOSEFUL DECLARED MASTER PLANNING PROCESS THAT THE PUBLIC CAN IDENTIFY SEPARATELY. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE SO MUCH OF THIS OVERLAY IS PREMISED ON THE IDEA OF 
          [00:50:01]
THIS IS KIND OF A STOP GAP UNTIL WE GET TO THE NEXT STEP. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAD CLARITY ON WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WERE GONNA LOOK LIKE. 
          UH, NOW, UH, PIVOTING BACK TO CQA, UM, BOTH THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DRAFT RESOLUTION STATE PRETTY CLEARLY THAT, UH, THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANY MAJOR SE CONCERNS BOTH BECAUSE OF, UH, THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT MAKING ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE PREVIOUS USES THAT WERE THERE. 
          AND BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA HAVE ANY EXPANDED MODIFICATIONS, EITHER EXPANDED LAND, EXPANDED LAND USES. 
          WILL THE EVENTUAL MASTER PLAN 'CAUSE THIS OTHER REASON WHY I WANTED TO ASK, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE EIR THAT COMES WITH THE GENERAL PLAN WILL SUFFICE FOR ANY CHANGES THAT ARE MADE THROUGH THAT PLAN. 
          WILL THIS NEXT MASTER PLANNING PROCESS THAT FOLLOWS HAVE TO UN UNDERGO ITS OWN EIR EVENTUALLY, OR WILL IT BE ABLE TO SUFFICE FOR SAY, LIKE A MITIGATED DECK? SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW EXPANSIVE AND HOW DETAILED THE MASTER PLAN. 
          BUT TYPICALLY, UM, SO WE WOULD DO, ONCE WE COMPLETE THE MASTER PLAN PROCESS, DEPENDING ON, UM, THE LEVEL OF ACTION THAT THE PLAN IDENTIFIES, UM, THEN WE WOULD MAKE A DETERMINATION, UM, ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          TYPICALLY A MASTER PLAN IS MUCH MORE BROAD STROKES, AND WHERE YOU ACTUALLY SEE THE IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE YOU DO THE MASTER PLAN, UM, YOU GET THE INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY, YOU'VE SORT OF IDENTIFIED A VISION, THEN YOU HAVE TO TURN YOUR ATTENTION TO AN IMPLEMENTATION. 
          SO TYPICALLY THAT'S EITHER A SPECIFIC PLAN, UM, OR CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS TO THE, UM, GENERAL PLAN AND THE ZONING CODE. 
          SO THERE WOULD BE THAT ADDITIONAL STEP, UM, THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, UM, AFTER A MASTER PLANNING EFFORT. 
          MAKES SENSE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN GOING, MAKING ANOTHER PIVOT, LOOKING AT SOME OF THE GENERAL PLANNED FINDINGS THAT ARE STATED IN THE RESOLUTION, UH, ONE THING THAT'S CALLED OUT IS, UH, POLICY AND PROGRAM TWO P 28, AND SPECIFICALLY THE STAFF REPORT CALLS OUT THE KENNELWORTH PARK REVITALIZATION PROCESS AND HOW THAT WILL KIND OF DOVETAIL IN TO EVENTUAL CHANGES OR VISIONING THAT TAKES PLACE ON THE SITE. 
          I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION THERE. 
          IS THE EXPECTATION THAT THROUGH THE KENNELWORTH REVITALIZATION PROCESS, THAT ALSO ENDS UP BEING A FAIR BIT OF FEEDBACK THAT GOES INTO THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS FOR THE AREA Y? YES. 
          SO THIS AGAIN GOES BACK TO TIMING. 
          UM, IT'S SORT OF A VERY MUCH VERY FOCUSED OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT ON HOW TO REVITALIZE THE KENNELWORTH PARK. 
          UM, BUT THERE'S NATURAL, UH, CARRYOVER. 
          SO WHEN WE HAVE BEEN TALKING TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE PARK, A LOT OF DISCUSSION, UM, AND COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY COME UP ABOUT THE FAIRGROUNDS ITSELF, RIGHT? SO HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT, UM, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, NOT SILOING THE KENNELWORTH EFFORT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN EFFORT, SILOING THAT FROM MASTER PLANNING EFFORT FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS, AND WE'RE TAKING A MORE HOLISTIC APPROACH, UM, TO PROGRAMMING AND MASTER PLANNING, UM, THE ENTIRE SITE. 
          UM, AND SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT PIECEMEAL. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS, UM, AS PART OF THE REVITALIZATION OF KENNELWORTH PARK, UM, BLENDS IN WITH, WITH THE REST OF THE CITY PROPERTY, UM, ON THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          NO, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I REALLY JUST WANTED TO CALL IT OUT IF ONLY BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE ARE ALL MOVING TIMELINES. 
          I DO THINK FOR THE PUBLIC AT LARGE THOUGH, THERE'S GOING TO BE, NEED TO BE A GREAT DEAL OF CLARITY AS TO WHICH PROCESSES APPLY TO WHICH PROPERTY IN WHICH DEVELOPMENT AND HOW THOSE WILL INTER INTERACT. 
          AND I RECOGNIZE THAT ANY NUMBER OF THINGS COULD HAPPEN TO DELAY ONE AND SPEED UP ANOTHER, BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING I WANTED TO FLAG. 
          UM, MOVING TO ANOTHER STEP, I PROMISE THERE AREN'T TOO MANY MORE. 
          UM, BUT MOVING TO ANOTHER STEP, UH, POL POLICY AND PROGRAM TWO P 83 TALKS ABOUT EFFECTIVELY TALKS ABOUT HOW THE PROPOSED OVERLAY WILL HELP ACHIEVE ONE OF THE BIG GOALS THAT THE CURRENT GENERAL PLAN HAD FOR THE AREA, WHICH IS NEAR YEAR-ROUND PUBLIC ACCESS AND RE RECREATIONAL USE FOR KIND OF FAIR GROUND FIELDS AND OPEN SPACE. 
          I'M ASSUMING THAT SECTION D SUBSECTIONS THREE THROUGH FIVE OF THE PROPOSED IEO CHAPTER, WHICH ROUGHLY COVERS NEW PUBLIC BENEFIT USES, ALLOWED ADMINISTRATIVELY, UH, TEMPORARY USES AND NEW USES ALLOWED BY CITY COUNCIL. 
          I'M ASSUMING THAT FUNCTIONALLY COVERS THE MECHANISMS THAT'LL MAKE THAT POSSIBLE FOR THESE KIND 
          [00:55:01]
OF ANCILLARY OR EXPEND EXPANDED NON TEMPORARY USES THAT FOLKS CAN APPLY. 
          MY QUESTION WAS, FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE, WHETHER YOU ARE A COMMUNITY GROUP MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC OR, UH, CURRENT LEASER ON THE ON THE SITE, WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE TO START TO START INITIATING THAT PROCESS? IS IT GOING STRAIGHT TO PLANNING AND TALKING TO THE PLANNING DIRECTOR? IS IT GOING TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND GOING THROUGH A SEPARATE PORTAL? GREAT QUESTION CHAIR. 
          AND SO WE ARE WORKING DILIGENTLY AS WE WORK TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR TO PUT MESSAGING OUT TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AND SO I THINK THE SIMPLEST WAY TO, UM, ENVISION HOW OUR COMMUNITY WILL ACCESS AND BENEFIT FROM THE FAIRGROUNDS, UM, IS JUST LIKE ANY OF OUR, UM, REC FACILITIES NOW. 
          AND SO IF WE, UM, WE HAVE A PERMITTING SYSTEM THROUGH OUR PARKS AND RECS. 
          UM, AND SO PART OF OUR, WHAT OUR INTENT HERE IS TO FOLD, UH, THE FAIRGROUNDS, UM, WITHIN THAT PORTFOLIO. 
          SO JUST LIKE YOU WOULD, UH, GO TO OUR CITY WEBSITE TO BOOK, UM, A FIELD OR BOOK THE COMMUNITY CENTER FOR AN EVENT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, THIS OPENS UP, UH, MORE, UM, AVAILABILITY BOTH, UM, INDOOR SPACE AND OUTDOOR SPACE, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC, UM, TO USE. 
          GREAT, THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN IN TERMS OF ENABLED USES, UH, I, I APPRECIATE THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A ACCEPTABLE USE UNDER MU ONE B ZONING, I, I'M GLAD THAT ROY'S FOOD TRUCK WAS ENABLED TO MOVE FORWARD ALONG WITH E EVERY OTHER LEASE CURRENTLY ON PROPERTY. 
          I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT YOU FOUND A KIND OF NEW WAY TO IDENTIFY IT BA AS A MOBILE FOOD VENDOR. 
          I WAS WONDERING SINCE WE'VE HAD IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS ISSUES WITH, I MEAN, SIMPLY PUT OUR CURRENT RULES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT JUST DON'T ALLOW FOR, FOR FOOD TRUCKS OR MOBILE FOOD VENDORS. 
          IS THIS KIND OF A, A POTENTIAL MODEL FOR HOW THE CITY OR HOW PLANNING MIGHT MOVE FORWARD TO START LOOKING AT AREAS WHERE WE ALLOW FOR THIS KIND OF CONDITIONAL USE? I RECOGNIZE THIS IS, THIS WHOLE THING IS SPECIFIC TO THE OVERLAY, BUT I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHETHER OR NOT THIS OPENS AN AVENUE FOR US TO EXPLORE? UH, IT DOES 100%. 
          SO I, I THINK PART OF, UM, THE CHALLENGE AND, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE GENERAL PLAN EFFORT IS HOW, UM, DOES A COMMUNITY WANT TO, UH, REIMAGINE, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST THE FAIRGROUNDS, BUT UM, THE PUBLIC SPACE, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY. 
          UM, AND SO OFTENTIMES WHEN WE THINK ABOUT FOOD TRUCKS AND NEW USES, UM, THAT MAY NOT PERFECTLY FIT IN WITH OUR, UM, ZONING CODE, UM, THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD CHALLENGES, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO DELIVER FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO TO ME THIS IS, UH, ONE WAY THAT WE COULD ABSOLUTELY, UM, TEST IT. 
          UM, THAT SAID, UH, TO YOUR POINT CHAIR, UM, WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS NOT AN EFFORT TO, UM, OPEN UP, UH, THE ZONING CODE, UM, AND START LOOKING AT, UM, MOBILE FOOD VENDING AT LARGE. 
          UM, BUT REALLY, UM, REALLY BEING CLEAR THAT THE DIRECTION, UM, FROM COUNCIL WAS, UH, IN THIS INTERIM PERIOD, UM, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT, UH, THERE'S STABILITY WITH OUR EXISTING TENANTS. 
          MM-HMM, . 
          UM, AND SO, UM, AGAIN, ONCE WE START TO ACTIVATE, ONCE WE START TO HAVE THE MASTER PLANNING DISCUSSIONS, UM, AND WE HAVE IDEAS ON HOW TO ACTIVATE THE SITE, UM, FOR NEW USES, UM, THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY LOOK AT. 
          UM, AND CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO JUMP IN RIGHT THERE IF THAT'S OKAY. 
          UH, WE DID RECEIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FROM ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS TODAY, AND IT WAS ABOUT THE DEFINITION MOBILE FOOD VENDOR. 
          AND I THINK STAFF WE WOULD RECOMMEND IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS OKAY WITH IT, UH, STRIKING THE WORD FOOD FROM MOBILE FOOD VENDOR, SO IT'S MOBILE VENDOR TO ALLOW MORE FLEXIBILITY. 
          UM, AND SO THAT WOULD BE IN C ONE, TABLE 5.1. 
          AND THEN WE DO RECOMMEND AN AMENDMENT TO C FOUR WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE TEMPORARY USES THAT ARE TYPICALLY LESS THAN 90 DAYS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , OUR ZONING PERMIT FOR THE TEMPORARY USES ARE 60 DAYS. 
          SO PROBABLY JUST FOR CLARITY, UH, WE WOULD RECOMMEND AMENDING THAT TO 60. 
          BUT TO YOUR POINT, I THINK IN, LIKE BRIAN SAID, THAT I REALLY SEE THIS AS A, JUST A PILOT PROGRAM FOR WHAT USES THAT COULD 
          [01:00:01]
BE OUT THERE AND HOW TO USE THE FAIRGROUNDS UNTIL THAT MASTER PLAN IS IMPLEMENTED. 
          UM, AND I THINK THIS ORDINANCE PROVIDES A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY IF THE FINDINGS FOR PUBLIC BENEFITS ARE MADE. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          AND I DID, I SAW THAT EMAIL ON THE WAY IN REGARDING THE STRICT WORD, AND THAT MAKES SENSE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE INCLUDING THINGS LIKE POPUPS OR OTHER KIND OF MOBILE VENDORS. 
          UM, I HAD TWO MORE THINGS. 
          I HAD A CLARIFYING QUESTION I SHOULD HAVE ASKED OFFLINE, BUT IT, IT CAME UP KIND OF VERY LATE. 
          IS THE REASON WHY AIRPORT EXPRESS WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ACCEPTABLE BEFORE? IS IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF A LARGER MIXED USE STRUCTURE? OR IS IT BECAUSE OF BOTH THE EXCESSIVE PARKING AND THEN THE, THE BUS TRANSIT ELEMENT OF IT? SO THE SHORT ANSWER IS IT'S WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT, UH, WHAT IT IS, IT'S A COMMERCIAL, UM, TRANSPORTATION FACILITY MM-HMM. 
          , UM, THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN OUR, UM, ZONING CODE. 
          UM, RIGHT. 
          AND SO THAT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S QUITE SIMPLY, UM, WHY WE CAME TO THAT CONCLUSION. 
          GOT IT. 
          UM, THERE'S A LOT THAT CAN OR THAT IS PERMITTED, UM, IN THE MIXED USE ZONE. 
          UM, AND STAFF DID LOOK TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE SIMILAR THAT COULD FIT A SIMILAR USE, SIMILAR AND COMPATIBLE USE. 
          UM, BUT WE CAME UP SHORT ON THAT. 
          OH, THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW THIS. 
          SO THIS IS ANOTHER THING THAT WE'D BE LOOKING AT FOR FUTURE UPDATES TO ZONING CODE TO ACCOUNT FOR GOING FORWARD. 
          YES. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN MY LAST, MY LAST QUESTION, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. 
          UH, THE IEO CHAPTER ESTABLISHES A STANDARD FOR DISCRETIONARY AND SPAR PROCESS FOR ANY MAJOR ADJUSTMENTS TO THE SITE, AND IT'S PRETTY EXPLICIT ABOUT PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MAJOR STRUCTURES. 
          I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE RACEWAY, FOR THE PROPOSED BMX TRACK THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT FUNDING, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED A TECHNICALLY TEMPORARY USE? 'CAUSE THEY CAN BREAK IT DOWN AND PUT IT BACK UP, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH PLANNING FOR THE DISCRETIONARY PROCESS? GREAT QUESTION. 
          SO IT DEPENDS ON THE SCOPE. 
          UM, BUT AGAIN, SO THAT'S SORT OF WHY WE'VE BUCKETED, UH, ESSENTIALLY FOUR OPTIONS TO TEST. 
          UH, SO EVERYTHING FROM A LESS THAN 60 DAY A YEAR TEMPORARY USE TO SOMETHING MORE PERMANENT. 
          SO JUST DEPENDING ON, UM, AND IF IT'S ONLY POPPING UP FOR THOSE. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          YEAH, I, I FORGOT ABOUT THE 60 DAY STRUCTURE. 
          UH, AND THEN, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO PICK ON THE RACETRACK SPECIFICALLY, UH, IN PART BECAUSE I LOVE THE RACETRACK, BUT I AM ALSO TRYING TO KEEP IN MIND HOW SOME OF THESE OTHER LEASES MIGHT NEED SOME, I WOULDN'T CALL THEM PERMANENT, BUT I ALSO WOULDN'T CALL THEM TEMPORARY STRUCTURES EITHER. 
          WOULD THIS ALSO BE TRUE FOR, SAY THEY WANT TO PUT UP NEW CONCESSION STANDS, NOT JUST MODIFYING OR IMPROVING A CONCESSION STAND, BUT THEY WANT TO PUT ONE UP, BUT TEMPORARY, TECHNICALLY THEY COULD TAKE IT DOWN IF THEY NEEDED TO. 
          WOULD THAT ALSO FALL WELL WITH UNDER, UNDER THE 60 DAY RULE? UH, AND SO DON'T HOLD ME TO THIS, BUT IF I WERE TO THINK ABOUT A, A MINOR, UM, USE PERMIT, UH, OR WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, UH, SORT OF THESE, UH, SMALLER CHANGES, UH, THEY AREN'T PERMANENT STRUCTURES, THEY'RE TEMPORARY. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD JUST OFF THE CUFF WOULD THINK, UM, COULD TAKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROACH, BUT AGAIN, THERE WOULD BE SOME PERMITTING PROCESS, SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS. 
          UM, ONCE A PROPOSAL IS SUBMITTED, THEN WE CAN MAKE THAT CALL ON, UM, SORT OF WHICH BUCKET TO, TO PUT THEM IN. 
          GOTCHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THERE, THAT'S THE END OF MY QUESTIONS, VICE MAYOR. 
          I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. 
          UM, BOTH YOU AND, UM, UM, COMMISSIONER KUSON CAME UP WITH MY QUESTIONS, SO THIS MADE IT EASY. 
           FAIR ENOUGH. 
          OH, I HAVE ONE. 
          YEAH. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN. 
          YEAH, ONE MORE POPPED UP. 
          UM, I SAW A LOT OF REFERENCES TO MAINTENANCE IN THE FUTURE CONTEXT IN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, NEW REVENUES WILL HOPEFULLY ALLOW FOR, FOR NEW EXPENDITURES. 
          HAS THAT COST BENEFIT OR A BUDGET BEEN, UM, DEVELOPED AROUND THAT? SO A PREMI, A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, AND SO THE CITY HAD COMMISSIONED, UH, GORDIAN, UH, IT'S A, UH, A FIRM. 
          AND SO THERE'S A VERY 
          [01:05:01]
DETAILED, UM, ANALYSIS THAT THEY CAME UP WITH. 
          SO THEY EVALUATED THE, UM, 65, UH, EXISTING, UM, BUILDINGS OF 55 ACRES, UM, AND LOOKED AT, UH, THE CONDITION OF EACH OF THEM GRADED EACH OF THESE. 
          AND SO THIS WAS ALL, UM, UH, PART OF OUR DUE DILIGENCE. 
          AND SO WHAT WE WILL DO NOW MOVING FORWARD, UH, WITH RESPECT TO MAINTENANCE, UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE TAKE OVER, UH, DIRECT MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT OF THE SITE AND THE FACILITIES, UM, WE CAN BE RESPONSIVE. 
          JUST LIKE IF, UH, SOMETHING GOES OUT OR PIPE BREAKS AT ONE OF OUR PARKS OR AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL FOLD THAT INTO OUR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM. 
          UM, AND THEN WORKING CLOSELY EACH OF THE LICENSE SEAS, UM, EACH OF THE NINE, UM, WITHIN THAT LICENSE, THERE'S ALSO THAT AGREEMENT ON, YOU KNOW, SORT OF MINOR THINGS. 
          WHAT WILL, WHAT WOULD A TENANT, UM, UH, BE RESPONSIBLE TO FIX VERSUS, UH, THE LANDLORD. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S ALL IDENTIFIED IN EACH OF THOSE LICENSES. 
          BUT, UM, HERE TO FOUR, THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DAA OR, OR THEIR TENANTS, CORRECT. 
          CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THERE'S, UH, WHAT WE COULD CALL DEFERRED MAINTENANCE. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I DON'T HAVE THE BETTER, WORSE. 
          YEAH, IT'S QUITE SIZABLE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S WHERE NOW WE DO THE, THE HEAVY LIFT, UM, UH, JUST TO MAINTAIN HEALTH AND SAFETY, UM, NOT JUST OF OUR TENANTS, BUT THE COMMUNITY THAT'S GONNA ENJOY THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          SO QUICK FOLLOW UP THERE. 
          I, I'VE HEARD SOME DIFFERENT THINGS ABOUT THE ACTUAL STRUCTURES ON SITE AND WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM, WHETHER THAT'S CITY OR, UH, THE FOURTH DISTRICT. 
          IT WOULD THAT BE FOLDED INTO THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THEM? IS THERE ANYTHING TO CONSIDER THERE ABOUT THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND KIND OF WHO'S RESPONSIBLE OR HAS LIABILITY FOR THEM OR ANYTHING THE CITY SEES THERE AS AN ISSUE? UH, NO ISSUES. 
          I MEAN, ULTIMATELY WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN, UH, THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, AND SO THE RESPONSIBILITY LIES WITH OUR LOCAL AGENCY. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING WITH THE, UH, FOURTH DAA AT THIS POINT IS, IS LARGELY ABOUT THE FAIR. 
          UM, AND SO WE HAVE OUR PLAN IN PLACE, UH, COME JANUARY ONE, UH, TO, TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING IN TERMS OF MANAGEMENT. 
          UM, SO ALL THE DAY-TO-DAY GROUNDS KEEPING, SO EVERYTHING FROM GROUNDS KEEP KEEPING TO, YOU KNOW, THE BROKEN SPRING SPRINKLER SYSTEMS TO, UH, LARGER, UM, CAPITAL, UM, ISSUES THAT MIGHT COME UP IN EACH OF THE BUILDINGS. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT OUR STAFF HAS BEEN DILIGENTLY DOING OVER THIS, UM, CALENDAR YEAR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          JUST TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT, THERE'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND THERE IS NO DOUBT, AND THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE, AFTER IN JANUARY, UM, AND THERE WERE, UM, SOME LIKE WATER LINES, YOU KNOW, PROBLEMS AND THE CITY JUST WENT IN THERE AND FIXED IT BECAUSE IT WASN'T BEING DONE AND IT NEEDED TO BE DONE. 
          SO THE CITY'S BEEN ON THE PROPERTY AND THERE IS VERY EXTENSIVE REPORT, UM, YOU CAN READ, UM, AND I, WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT. 
          IS THAT PUBLIC? UH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          VICE MAYOR, IT'S SOMETHING, UH, IF YOU GO TO OUR WEBSITE, WE HAVE A DEDICATED PAGE JUST FOCUSED ON, UH, SAVING THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          UM, AND SO AT THE BOTTOM THERE'S A LINK TO THE BUILDING CONDITIONS, FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF 2022. 
          UM, AND SO THAT WILL MAKE FOR A, A VERY DETAILED READ ON, UM, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT'S ON SITE AT THE FAIRGROUNDS, IT'S ABOUT A 90 PAGE. 
          IT'S A LOT, BUT I MEAN, IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GET, UH, MORE FAMILIAR WITH FAIRGROUNDS AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          UM, SO IT IT'S A WORTHY READ, I THINK. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO PIVOT TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND JUST TO GET THINGS GOING, THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. 
          IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND BRING IT TO THE CLERK. 
          UH, ARIEL, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING? YES, WE RECEIVED FOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS. 
          UH, SORRY. 
          UM, FOR THIS ITEM WE RECEIVED, UM, ONE PUBLIC COMMENT, I BELIEVE, UH, AND IT MUST HAVE BEEN POST, ACTUALLY, I APOLOGIZE, WE RECEIVED NO PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          WITH THAT, I AM GOING TO CALL THE FIRST CARD I'VE RECEIVED SO FAR, WHICH IS FROM ERIC LELAND. 
          UH, I INTENDED TO SPEAK ON THE NEXT ITEM. 
          RIGHT. 
          WELL, 
          [01:10:01]
THEN I COMPLETELY MISREAD THE CARD. 
          ALRIGHT, WITH THAT IN MIND, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY COMING UP TO SPEAK. 
          OKAY. 
          THEN I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE WILL PIVOT BACK TO COMMENTS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND A POTENTIAL MOTION. 
          DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE DISCUSS A MOTION? COMMISSIONER RICKSON? YEAH, THANK YOU CHAIR HOOPER. 
          UM, JUST ON, ON TIMING OF THIS, AND THIS IS NOT AN ANYTHING AGAINST STAFF AND I UNDERSTAND THE PRIORITIES AND THE PAC MEETINGS WE'VE HAD, UH, BUT IT FEELS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, A MEASURE REALLY NEEDED TO KEEP THE CURRENT TENANTS AND LICENSEES IN PLACE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION, WITHOUT FALLING INTO KIND OF A NON-CONFORMING STATUS BY JANUARY 1ST. 
          AND WE'RE SEEING IT ONCE HERE ON DECEMBER 19TH. 
          UM, FEELS A LITTLE LESS THAN IDEAL AND I KNOW WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE, IS ADVOCATING FOR, YOU KNOW, LET'S GET AS MUCH LEAD TIME AS WE CAN. 
          LET'S HAVE STUDY SESSIONS. 
          UH, AND I THINK FOR, UH, A LOT OF US WHO HAVE READ THE STAFF REPORT AND KIND OF UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT IN WHICH THIS IS INTENDED, IT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A CHANGE. 
          BUT I KNOW WITH THIS PROPERTY AND WITH OUR COMMUNITY, IT'S ALWAYS A BIG DEAL. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO ADVOCATE FOR, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD'VE BEEN GREAT TO HAVE A STUDY SESSION PRIOR AND POTENTIALLY MAKE SOME CHANGES IF THEY WERE NEEDED. 
          UM, SO I, I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT IN THERE. 
          AND, AND ALSO TO MAKE SURE WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS REGARDING THE FAIRGROUNDS, WE DO NOTICE ON EAST WASHINGTON, I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF KNOWS IF THERE WERE THE BOARDS PUT ON ALONG WASHINGTON JUST TO BE AS VISIBLE AS POSSIBLE. 
          UM, I'VE HEARD IT WAS KIND OF ON THE PAY RAN SIDE OR THE, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          DOES ANYONE VERIFY THAT? SO WE DO HAVE VERIFICATION. 
          WE DID DO ON ONSITE SIGNAGE ON EAST WASHINGTON ON PAY RAN AND ON KENNELWORTH AND ALL OF THAT SIGNAGE WAS EQUIVALENT AND I BELIEVE IT WAS HIGHLY VISIBLE. 
          WE DO HAVE IMAGES IN THE FOLDER, UH, IN THE PROJECT RECORD THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE, UM, SIGN INSTALLER. 
          OKAY, FANTASTIC. 
          WELL THEN I GUESS FOR ME IT WAS JUST THE PROCESS, THE TIMING THING. 
          I WANTED TO COMMENT ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS. 
          IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE LEAD, A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION, UH, AND KIND OF COME BACK AROUND ON IT. 
          UM, AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO ECHO, I APPRECIATED SEEING THAT CHANGE TO MOBILE VENDORS. 
          I DO WANT TO ANY MOTION I WOULD ADVOCATE TO INCLUDE THAT IN THERE, UM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT BROADER DEFINITION REALLY SERVES US, ESPECIALLY AS WE MOVE FORWARD THINKING ABOUT THE BROADER IZO, I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY A, A MISSING PIECE FOR ALL MOBILE VENDORS AS THAT BECOMES A, A MORE VIABLE EVER INCREASINGLY MORE VIABLE BUSINESS MODEL. 
          UM, AND YOU KNOW, I DID WANNA ADVOCATE FOR SOMETHING IN THERE TALKING ABOUT, UM, NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ON SITE. 
          I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST KIND OF CONTENTIOUS ISSUES I'VE HEARD BROUGHT UP FROM KIND OF FOLKS WHO HAVE ALL BEEN GIVING COMMENTARY ON THE FAIRGROUNDS, INCLUDING I THINK THAT THE HEALTHY DEMOCRACY GROUPS, UH, AND I THINK DOING THAT IN THIS INITIAL KIND OF PILOT STOPGAP MEASURE, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT FOR THE OVERLAY, WE GO A LONG WAY TO KIND OF ASSUAGING THAT BIG CONCERN THAT THIS IS GONNA BE TURNED INTO HOUSING, HOWEVER MUCH WE ALREADY HAVE SAFEGUARDS TO MAKE SURE IT ALIGNS WITH CERTAIN POLICY PIECES WE'VE LAID OUT. 
          AND THAT MAY STOP IT. 
          I THINK HAVING THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE, UH, PENDING, OBVIOUSLY THAT CAN BE AMENDED WITH WHATEVER THE MASTER PLAN LOOKS LIKE, WHATEVER THE GENERAL PLAN LOOKS LIKE. 
          UM, I WANTED TO SEE IF, IF WHAT COMMISSIONERS THOUGHT ABOUT INCLUDING LANGUAGE LIKE THAT, ABOUT NOT HAVING NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ON SITE, JUST TO GIVE THAT KIND OF REASSURANCE TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAD THAT CONCERN AS THIS MOVES FORWARD IN THE PUBLIC PROCESS. 
          SO, UM, THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FEEDBACK ON THAT ONE. 
          UM, I, I FEEL LIKE THIS OVERLAY IS ACTUALLY THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO GET INVOLVED. 
          I CAN, I DON'T SEE THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN TOMORROW SOMEBODY'S GONNA COME IN AND SAY, OH, WE'RE GONNA PUT HOUSING ON THERE. 
          I MEAN, THIS IS A LONG PROCESS. 
          I SEE THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE EXTENDED THE LEASES BECAUSE THESE ARE BUSINESS OWNERS AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THEIR OWN, WHETHER IT'S GONNA FOLD INTO THIS PROCESS OR NOT. 
          I THINK THAT'S THE PROCESS. 
          AND I, I, I'D HATE TO PUT ANYTHING IN HERE THAT, UM, KINDA STOPS A PROCESS AND I JUST THINK THIS IS, WE JUST NEED TO KEEP THIS AS AN OPEN SLATE SO WE CAN START, UM, WORKING WITH, UM, THE COMMUNITY. 
          UM, AND IT'S NOT JUST GONNA BE THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          IT'S GONNA BE AN ACTUAL SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL PLAN ALSO, AND TO, I, I JUST DON'T FIND IT NECESSARY TO PUT ANYTHING IN THERE. 
          WE WANNA KEEP IT OPEN SO YOU CAN HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION 
          [01:15:01]
AND THE CHANCES OF SOMEBODY COMING IN OR YOU KNOW, ON JANUARY 1ST AND SAYING, OH, I WANNA PUT HOUSING ON THERE. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S JUST NOT GONNA HAPPEN. 
          WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN, THE WHOLE PROCESS. 
          THE OVERLAY IS JUST REALLY WHERE THE PROPERTY IS AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING WITH. 
          SO I, I SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING AS FAR AS THE FOOD TRUCKS IN THERE, BUT I WOULD NOT PUT ANYTHING, UH, CONCRETE, UM, THAT WOULD PROHIBIT FROM PEOPLE EVEN MAKING COMMENTS. 
          SO, ANDREW? SURE. 
          AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMISSION, I, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT SUBSECTION D FIVE SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT A NEW CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ANY USE PERMITTED BY RIGHT. 
          OR CONDITIONALLY ALLOWED IN THE BASE ZONING DISTRICTS HOUSING IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE CIVIC FACILITIES BASE ZONING DISTRICT. 
          IT IS, IT IS ALLOWED IN THE MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT. 
          HOWEVER, IT WOULD REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. 
          SO WE DO HAVE THOSE SAFEGUARDS, UM, IN THERE, IN THAT, UM, IT, IT COULD, IT COULD BE ALLOWED IN THE MIXED USE, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD TOO, ANDREW'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. 
          I WAS GONNA SAY THE SAME THING. 
          IT WOULD REQUIRE PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND AGAIN, THIS IS CITY PROPERTY. 
          SO CITY WOULD HAVE TO BE THE FIRST ONES EITHER TO GO OUT AND LOOK FOR THIS RESIDENT OR MIXED USE, OR THEY WOULD COME TO US AND THEN WE WOULD BRING IT TO YOU. 
          UM, AND IT, IT WOULD DEFINITELY FALL WITHIN THE D FIVE HERE, UH, SECTION. 
          SO BESIDES IT REQUIRING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM BOTH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, IT WOULD NEED FINDINGS THAT WOULD BE IN THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL. 
          UH, THE PUBLIC USE BENEFITS, AND I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ASSUAGES YOUR CONCERN THERE. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER MARK HUON. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, AND AT LEAST GETTING THOSE EXPLANATIONS ON THE RECORD MAY HELP ASSUAGE OTHERS' CONCERNS ABOUT KIND OF THE PROTECTIONS ALREADY IN PLACE. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          IF I COULD ALSO JUMP IN, UH, THIS IS ALSO WHY, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR, AND WE WILL GET TO THE DISCUSSION OF A MOTION, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS GONNA ASK FOR, ESPECIALLY WITH ITEMS LIKE THIS GOING FORWARD, I THINK HAVING A CLEAR BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE PROCESS-WISE IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. 
          AND I THINK THIS WAS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF THAT, IN PART BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T REALIZE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A FULL MASTER PLANNING COMMUNITY PROCESS, IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT RIGHT OUTTA THE GATE, THEN YOU LOOK AT THE OBJECTIVE OR YOU LOOK AT THE OVERLAY AS MAYBE YOUR ONE SHOT TO ENSURE OR STOP SOMETHING. 
          THE REALITY IS, AS HAS BEEN VERY CLEARLY DISCUSSED SO FAR TONIGHT, THE OVERLAY IS ENTIRELY ABOUT GETTING FROM HERE TO THE NEXT STEP. 
          IT'S ABOUT ENSURING THAT THE LEASES WE HAVE CURRENTLY WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, THAT THERE'S EXPANDED PUBLIC USE, BUT IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THE OVERLAY THAT ANYTHING BEYOND THAT WOULD HAVE TO NOT ONLY BE ENABLED IN THE BASE DISTRICT, BUT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF US AGAIN TO BE APPROVED. 
          THAT, THAT'S EASY TO SWALLOW AS LONG AS YOU KNOW WHAT'S COMING NEXT. 
          SO IF YOU KNOW THAT, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH GENERAL PLAN, THERE'S GONNA BE VISIONING FROM THE GENERAL PLAN ADVISOR GROUP THAT'S GONNA COME WITH A SET OF CHANGES, WE'RE GOING TO THEN HAVE A MASTER PLANNING PROCESS, WHICH IS THEN GOING TO COME UP WITH ITS OWN SET OF CHANGES. 
          'CAUSE LET'S BE HONEST, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT PROPERTY THAT HAVE YET TO BE ANSWERED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS YET. 
          KNOWING THAT AT THE START MAKES IT VERY EASY TO LOOK AT THIS AND GO, OKAY, WE, WE'VE GOTTA MAKE SURE THAT OUR OVERLAY IS SIMPLY AN OVERLAY AND NOT TRYING TO DO MORE WORK THAN IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THAT'S COMING. 
          IT'S PART OF WHY I ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE Q AND A SECTION, JUST BECAUSE IT'S MASTER PLAN IS REFERENCED A LOT IN BOTH THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DRAFT DRAFT RESOLUTION, BUT IT'S JUST, AT NO POINT IS IT STATED, HEY, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THIS STEP AND THIS STEP. 
          AND I THINK FOR THE PUBLIC, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE FOLKS I'VE CERTAINLY HAD REACH OUT CONCERNED FOR THE SAME REASON, THEY WANNA MAKE SURE THIS ISN'T SOME TRAP DOOR TO ENABLE HOUSING ALL OF A SUDDEN. 
          AND I'VE HAD TO EXPLAIN IT'S NOT, HERE'S WHY. 
          HAVING THAT IN WRITING AND HAVING THAT CLEARLY, I THINK FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. 
          ESPECIALLY WITH SOMETHING LIKE THE FAIRGROUNDS, REGARDLESS OF YOUR POSITION ON ANY OF THIS. 
          IT'S SOMETHING WE ALL CARE ABOUT AND WE ALL HAVE A LOT OF FEELINGS ABOUT. 
          UH, I DID ALSO WANNA DOVETAIL OFF, UH, COMMISSIONER ZEN'S COMMENT ABOUT TIMING, BUT I WANNA TAKE IT TO A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT PLACE. 
          [01:20:02]
I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS GOT STARTED AND STOPPED AND STARTED AND STOPPED BECAUSE WE HAD A FEW OTHER BIG TICKET ITEMS COMING UP, AND WE CAN ALL REMEMBER WHAT THOSE HAVE BEEN AND HOW THE MEETINGS HAVE LOOKED FOR THOSE ITEMS. UH, AND I, I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT STAFF'S TIME IS PRETTY MAXED OUT AS AS IT IS ALREADY. 
          UM, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS THOUGH, I THINK ONE THING THAT WOULD ALSO HELP, I KNOW WE'RE GONNA RUN INTO CIR CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE WE CAN'T HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT AWAY, WHERE WE CAN'T FIT THAT IN BECAUSE WE HAVE KIND OF A TIGHT LIST OF ITEMS COMING UP. 
          BUT EVEN IF WE COULD GET, HEY, THIS IS A BACKGROUND DOCUMENT FOR THE, FOR THE PUBLIC ESPECIALLY, THIS IS FOR THREE MEETINGS FROM NOW, WE CAN'T HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT HERE'S THIS INFORMATION AND TIME TO DIGEST IT AS THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF SOMETHING MORE REALISTIC. 
          'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S EASY FOR US TO SAY, HEY, GIVE US ANOTHER, ANOTHER HEARING TO REALLY DI DIG THROUGH THIS. 
          BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT I THINK WE'VE MAXED OUT STAFF TIME AS FAR AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE IN THE LAST YEAR WITH ADDED THINGS. 
          SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE OTHER STEP WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF JUST HAVING MORE STAFF. 
          SO IF THAT COULD AT LEAST BE A MIDDLE GROUND WHERE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS COMING UP, THIS DOCUMENT ISN'T FOR THIS MEETING, IT'S FOR ONE, TWO, MAYBE THREE MEETINGS FROM NOW. 
          BUT WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE THAT BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO DIGEST. 
          AND I RECOGNIZE THAT WRITING A REPORT IS BY NO MEANS A QUICK PROCESS, SO TAKE IT AS YOU WILL. 
          BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADVOCATE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS WELL, BECAUSE IT DOES COME OFF IF YOU'RE FROM LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE PUBLIC IN, I'M SURE THIS COULD COME OFF AS LIKE, WELL, WHY ARE WE JUST DOING THIS NEAR THE END OF THE YEAR? OBVIOUS. 
          OBVIOUSLY IT'S BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A LONG YEAR OF ITEMS, BUT I, I CERTAINLY DON'T BLAME ANYBODY FOR LOOKING AT THIS GOING, WELL, THIS ISN'T A RANDOM DECEMBER MEETING, WHY IS THAT? SO, JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT. 
          YES. 
          I'LL JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT. 
          THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UM, COUNCIL WORK ON THIS IN THE BACKGROUND AND IN CLOSED SESSIONS. 
          YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH LEASES, WE'RE DEALING WITH, UM, THE CHANGE FROM THE FOURTH DA COMING INTO THE CITY. 
          AND THIS JUST HAPPENED TO REALLY BE THE TIMING. 
          I MEAN, IT, IT'S BEEN, IT, IT'S BEEN QUITE A PROCESS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO WHAT I SEE THIS PROCESS IS, IS THE PROCESS IN 2024, WE'RE GONNA START LOOKING AT MASTER PLANNING, AND WE NOW KNOW WHAT WE'RE MASTER PLANNING. 
          AND, UM, AND YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE STAFF SAYING, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE CITY DOES OWN THIS PROPERTY, SO IT'S NOT AS THOUGH SOMEBODY'S GONNA COME IN AND DECIDE THEY'RE GONNA, YOU KNOW, NEGOTIATE A DEAL. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE TALKED ABOUT. 
          UM, ARE YOU GONNA HAVE FOR-PROFITS WANTING TO GO IN THERE, YOU KNOW, UM, OR ARE, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE WE REALLY LOOKING? AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS THE PUBLIC'S PROPERTY AND THE PUBLIC REALLY WANTS TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT. 
          AND JUST EXTENDING THE LEASES WAS JUST A BENEFIT FOR THE BUSINESSES TO SEE WHERE ARE THEY GONNA BE. 
          AND THAT'S WHY THE TWO YEAR EXTENSIONS, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO THROW PEOPLE OUT. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WORK HARD. 
          UM, THEY'RE GOOD TENANTS AND WE WANNA BE, UM, GOOD TO THE TENANTS. 
          AND SO THIS PROCESS IS REALLY JUST THE BEGINNING. 
          AND SO NOW YOU HAVE THE OVERLAY DONE, SO NOW YOU KNOW WHERE WE, WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON. 
          UM, BUT THERE HAS BEEN ACTUALLY A LOT OF TIME SPENT ON THIS, UM, WITH THE COUNCIL AND A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT SPENT, UM, BY STAFF. 
          IT'S BEEN A HARD YEAR WITH THIS, AND I THINK WE'VE REALLY COME TO A GOOD RESOLUTION. 
          AND THE LEASES ARE, I THINK, PLEASED. 
          AND THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT ACTIVITIES THAT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT HOW TO GET PEOPLE ONTO THE SITE SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE ON THE SITE AND SEE WHAT THE SITE IS LIKE. 
          SO, UM, I THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE THEIR CONCERNS, UM, WE JUST NEED TO PULL BACK ON THE CONCERNS BECAUSE IT REALLY IS GONNA BE A BIG PREP PROCESS. 
          NOBODY IS COMING IN WITH A VISION, AND I, I DON'T BELIEVE ANY COUNCIL MEMBER IS COMING IN WITH A VISION. 
          IT'S REALLY THE PUBLIC PROCESS. 
          AND THIS IS PRIME BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY. 
          AND, UM, IT'S IN THE CORE OF OUR TOWN, AND IT'S REALLY ACTUALLY GONNA BE AN EXCITING PROCESS. 
          SO I THINK PEOPLE JUST NEED TO WILEY WANT TO, INSTEAD OF BEING CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEGATIVES, LET'S LOOK AT THE POSITIVES AND LET'S, YOU KNOW, MOVE ON IN 2024 AND REALLY HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION OF WHAT THE PUBLIC WANTS AND ALSO THE LEASES. 
          YOU HAVE A LOT 
          [01:25:01]
OF RESPECT FOR THEM. 
          AND I, I DO WANNA GIVE KUDOS TO OUR CITY MANAGER FOR WORKING WITH EVERY, UM, EVERY TENANT THERE AND RESPECTIVELY WORKING WITH THEM. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION, AND I'M GONNA SPECIFY, UH, THAT WOULD DIRECT STAFF TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS. 
          SECTION 7.120 POINT C 0.1, REMOVE, REMOVE THE WORD FOOD FROM MOBILE FOOD VENDOR, SECTION 7.120, UH, POINT C 0.4, CHANGE REFERENCE TO LESS THAN 90 DAYS TO LESS THAN 60, OR SORRY TO 60 DAYS OR LESS. 
          AND FINALLY, SECTION ONE OR SECTION 7.12, ZERO POINT C POINT TABLE 5.1, CHANGE LICENSEE ROY'S USE TO MOBILE VENDOR. 
          UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, I'D LIKE TO BRING FORWARD A MOTION TO MAKE THAT, UH, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION WITH THOSE CHANGES. 
          DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          ARIELLE, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. 
          COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES, ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN? YES. 
          VICE MAYOR CATER THOMPSON? YES. 
          CHAIR HOOPER. 
          YES, THE VOTE IS PASSED. 
          OKAY. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE'RE NOW GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR. 
          CHAIR. 
          IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM THREE BEFORE HAVING THAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE ARE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM THREE. 
          THE LAST THING WE WANT ARE TWO CONCURRENT PUBLIC HEARINGS HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME. 
          WE WILL NOW MOVE TO MEETING ITEM FOUR, A NEW PUBLIC HEARING, A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD SECTION 7.120 OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS APPLICABLE CITYWIDE. 
          THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, CE QA PURSUANT TO CE QL GUIDELINES, SECTION 1 5 3 0 8 FOR CLASS EIGHT ACTIONS BY REGULAR AGENCIES. 
          THAT WAS A LONG WAY, VERY LONG-WINDED WAY OF SAYING WE ARE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT OUR PROPOSED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AGAIN. 
          SO IF YOU WERE HERE FOR A LAST MEETING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SEQUEL, AND I'M SURE IT WILL BE A BARN BURNER. 
          UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING, REQUIRE THE COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. 
          I THINK WE'RE GOOD ON EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. 
          I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS AS A PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I'D LIKE TO INVITE STAFF TO PRESENT, WHICH INCLUDES ANDREW TRIPLE, OUR PLANNING MANAGER, AND HEATHER GITZ, OUR SENIOR PLANNER, AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          WE'LL BE, UH, JUST A MOMENT GETTING SET UP AND, UH, BROADCASTING OUR PRESENTATION. 
          JUST TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT WHILE WE WAIT. 
          AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE LOOKED AT A FEW QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY THAT STAFF HAD FOR US REGARDING THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AS THEY WERE PROPOSED THIS MEETING, WE'RE ACTUALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT MORE FINALIZED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS TO MAKE THE REC POTENTIALLY MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE THEM FORWARD TO COUNSEL. 
          [01:30:25]
OKAY. 
          CHAIR, I BELIEVE WE'RE READY TO GO. 
          SO THIS, UH, THIS PRESENTATION IS A, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          UH, THESE ARE PROPOSED STANDARDS. 
          UM, AS SUCH THEY'RE IN A DRAFT FORM, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE PROPOSED. 
          SO, SO, HMM. 
          THAT'S STRANGE. 
          LET'S SEE HERE. 
          THAT'S MISSING. 
          YEAH. 
          WHAT AM I DOING? WHAT'S GOING ON? AND IT'S NOT OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO THIS EVENING'S, UH, PRESENTATION IS UMM GOING TO REFLECT UPON PLANNING COMMISSION'S QUASI LEGISLATIVE ROLE IN THAT ITS ROLE THIS EVENING IS TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL ON A LEGISLATION THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE CONSIDERING, UH, THROUGH ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ORDINANCE. 
          AND SO, SPECIFICALLY, WE'LL BE CONDUCTING PUBLIC REVIEW IN A PUBLIC HEARING FORMAT OF THE PROPOSED STANDARDS. 
          UH, THE MEETING ITEM INCLUDED PROJECT INFORMATION CONSISTING OF THE STAFF REPORT, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, UM, OF VARIOUS ATTACHMENTS TO THE, THE STAFF REPORT, AND THEN A PC RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING, UH, THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE. 
          THE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL ALSO CONSIST OF THE STAFF PRESENTATION, PUBLIC COMMENT, IF ANY, AND THEN THE REQUIRED FINDINGS TO BE MADE. 
          SO REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE ARE CONTAINED IN CHAPTER FIVE OF THE ICO. 
          THIS IS A CITY INITIATED, UM, ICO AMENDMENT TO PROPOSE THAT, UH, SECTION 7.120 OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS BE ADDED TO THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          AND, UH, AS I PREVIOUSLY INDICATED, PLANNING COMMISSION IN ITS QUASI LEGISLATIVE ROLE WOULD RECOMMEND ADOPTION TO CITY COUNCIL SHOULD IT CHOOSE TO DO SO. 
          THE PRIMARY FINDINGS, UH, THAT PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD NEED TO MAKE IN ORDER TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION WOULD BE CONFORMITY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND CONSISTENT WITH THE, UH, PUBLIC NECESSITY, CONVENIENCE, AND GENERAL WELFARE. 
          UH, THOSE FINDINGS WERE PROVIDED BY STAFF AND, UH, ANALYZED IN DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. 
          WE'LL BE SUMMARIZING THEM AS PART OF THIS EVENING'S PRESENTATION. 
          SO TO BRIEFLY, UH, REFLECT UPON THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, AS WAS DISCUSSED, UH, IN THE STUDY SESSION, IS TO ESTABLISH DESIGN STANDARDS, OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT IS, AS OPPOSED TO SUBJECTIVE FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          IT, UH, IS INTENDED TO RESPOND TO SB THREE 30, SB 35, A 2162, AND OTHER STATE MANDATED STREAMLINING MEASURES THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR EITHER THE ELIMINATION OF DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OR WOULD LIMIT DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, UH, TO, TO REVIEW AGAINST OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          IT WOULD ALSO SU, UH, SUPPLEMENT EXISTING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN THE FORM OF, UH, STANDARDS CONTAINED IN THE BUILDING CODE, IN THE FIRE CODE PUBLIC WORKS, UH, STREET DESIGN MANUAL, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT WE DO HAVE IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE ICO CURRENTLY, SUCH AS, UH, DENSITY, LOT SIZE, UH, LOT COVERAGE, FAR AND SO FORTH. 
          THE INTENT IN, IN, UH, DRAFTING THESE STANDARDS AND IN THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STANDARDS WOULD BE TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE RECEIVING, WE'RE ACHIEVING SATISFACTORY QUALITY DESIGN IN INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND THEIR SITES, THAT THE, UH, THE PROJECTS ARE DESIGNED APPROPRIATELY FOR THE INTENDED USES, WHICH WOULD BE PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL, AND THAT THE, UH, PROJECT DESIGNS WOULD RESULT, UH, IN, IN PROJECTS THAT ARE IN HARMONY WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENTS AND WITH THEIR SURROUNDINGS. 
          SO THE TIMELINE, THIS HAS BEEN A MULTI-YEAR PROJECT. 
          UM, IT BEGAN IN JUNE OF 2020 AS A CONCEPTUAL PROJECT PRESENTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION AT A STUDY SESSION. 
          THEN IN EARLY, UH, 2021, UM, STAFF CONDUCTED GROUP INTERVIEWS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS 
          [01:35:01]
AND, UH, PREDOMINANTLY LOCAL ARCHITECTS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES ARE TO, UH, HOUSING PRODUCTION WITHIN THE CITY OF PETALUMA AS IT RELATES TO DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS. 
          WE ALSO CONDUCTED BEST PRACTICES RESEARCH. 
          WE LOOKED AT, UH, EXISTING DESIGN OR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS IN, UM, BAY AREA MUNICIPALITIES, SUCH AS THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY, ALAMEDA, UH, MILPITAS AND OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN APRIL, 2021. 
          THEN, UH, THE, THE RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH OF THE GROUP INTERVIEWS AND SO FORTH WERE ANALYZED AND BROUGHT BACK TO THE COMMISSION WHERE, UH, THE COMMISSION AFFIRMED THE GOALS AND MECHANISMS FOR DEVELOPING OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND ALSO PROVIDED POLICY LEVEL FEEDBACK. 
          UH, FROM THAT POINT IN TIME, THE PROJECT WENT ON HOLD FOR, FOR A PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE THE HOUSING ELEMENT, THE, THE SIX CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT WAS BEING DEVELOPED. 
          AND SO IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, BECAUSE THEY WERE AT THAT POINT, VIRTUALLY RUNNING IN PARALLEL WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT DEVELOPMENT, THAT THEY DIDN'T GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          AND SO THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROJECT WAS PAUSED THEN, UM, FOLLOWING THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE HOU SIX CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT AND CERTIFICATION BY HCD. 
          THE PROJECT WAS RESUMED, UM, WITH WORK BEING DONE ON FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE DRAFT STANDARDS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD FOR CITYWIDE STAFF REVIEW, UM, AND STAKEHOLDER REVIEWS DURING THE MONTHS OF SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER. 
          THEN, UH, IN OCTOBER WE OF THIS YEAR, WE PROVIDED A PLAN AND COMMISSION UP UPDATE, UM, BOTH ON THE PROJECT, BUT ALSO SORT OF TO DEVELOP A, A SHARED LANGUAGE ABOUT, UM, OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, AS WELL AS TO ESTABLISH SOME EXPECTATIONS AND BEGIN TO MANAGE EXPECTATIONS RELATED TO, UM, WHAT THE, HOW THE, THE STANDARDS WOULD BE APPLIED, UH, FOR INSTANCE, TO QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          UM, AND THEN IN NOVEMBER, WE TOOK THE DRAFT STANDARDS TO OUR, UH, PAC AND TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEES FOR REVIEW. 
          WE BROUGHT THEM BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION, A STUDY SESSION. 
          WE'VE INCORPORATED RECOMMENDATIONS OF FOLLOWING ANALYSIS MADE MODIFICATION TO, UH, THE DRAFT STANDARDS IN THE FORM OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. 
          SO WE WANTED TO SHARE THIS, UH, SCREEN HERE. 
          WE'RE WE'RE JUST ABSOLUTELY HONORED, UH, AND THANKFUL TO OUR, ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS WHO SPENT AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING ON A REVIEW OF THE DRAFT STANDARDS, PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS, HIGHLIGHTING SOME POINTS OF TENSION BETWEEN PROFESSIONS, IF YOU WILL, AND REALLY, UM, GETTING, UH, SUPPORTING STAFF IN BRINGING THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FORWARD IN THEIR CURRENT FORM, AS WELL AS PROVIDING THEIR, THEIR EXPERTISE, WHETHER THAT'S, UH, IN THEIR ROLES OF PUBLIC AGENCY. 
          UH, JESSICA POWER'S FIRE MARSHAL, JEROME HOBERG, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, UM, KAREN MIZZU, HOUSING MANAGER, BJORN, UH, GRUENBERG, THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION, UM, SPECIALIST IN PUBLIC WORKS. 
          BUT THEN WE ALSO HAD COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS COOL PETALUMA, PETALUMA CHAT. 
          WE HAD A VARIETY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS WHO PARTICIPATED FROM EDEN HOUSING PACIFIC COMPANIES, MID PEN, DANCO, BURBANK HOUSING. 
          THESE, UH, THESE NAMES THAT SOUND VERY FAMILIAR BECAUSE THESE ARE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE DEVELOPING IN PETALUMA CURRENTLY. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, JUST AN INCREDIBLE OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT AND, UH, REVIEW ACTIVITY FROM OUR LOCAL, UH, LAND USE AND DESIGN PROFESSIONALS. 
          WE SEE A VARIETY OF, OF, UM, ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, UH, CIVIL ENGINEERING AND CIVIL DESIGN, UM, WHO SPENT HOURS, UH, PARTICULARLY THIS FALL, UH, WORKING THROUGH THEM AND HELPING STAFF TO RESOLVE, UH, SOME CONCERNS, BUT AS WELL AS TO PROPOSE SOME REFINEMENTS THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN INVALUABLE. 
          SO WE DO WANT TO, UH, SHARE THAT AND ACKNOWLEDGE ALL OF THE, THE EFFORT THAT STAKEHOLDERS, UH, PUT FORWARD ON THIS PROJECT. 
          SO THE GOALS OF THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, THESE WERE THE GOALS THAT WERE ADOPTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION IN IN 2021. 
          UH, THE FIRST IS TO STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY CHARACTER IN THE PUBLIC REALM. 
          SO WE WANTED OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT WOULD SUPPORT, REFLECT THE PETALUMA COMMUNITY AND ENHANCE ITS PHYSICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, AND CULTURAL CHARACTER TO THE EXTENT THAT, UH, OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS CAN DO THAT. 
          UM, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE A VARIETY OF NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY THAT EXHIBIT, UM, UNIQUE DESIGNS IN MANY INSTANCES. 
          AND WE ALSO WANT TO DESIGN FOR PEOPLE IN A WAY THAT IT SUPPORTS 
          [01:40:01]
PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED ENVIRONMENTS IN A DIVERSE RANGE OF USES. 
          OFTENTIMES, THOSE RANGE OF USES, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, PROXIMITY AND THE ABILITY TO, TO, UM, TO VISIT COMMERCIAL USES, ESPECIALLY THROUGH NON VEHICULAR TRANSPORTATION, IS IMPORTANT. 
          AND SO TO, UH, CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE DIVERSITY OF THE RANGE OF USES, APPROXIMATE TO, UM, OUR RESIDENTIAL USES TO DESIGN EQUITABLE PLACES, UH, THAT RECOGNIZE AND SUPPORT, UM, THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS AND WORKERS AND THEIR ACTIVITIES, UH, TO SUPPORT CONNECTIVITY AND ENSURING THAT OUR PROJECTS, THESE QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ARE SAFE, ARE FUNCTIONAL, AND, UM, AND ARE, ARE ESTABLISHING MULTIMODAL CONNECTIONS WHERE POSSIBLE. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, TO DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABILITY, TO CONTINUE TO ENHANCE PETALUMA'S RESILIENCE AND RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP, UM, IN PARALLEL WITH OTHER EFFORTS, SO SUCH AS THE BLUE BLUEPRINT FOR CLIMATE, UH, UM, CHANGE AND, UM, AND OTHER, UH, ONGOING EFFORTS, GENERAL PLAN AND SO FORTH. 
          SO WE DO, WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THESE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE, UH, COMING FORWARD ALONGSIDE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES, GENERAL PLAN UPDATE THAT I MENTIONED, THE PARKING ORDINANCE, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, THE, UH, BUILDING CODE, THE REACH CODE, AND THEN THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. 
          AND WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THESE POLICY DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS, UH, WOULD DIRECT, UH, ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT MAY FALL IN THE ICO GENERALLY OR WITHIN THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          AND SO WE DO SEE THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AS BEING A, UH, AN EVOLVING SET OF STANDARDS, UM, THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY POLICIES DEVELOPED UNDER EACH OF THESE INITIATIVES ALL THE WAY, UH, THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, AND INCLUDING THE CODIFICATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO, AS WE, AS WE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED SOME OF THE KEY TERMS MINISTERIAL REVIEW, UH, THAT'S A REVIEW OF AGAINST COMPLIANCE WITH OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERPRETATION OR DISCRETION BY REVIEW AUTHORITY. 
          AND TYPICALLY WE WOULD, UH, SEE THAT IN A BUILDING PERMIT, UM, SSB 35 PROJECTS, UM, ARE ABLE TO, IF THEY'RE QUALIFYING, THEY CAN COME FORWARD AS A BUILDING PERMIT ONLY, AND THEY ARE REVIEWED AGAINST OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          WE HAVE A VARIETY OF EXAMPLES IN PETALUMA CURRENTLY, UM, THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SB 35 PROCESS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          UM, COMMUNITY MEMBER CHRIS LYNCH, WHO'S AN ARCHITECT, AND ONE OF THE STAKEHOLDERS, UH, PROVIDED PUBLIC COMMENT JUST TODAY ABOUT, UM, AN EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT WENT THROUGH THE SB 35 PROCESS WITHOUT BENEFIT OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          SO THOSE PROJECTS ARE COMING FORWARD, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO COME FORWARD, AND AS LONG AS WE DON'T HAVE THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, THEN, UH, THEY WOULDN'T BE REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE. 
          SO THAT DOES, UH, IF, IF YOU FEEL A SENSE OF URGENCY  BEHIND THAT, THAT'S, THAT IS INTENTIONAL. 
          WE DO HAVE A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT GAP WITHIN OUR CURRENT IZO THAT WE ARE TRYING TO CLOSE IN RESPONSE TO, UH, ACTIONS BY THE STATE, UH, PARTICULARLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS THAT WOULD EITHER STREAMLINE OR ELIMINATE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          SO THEN, UM, THAT'S PRECISELY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS, IS DISCRETIONARY REVIEW AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO, UH, CONSIDER GRANTING ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, UM, AND TO IN INTERPRET AND APPLY AND LEVERAGE THEIR DISCRETION TO, TO ACHIEVE, UH, HIGH QUALITY PROJECTS THAT DO REFLECT THE CORE GOALS OF THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          UM, WHEN, WHEN WE HAVE QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, SOME OF THAT DISCRETION IS EITHER GOING TO BE, UM, LIMITED THROUGH THE SSB THREE 30 PROCESS, AB 2162 OR ELIMINATED, SUCH AS THROUGH SB 35. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, OBJECTIVE REVIEW LIMITATIONS ON REASONS FOR DISAPPROVAL. 
          UM, THE CITY IS BURDENED TO, UH, FIND, UH, MAKE FINDINGS TO DENY APPROVAL. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, A QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECT IS A TERM THAT WE'VE BEGUN USING IN, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          AND THAT SPECIFICALLY RELATES TO THOSE PROJECTS THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR STREAMLINED REVIEW, UH, PURSUANT TO, UM, STATE CRITERIA. 
          SO THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK THAT WE'RE OPERATING UNDER THE, THE, UH, CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, UH, WHICH IS ADOPTED IN THE FORM OF OUR LOCAL BUILDING CODE WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS, UH, CAL GREEN AND OTHER STATE REGULATIONS THAT APPLY TO ALL 
          [01:45:01]
OF OUR PROJECTS. 
          UM, STATE ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS ARE AN EXAMPLE AS WELL, OF OTHER STATE REGULATIONS. 
          THEN IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE, WE DO CONTINUE TO APPLY, UH, THE BUILDING CODE, THE FIRE CODE, UH, OTHER, OTHER OBJECTIVE STANDARDS SUCH AS STORM WATER, WAY LOW, UH, WATER CONSERVATION AND SO FORTH. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, WITHIN, UM, THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT COME FORWARD THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN AND ARE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE AND SMART CODE, UH, THAT RELATE TO, UH, ESPECIALLY TO ZONING TO DENSITY, UM, SETBACKS, PARKING OPEN SPACE AND SUCH. 
          SO THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THEIR INTERACTION WITH THE, WITH OUR CURRENT MUNICIPAL CODES, UM, THEY WOULD APPLY TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEY WOULD SUPPORT PRIVATE PROPERTIES RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY. 
          I THINK THAT'S ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION WE WOULD WANT TO MAKE, IS THAT THEY WOULD NOT DIRECT DESIGN WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ITSELF. 
          SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT A DESIGN ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
          THE, UH, PUBLIC WORKS STREET DESIGN MANUAL AND SO FORTH WOULD CONTINUE TO SPECIFY DESIGN OF THAT PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          WE DO, AS I MENTIONED, SEEK TO FILL THE GAPS AND SUPPORT EXISTING CODES. 
          UH, WE'VE, WE'VE, UH, DONE OUR BEST TO AVOID DUPLICATION THAT MAY LEAD TO INCONSISTENCY OR CONTRADICTORY REGULATIONS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE RESOLVED. 
          AND WE ARE ALSO, UH, BEING VERY CONSCIOUS OF AVOIDING PLACING AN EXCESS BURDEN THAT MAY PREVENT OR LIMIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE THE INTENT OF THE STATE STREAMLINING MEASURES AND OF THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS IS TO, UH, FACILITATE HOUSING PRODUCTION, UH, IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE STATEWIDE HOUSING CRISIS. 
          SO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS, WE'VE, WE'VE, UM, LOOKED AT THIS BEFORE, UH, WITH DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          A PROJECT WOULD COME IN, WOULD REQUIRE PLANNING ENTITLEMENTS, AND PART OF THAT PROCESS WOULD BE TO, UH, REVIEW IT UNDER SITE, UM, UM, SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, SPAR, MAKE DISCRETIONARY FINDINGS AND PERHAPS CONDITION THE PROJECT TO ACHIEVE A HIGH QUALITY, UH, DESIGN. 
          THEN IT WOULD GO ON THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH A VARIETY OF STANDARDS THAT EXIST IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE. 
          UM, SOME EXAMPLES OF SPAR FINDINGS THAT WE'VE PRESENTED BEFORE, AND THAT YOU ALL AS A COMMISSIONER ARE FAMILIAR WITH, UM, WE CAN SEE THAT, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF DISCRETION HERE. 
          ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS APPROPRIATE AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THAT'S VERY SUBJECTIVE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT MIGHT SPECIFY, UH, WHAT THOSE ARCHITECTURAL APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES ARE LIKE. 
          AGAIN, WE SEE DOWN IN, UM, IN SPAR FINDING NUMBER TWO, LANDSCAPING THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THAT'S, UH, AGAIN, HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE. 
          AND THEN, UH, WE SEE IT AGAIN IN, IN FINDING NUMBER THREE. 
          SO WE, WE REALIZE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT THAT OUR FINDINGS DID ALLOW THE REVIEW AUTHORITY FULL DISCRETION, AND DID ALLOW US TO, TO REALLY SHAPE PROJECTS UNIQUELY IN A MANNER THAT IS NOT AFFORDED TO US IF IT'S A QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECT. 
          HENCE, WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          SO A REVIEW PROCESS FOR A PROJECT THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO OBJECTIVE DIVINE DESIGN STANDARDS PLANNING REVIEW WOULD LOOK FOR COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WITH SUBDIVISION STANDARDS, AND WITH OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          IF IT FOUND THAT COMPLIANCE IN THE CASE OF SB 35, THEN IT WOULD GO ON TO BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW. 
          IN THE CASE OF SSB THREE 30, IT WOULD STILL CONTINUE TO COME FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SPAR REVIEW, BUT YOU WOULD, YOUR REVIEW WOULD BE LIMITED TO ONLY REVIEW OF THE PROJECT UNDER OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          SO IT DOES HAVE QUITE A CHILLING EFFECT ON THE ABILITY OF THE REVIEW AUTHORITY TO, TO, UH, APPLY DISCRETION. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, IF A PROJECT IS, IS ELIGIBLE, IS QUALIFYING, BUT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, THEN THE PROJECT WOULD NOT BE APPROVED OR WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD. 
          IT WOULD BE REMANDED TO THE APPLICANT FOR, UM, EITHER REVISION AND RESUBMITTAL OR, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW. 
          SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE EXISTING REGULATIONS AND HOW THEY STACK UP UNDER THE FIVE GOALS OF CHARACTER, HUMAN SCALE, EQUITY, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY, WE, WE SEE HERE, WE'VE, WE'VE TAKEN EXISTING REGULATIONS AND SHOWN WHERE THEY WOULD SUPPORT THE VARIOUS GOALS, BUT 
          [01:50:01]
WE UNDERSTAND, UH, THIS, THIS SORT OF CATEGORIZATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THEN HOW WE'VE ADDED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS TO FURTHER ENHANCE THOSE EXISTING. 
          SO YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE REALLY BUILDING OUT AND FURTHERING OUR EFFORTS TO, UH, TO SHAPE THE CHARACTER HUMAN SCALE, UM, EQUITY, MULTIMODAL CONNECTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THIS. 
          THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE, ARE GENERALLY ORGANIZED INTO TWO, UM, CATEGORIES, SITE DESIGN, INCLUDING THE VARIETY OF TOPICS THAT WE SEE HERE, AND THEN BUILDING DESIGN, WHICH FOCUSES SPECIFICALLY ON ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, UH, BUT COULD GET INTO SOME BUILDING FORM, UH, IN TERMS OF ROOF, ROOF, UH, USES AND, AND CORNER TREATMENTS AND SO FORTH. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF SUBSTANTIAL REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO, UH, THE VARIOUS, UH, CCBS, BUT IN PARTICULAR PLANNING DIVISION, UM, YOU WILL EXPERIENCE, UH, REVISIONS TO PARKING LOT SHADING. 
          WE DID ALLOW FOR, UM, INCREASE IN THE USE OF SOLAR PANELS AND PARKING LOTS, UH, WHICH, WHICH, UH, IS REFLECTED IN A REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF TREES REQUIRED IN THE LOCATION, UH, TRADE OFF THERE, OF COURSE, UM, BICYCLE PARKING. 
          WE REVIEWED THAT. 
          WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT HERE SHORTLY. 
          AND SOME LIMITATIONS THERE ON WHAT WAS DESIRED, BECAUSE THEY REALLY, UH, IN THE ESTIMATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UH, LEND THEMSELVES TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AS OPPOSED TO DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          UH, FENCING, WE'VE GOT, UH, SOME REVISIONS TO SHOW YOU, AS WELL AS IN LANDSCAPING, OPEN SPACE SEATING. 
          WE, UM, HAVE A FULL PRO PROHIBITION ON ARTIFICIAL TURF. 
          WE INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FACADE LENGTH. 
          UH, WE REMOVED THE WINDOW SHADING REQUIREMENT. 
          IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO, UH, TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS AT A LEVEL THAT SEEMED TO MAKE THAT ACHIEVABLE, FEASIBLE, AND IMPLEMENTABLE. 
          UM, AND SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, AT LEAST WE HAVE REMOVED THAT, AND THEN WE MODIFIED REQUIREMENTS FOR OCCUPIED ROOFS. 
          SO GOING FORWARD, I'M GOING TO ASK, UH, SENIOR PLANNER, HEATHER GUREWITZ TO GO THROUGH THE SPECIFIC, UH, MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE COMPLETED FOR YOUR BENEFIT. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO, UM, HEAR OUR PRESENTATION TONIGHT AND CONSIDER AN ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION. 
          UM, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL FEEDBACK FROM THE PREVIOUS STUDY SESSION. 
          UM, AND AS WELL TO THE NUMEROUS PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED, WE DEFINITELY TOOK THEM ALL INTO CONSIDERATION AND, UM, LOOKED AT HOW WE COULD, UH, INCORPORATE THEM. 
          SO, UM, GOING IN ORDER OF THE DOCUMENT, UM, I JUST WANNA NOTE, I DON'T HAVE A SLIDE, BUT WE DID ADD A FEW DEFINITIONS TO SUPPORT SOME OF THE, UM, CHANGES THAT WE HAVE MENTIONED. 
          SO I WILL DISCUSS THOSE AS WE GET TO THEM. 
          UM, SO AS REQUESTED, UM, TO HAVE AS MUCH SOLAR AS POSSIBLE ON SITE, UH, WE DID INCREASE FROM WHAT WAS A REPLACEMENT OF 50% OF THE REQUIRED SHADE TREES WITH UP TO A HUNDRED PERCENT AS LONG AS ORNAMENTAL TREES ARE PRO PROVIDED AROUND THE PERIMETER. 
          AND, UM, I JUST WENT WITH THE ONE TREE PER 30 FEET BECAUSE WE HAD USED THAT ELSEWHERE. 
          OF COURSE, THAT'S NOT IN THERE ANYMORE, AND I'LL GET TO THAT. 
          BUT, UM, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE SIZE OF ORNAMENTAL TREES, THAT'S A REASONABLE AMOUNT. 
          HOWEVER, IT'S UP TO DISCUSSION AS WELL. 
          UM, SO AS REQUESTED, WE DID, UH, LOOK BACK AT THE PARKING AND, UM, WE, I HAD YET ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH BJORN ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT MORE FLEXIBLE. 
          AND WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING WAS, UM, TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THE, UM, THERE IS THE ALTERNATIVE OPTION. 
          SO YOU ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY REQUIRED TO USE ONLY THOSE SHAPES, BUT IF YOU'RE NOT USING THE ALLOWABLE SHAPES THAT ARE SHOWN IN THE TR TOP DRAWING THERE, UM, THAT YOU DO NEED TO COMPLY WITH IJ AND K AND THAT'S, UM, THAT IT HAS A MEANS OF SECURING. 
          AND AGAIN, WE BEEFED UP THAT SECTION BY PROVIDING A MINIMUM, UM, STRENGTH AND, UM, SIZE OF TUBING, UM, THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. 
          AND ALSO, UM, JUST ENSURING THAT, AGAIN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIFT THE BIKE TO USE THE RACK BECAUSE THAT DOES PROVIDE 
          [01:55:01]
AN ACCESSIBILITY ISSUE. 
          UM, THE PERFORMANCE ISSUE THAT CAME INTO PLAY WAS WHETHER WE COULD IN DESIGN STANDARDS REQUIRE THAT BICYCLES BE ALLOWED, UM, IN HALLWAYS AND ELEVATORS. 
          AND DYLAN, IF YOU WANTED TO, IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, DYLAN WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THOSE AS AS WE MOVE ON. 
          UM, WE'LL TAG TEAM ON THOSE. 
          UM, SO WE DID HAVE A REQUEST, UM, TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL STYLES OF ALLOWABLE FENCING. 
          UM, SO WE DID ADD THOSE, AND IT'S THE LASER CUT METAL AND THE HORIZONTAL MEMBER FENCING. 
          UM, AND THEN THE, UH, WE DID REMOVE THE 75% VEGETATIVE COVER. 
          AND THE REASON BEING, AS, AS I CONTINUED DOING THESE VISUAL SURVEYS OF DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS, IT WAS REALLY CLEAR THAT THOSE ARE NOT BEING MAINTAINED, THAT THEY'RE DYING. 
          AND THAT, AGAIN, YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FENCE, IF THERE'S NOT VEGETATION THERE, THAT IT STILL HAS A REASONABLE AESTHETIC. 
          AND SO THAT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND THAT, UM, TO PROVIDE THAT. 
          SO, UM, THERE WERE JUST SOME MINOR CHANGES TO, UM, THE SCREENING LANGUAGE, JUST TO CLARIFY AND ENSURE THAT THE STANDARDS WERE OBJECTIVE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING NEW OR DIFFERENT ABOUT IT. 
          UM, IT'S THE SAME STANDARD, BUT WE DID JUST DO A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, ATTORNEY PROMPTED CLEANUP, , AS I WOULD CALL IT. 
          AND, UM, OKAY, SO THE, THE BIG CHANGES WERE IN LANDSCAPING. 
          UM, SO WE DID REVISE THE REFERENCE THAT WAS IN THERE TO OPEN SPACE, UM, TO BE SPECIFIC, TO REFERENCE TO PETALUMA RIVER OR CREEK, WHICH IS CLEARLY DEFINED, UM, IN OUR, IN OUR SECTION AS REFERRING TO SECTIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS. 
          UM, THE OTHER THING THAT WAS ADDED AS WELL AS WE DID, UM, ADD SOME DEFINITIONS THAT I CARRIED OVER FROM THE GENERAL PLAN FOR SENSITIVE HABITAT AND NATURAL HABITAT. 
          SO THOSE ARE NOW ALSO IN THE DEFINITIONS. 
          AND I, DID I SKIP A SLIDE? MAYBE NOT, MAYBE IT'S COMING UP AFTER. 
          UM, BUT JUST IN CASE THEY, UM, YEAH. 
          OH, NO, THAT WAS OKAY. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          SO THE NATIVE PLANT REQUIREMENT IS NOW JUST FOR RIVERS AND CREEKS. 
          I CHANGED THE PICTURE, SORRY. 
          OKAY, SO MOVING ON. 
          UM, THIS, THIS WAS THE BIG KIND OF DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AT THE STUDY SESSION WAS THIS, UM, FI WAS THE FIVE FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER BETWEEN AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND A PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND IT WAS ONE TREE PER 30 FEET REQUIRED. 
          WELL, SO AS I CONTINUED TO DIG INTO THE LAYERS AND LOOKING AT THE CODE, MOST OF THE SETBACKS WHERE MULTIFAMILY IS ALLOWABLE WERE FIVE FEET, AND THEN THERE WERE ACTUALLY SOME THAT WERE THREE FEET. 
          WELL, NOW IF YOU THINK ABOUT A TREE, A TREE NEEDS MORE THAN FIVE FEET, REGARDLESS OF THE FIRE SITUATION, YOU, YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ROOM FOR A TREE IF YOUR SETBACK IS THIS WIDE. 
          AND, UM, SO WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING IS, AGAIN, WE, WE TALKED THIS OVER WITH DYLAN AND, AND HE CAN ANSWER FURTHER QUESTIONS, BUT ESSENTIALLY SSB THREE 30 PROHIBITS, UM, CHANGING THE DENSITY OR THE SETBACKS. 
          AND BY REQUIRING A TREE THAT THEN NEEDS SPACE TO GROW, YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY CHANGING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. 
          UM, AND SO IN THE END, UM, AND WITH THE ISSUE WITH THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD AND NOT BEING ABLE TO GUARANTEE WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TREE MAINTENANCE, WE JUST SAID THIS IS NOT A GOOD STANDARD TO HAVE IN OUR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          AND WE HOPE, AND UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S NO GUARANTEE IN THAT, BUT THE BET THAT'S REALLY, UM, WHAT WE CAN DO IS HOPE THAT OUR PROJECT DESIGNERS WILL, UM, CONSIDER THESE THINGS WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING THEIR SITES. 
          UM, BUT AS WE, AS WE LOOKED AT IT MORE AND MORE, ONE OF THE KEY TENANTS TO PLANNING IS DO NO HARM. 
          AND WE JUST KEPT FINDING THAT THE STANDARD WAS NOT GOING TO MEET THAT, THAT BAR, IT JUST WASN'T FITTING IN. 
          SO AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, WE CAN TURN IT OVER TO DYLAN. 
          YEAH. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          MOVING ON. 
          OKAY. 
          SO TREES, UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KUSON FOR SHARING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 
          [02:00:01]
ABOUT ALTERNATIVES TO ROOT BARRIERS. 
          UM, WE DID ADD SOME LANGUAGE TO ALLOW ALTERNATIVES TO ROOT BARRIERS, SO THAT'S NO IN THE STANDARDS. 
          UM, AND WE REVISED, UM, THE SEATING RATIO BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM, UM, COMMISSIONER MOSES. 
          AND, UM, NOW IT IS TWO, ONE BENCH OR TWO SEATS PER EVERY 200 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, SO THAT'S WHAT OUR NEW STANDARD IS. 
          AND, UM, BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM COMMISSIONER BAUER AND CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSION, WE DID, UM, DO A LOT OF RESEARCH LOOKING AT THE MAXIMUM ON WHETHER WE WOULD DO, WHETHER IT MADE SENSE TO DO A 200 FOOT BUILDING MAXIMUM. 
          AND, UM, SO WE DID ESSENTIALLY, UM, AN AERIAL SURVEY OF LOOKING AT THE MAJORITY OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING UNIT HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS IN PETALUMA. 
          UM, THE VAST MAJORITY WERE AROUND A HUNDRED, 150 FEET LONG FOR THE PRIMARY FRONTAGE. 
          BUT THERE WERE, UM, A NUMBER THAT WERE IN THE 200 RANGE, AND THERE WERE SEVERAL THAT WERE A LITTLE OVER 200. 
          AND IN TERMS OF TRYING TO SAY, OKAY, WE'RE CREATING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS, WE'RE TAKING THESE DISCRETIONARY FINDINGS, AND WE DON'T HAVE GUIDELINES TO USE. 
          SO WHAT WE CAN USE IS WE CAN SAY, OKAY, THIS IS WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE PAST HAS SEEN AS APPROVABLE PROJECTS AND REASONABLE, YOU KNOW, SIZES. 
          AND SO WE DID GO WITH 250, UM, BECAUSE THAT WAS A REASONABLE AMOUNT GIVEN WHAT EXISTING PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY APPEAR TO BE. 
          SO, UM, THAT IT SEEMED TO MEET THAT CHARACTER REQUIREMENT AND PUT AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD TO IT. 
          UM, SO WE DID ADD THAT IN AND WE REMOVED THE WINDOW SHADING. 
          UM, AS ANDREW SAID, UM, WE WERE, WE WERE RUNNING INTO A LOT OF DIFFICULTIES WITH TRYING TO MAKE THESE OBJECTIVE, UM, AND IN A WAY THAT IS MEANINGFUL AND TO ENSURE THAT THEY MET THEIR PURPOSE. 
          AND I, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED. 
          UM, IN ORDER TO REALLY UNDERSTAND SHADING NEEDS, UM, WHEN YOU START TO GET INTO SHADING, THERE'S USUALLY A SHADING STUDY REQUIRED. 
          UM, IT IT, AND AGAIN, IT GETS EXTREMELY COMPLICATED TO MAKE A REAL SIMPLE OBJECTIVE STANDARD. 
          AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS, AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOKED AT OTHER PROJECTS FROM THE PAST, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ASKED OTHER PROJECTS TO DO THAT I, WE COULD FIND CLEAR EVIDENCE OF IN LOOKING AT THESE STRUCTURES AND SAYING, OKAY, YOU GOTTA HAVE THESE SHADINGS. 
          UM, AND SO THERE ARE ENERGY EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS THAT THE BUILDING CODE HAS THAT ARE CODIFIED, BUT IN TERMS OF ADDING THIS EXTRA SHADING ELEMENT, UM, IT WOULD'VE BEEN ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT OTHER PROJECTS IN THE PAST HAVE REALLY BEEN REQUIRED TO DO. 
          AND, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS NOT A, A MATTER OF A SIMPLE STANDARD. 
          SO, UM, WE ENDED UP TAKING IT OUT, UM, WAS WHERE WE WERE AT. 
          SO UNFORTUNATELY THAT DID COME OUT AND WE HOPE THAT IN, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE HAVE A HUGE AMOUNT OF PLANNING WORK THAT'S HAPPENING. 
          I KNOW YOU'RE VERY ANXIOUS TO SEE IT, BUT I PROMISE YOU IT'S HAPPENING. 
          UM, WE JUST WANNA GET IT TO THE RIGHT PLACE. 
          BUT THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE CAN ADDRESS AS WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING UPDATES. 
          AND AGAIN, THIS IS A LIVING DOCUMENT. 
          IT DOESN'T MEAN THIS IS DEAD FOREVER. 
          IT JUST MEANS THAT IN THIS STOP GAP SHORT-TERM SOLUTION, WE JUST WERE NOT ABLE TO GET IT IN. 
          SO, UM, OKAY. 
          UM, WE DID HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT ROOFTOP, COMMON, USABLE OPEN SPACE. 
          AND SO WE'VE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL STANDARDS THAT WOULD, UM, ADDRESS SHOULD SOMEBODY DECIDE TO PUT THEIR USABLE OPEN SPACE ON THE ROOFTOP. 
          AND THEY INCLUDE, UM, AT LEAST 30% OF THE OPEN SPACE SHALL INCORPORATE ABOVE GROUND PLANTERS THAT ARE NO LESS THAN THREE FEET WIDE AND THREE FEET LONG. 
          AND THAT, UM, PERMANENT NON MEMBRANE SHADING DEVICES SHALL BE INSTALLED TO COVER AT LEAST 15% OF THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE SQUARE FOOTAGE. 
          UM, AND THAT THEY NEED TO ALSO PROVIDE THE SEATING AS IT COMPLIES WITH, UM, WITH THE OPEN SPACE SECTION. 
          SO, UH, THAT WAS, SO THOSE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL STANDARDS. 
          AND, UM, ESSENTIALLY THE, UH, HERE WE GO TO WRAP IT UP. 
          UM, THE PROJECT IS CON AS WE'VE ANALYZED IT, BELIEVE THE PROJECT IS 
          [02:05:01]
CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH NOT A REQUIRED FINDING, IT DOES CONFORM WITH THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          AND THE PROJECT IS, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC NECESSITY, CONVENIENCE IN GENERAL, WHERE WELFARE, UM, STAFF ANALYSIS ALSO FINDS THAT THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT UNDER SQA 1 5 0 6 1 B THREE, WHICH IS THE COMMON SENSE EXEMPTION. 
          UM, WHICH BASICALLY IS THAT, UM, IT IS WITH C WE CAN ASSESS WITH, CERTAINLY THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE ENVIRONMENTAL HARM. 
          IT'S CREATING STRICTER REGULATIONS WHERE THERE CURRENTLY ARE HUGE GAPS. 
          UM, AND ALSO EXEMPT UNDER 60, UNDER SECTION 15, 3 0 8, CLASS EIGHT, WHICH IS AGENCY ACTIONS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT, UM, AS WELL AS NUMEROUS EXAMPLES OF, UM, SUSTAIN SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES THAT WE'VE INCORPORATED. 
          UM, THERE, THIS, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT IS TO PROTECT THE AESTHETIC ENVIRONMENT OF PETALUMA. 
          UM, AND SO WE HAVE, UM, CONCLUDED IT EXEMPT AND, UM, WE RECOMMEND THAT, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO, FOR THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE, TO ADD THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          AND I JUST WANNA ADD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT I WAS RECENTLY AT A CONFERENCE WHERE, UM, WE HAD A STATE SENATOR WHO, UM, WAS GREAT AND EXPRESSED HIS INTENTION OF CONTINUING TO PROVIDE MORE AND MORE HOUSING BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO BE, UM, CREATING MORE AND MORE MINISTERIAL PROJECTS. 
          SO WE MAY ONLY HAVE TWO OR THREE BILLS RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          SO, UM, THAT'S ALL WE GOT, I THINK FOR NOW. 
          QUESTIONS. 
          GREAT. 
          UM, THANK YOU HEATHER. 
          I, I DO WANT TO NOTE WITH REGARD TO THE CA FINDING, UM, IN THE RESOLUTION, UH, FINDING TWO A, UH, WHICH IS YOUR CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, FINDING THE FIRST REFERENCES, UH, REFERENCES, SECTION 1 5 3 0 1, SUBSECTION B THREE, THAT, UH, SHOULD BE CORRECTED TO READ SECTION 1 5 0 6 1, SUBSECTION B THREE, AND THEN THE, UM, THE ADDITIONAL CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 1 5 3 0 8 REMAINS THE SAME. 
          WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. 
          WE'RE GONNA MOVE STRAIGHT INTO COMMISSIONER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, SORRY. 
          AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE WILL HAVE OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT WE WILL MOVE BACK INTO COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION. 
          WITH THAT, I'M GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONER WEISSMAN. 
          UM, PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MIC. 
          OOPS, THAT IT WASN'T EVEN ON. 
          SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, SO QUESTION ABOUT, UM, UM, BASICALLY THE, THE DURATION OF THESE STANDARDS, UM, SO A BUILDING IS APPROVED ACCORDING TO ODS, IT, ODS LIVES WITHIN THE IZO, UM, BUT A HOMEOWNER WHO, WHO THEN PURCHASES THE BUILDING FROM THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE YEAR LATER, 10 YEARS LATER, WHATEVER, UM, WANTS TO CHANGE AN ELEMENT THAT FALLS WITHIN THIS, UM, ARE, ARE ALL, WOULD ALL THESE CHANGES BE CONSIDERED PERMITABLE SO THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BASICALLY APPLY FOR A PERMIT AND, AND CONFORM TO THESE STANDARDS? THAT'S A, THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION THAT HASN'T COME UP BEFORE. 
          UM, I THINK WE WOULD TREAT, WE WOULD TREAT A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION JUST LIKE WE DO MODIFICATIONS TO ANY PROJECT, WHETHER IT'S REVIEWED, UH, THROUGH A DISCRETIONARY PROCESS OR NOT. 
          SO IF WE, IF WE RECEIVE A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS TO SAY, UM, A PROJECT THAT WAS DEVELOPED 15 YEARS AGO, WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL AND LOOK AT WHAT WAS APPROVED TO LOOK TO SEE IF, UM, THE SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT THEY'RE SEEKING TO MODIFY WERE DISCUSSED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND UM, OR IF THEY WERE CONDITIONED IN A CERTAIN WAY. 
          SO I THINK LIKEWISE, 
          [02:10:01]
WITH A QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED UNDER ONE OF THE STREAMLINING MEASURES, WE WOULD DO THE SAME THING. 
          WE WOULD GO BACK TO, UM, THE POINTS OF APPROVAL, LOOK AT THEM, AND THEN REQUIRE THAT THEY COMPLY WITH, UM, THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE AT THE TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND MAYBE I COULD ADD TO THAT, ANDREW, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO, IF I'M NOT, AND COMMISSIONER WEISMAN IF I GET THIS, UH, QUESTION WRONG, BUT I WOULD THINK TOO THAT, YOU KNOW, SB THREE 30, IT LOCKS THEM INTO THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS WHEN THEY SUBMIT THAT PRE-APPLICATION. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT LET'S SAY THEY SIT ON IT FOR A COUPLE YEARS, OUR AND CODE THAT WE AMENDED THE RECENT 24 AMENDMENTS LAST YEAR, TWO YEARS AGO, IT DOES HAVE A PROCESS FOR REQUIRING, LIKE THE WITHDRAWAL OF THOSE APPLICATIONS THAT THEY DO SIT ON IT. 
          SO IF THEY DO SIT ON IT FOR A COUPLE YEARS, MAYBE EVEN A YEAR, WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY THAT PRE-APPROVED APPLICATION THAT'S NO LONGER VALID AND YOU WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ANY NEW OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT GET ADOPTED IN THE INTERIM. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR PROVIDE SOMETHING? ME? YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT POST REVIEW, ACTUALLY POST OWNERSHIP TRANSFER. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO I THINK, I THINK DYLAN'S RESPONSE WOULD A POINT TO, UM, DURING THE, THE APPROVAL PROCESS, BUT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION MM-HMM. 
          , BUT THE, THE BOTH SB THREE 30 AND SB 35 DO FORTUNATELY HAVE, UM, RE RESPONSIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , AND THOSE APPLICATIONS WILL DIE IF THE APPLICANT ISN'T RESPONSIVE DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS. 
          SO, UM, BUT, BUT YEAH, I THINK FOR THE LONG TERM THOUGH, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL APPROVALS. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, QUESTION REGARDING, UM, THE WATERWAY ACCESSIBILITY. 
          UM, IT SPEAKS TO WHAT SHALL BE, UM, PROVIDED, UM, I'M JUST REVIEWING THIS AGAIN HERE. 
          UM, IS THERE ANY, IS THERE ANY INTENT THERE TO, UM, MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT A RESTRICTION TO WATERWAY ACCESSIBILITY, UM, WHETHER IT BE BY, YOU KNOW, BUILDING FENCES, WALLS, WHATEVER, TO, TO RESTRICT THAT ACCESSIBILITY TO THE WATERWAY? SO THEY, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE, THEY CAN'T BUILD THINGS IN BETWEEN THE WATERWAY AND THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, UNLESS, I MEAN, THERE'S A LIMITED EXCEPTION TO THAT IF FOR SOME REASON, UM, IF, IF NO OTHER PART OF THE PROJECT EXCEPT WHAT'S REQUIRED TO BE A PUBLIC PATHWAY, WE'RE GOING TO IMPACT RIPARIAN OR WETLAND HABITAT, THEN THEY CAN PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE THAT WOULD GO AROUND THE BUILDING. 
          BUT IN THAT CASE, IF YOU HAVE SUCH SENSITIVE HABITAT THAT THEY CAN'T PUT A PATHWAY THERE, YOU REALLY DON'T WANT PEOPLE GOING THERE BECAUSE IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO PROTECT THE HABITAT AT THAT POINT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT OTHERWISE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SOME EXTREMELY SENSITIVE HABITAT, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS ALONG THE WATERWAY. 
          BUT COMMISSIONER, WE DON'T HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE ACCESS FROM THE SITE TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS. 
          SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE THINKING, UM, HOW MIGHT PEOPLE MOVE IF FROM THE SITE TO THE, THE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PATHWAY MM-HMM. 
           THAT WOULD BE ADJACENT TO THE WATERWAY? WELL, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE HEARD CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, ACCESS FROM THE WATERWAY TO THE PROPERTY. 
          SO, AND, AND RESIDENTS MAY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, OR DEVELOPERS IN THIS CASE MAY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. 
          SO HOW DO WE MANAGE THE, THE PUSH AND PULL BETWEEN FOLKS WANTING TO, YOU KNOW, SOME LEVEL OF SECURITY, BUT THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ACCESS FRONT, STILL PROVIDE ACCESS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE RIVER, THE PUBLIC, RIGHT WAY? THE FRONT. 
          OKAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO, SO I THINK IT, WHAT I'M ENVISIONING IS YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR WATERWAY, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PATH, THEN YOU MIGHT HAVE SAY A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE BETWEEN THE PATHWAY AND THE DEVELOPMENT 
          [02:15:01]
THAT DOESN'T HAVE A GATE IN IT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO AT PRESENT, THE, THE PROPOSED STANDARDS WOULDN'T REQUIRE THAT THERE BE ACCESS THROUGH THAT. 
          THEY MIGHT, THEY MIGHT ACCESS IT BY GOING AROUND THE BUILDING FROM THE FRONT AND CONNECT TO IT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PROPERTY PROVIDES ACCESS TO THE RIGHT OF WAY. 
          AND I THINK THAT THERE, I, I DO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS BECAUSE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE CONCERN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PEOPLE ACCESSING THE DEVELOPMENT IF THEY DON'T RESTRICT ACCESS OTHERWISE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, AND, UH, WE COULD CERTAINLY WORK ON THAT, UH, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS SOME SORT OF REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE ACCESS TO THE, THE PUBLIC PATHWAY ADJACENT TO THE WATERWAY. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , OKAY. 
          UM, I, I'M NOT NECESSARILY ADVOCATING FOR THAT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , I'M JUST ASKING WHERE THAT WAS IDENTIFIED 'CAUSE I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T SEE SPECIFICALLY, UM, A REFERENCE TO THAT. 
          AND SO IF THE CODE REMAINS SILENT ON THAT, I'M NOT SURE THAT I'M ASKING FOR ANY DIFFERENT. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT I, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          THEY CAN PUT A GATE FOR RESIDENTS 'CAUSE THEY DEFINITELY HAVE TO PUT IN THE PUBLIC PATHWAY AND THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY TO THE PUBLIC PATHWAY, TO OTHER PUBLIC PATHWAYS. 
          WHETHER IF THERE'S NOT A UPPER DOWN RIVER, IT HAS TO CONNECT TO THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OR WHETHER IT'S ON THE SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THERE HAS TO BE THAT CONNECTIVITY TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT INTERNALLY HAS TO ALSO CONNECT TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          SO WE DO REQUIRE THAT YOU COULD WALK, YOU JUST, I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT A DEVELOPER IS GONNA PUT A, PUT A GATE ON THAT SIDE, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO MAKE VISIBLE FENCING. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT IT. 
          SO YOU CAN LOOK AT IT AS YOU WALK AROUND . 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I'LL PLOW THROUGH THIS SECTION A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          UM, THE, UH, I, I APPRECIATE THE ALLOWANCE FOR SOLAR CAR PARTS AND, AND ALLOWING THAT FLEXIBILITY THERE. 
          UM, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PERIMETER TREES. 
          UM, IS THERE ANY GUIDANCE THERE OR, UM, RESTRICTION ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THOSE ORNAMENTAL TREES? UM, AND OBVIOUSLY THE CONCERN FOR THAT, THOSE TREES MIGHT END UP ACTUALLY SHADING THE PANELS. 
          UM, SO AGAIN, NOT NECESSARILY ASKING FOR A RESTRICTION, BUT JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S GUIDANCE THERE THAT, THAT CERTAINLY WANT TO, WOULDN'T WANT TO DEMAND A TREE THAT'S TALLER THAN THE SOLAR PANELS, BUT MM-HMM. 
           ONLY, ONLY ONLY IF IT'S BELOW A POWER LINE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO I SAW THAT ONE. 
          THAT'S OUR ONLY HEIGHT RESTRICTION. 
          WE DON'T HAVE ONE ABOUT REQUIRING THAT THE ORNAMENTAL TREES DON'T INTERFERE WITH THE SOLAR PANELS. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I THOUGHT THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, VERY COMPREHENSIVE. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, CREDIT TO STAFF FOR, UM, GOING THROUGH EXTRAORDINARY VOLUMINOUS AMOUNT OF INFORMATION AND DISTILLING IT DOWN AND, AND, UH, UH, I WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND LIVE THE, THE LAST STUDY SESSION, BUT, UH, I WAS ABLE TO WATCH SOME OF IT, UH, UH, LIVE AND THEN SOME OF IT ON TAPE DELAY. 
          SO I DO APPRECIATE THE, THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT ON, UM, ON YOUTUBE TO, TO WATCH LATER. 
          BUT, UM, I, I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. 
          MAY COME UP WITH SOME LATER AS WE GO ALONG, BUT, UH, APPRECIATE IT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON. 
          THANKS, CHAIR HOOPER. 
          UH, YEAH, I WAS ACTUALLY MY FIRST QUESTION, UH, REGARDING ON LINES 2 63 TO 2 66 ABOUT ALLOWABLE BIKE RACKS. 
          DID YOU READ SOME OF, UH, ARCHITECT CHRIS LYNCH'S FEEDBACK ON BIKE RACKS AND ESPECIALLY LOW FOOTPRINT, HIGHER VOLUME OPTIONS? I THINK HE REFERENCED A MANUFACTURER CALLED PEAK BIKE RACKS IN PARTICULAR, UM, AND WONDERED IF SOME OF THE CHANGES, OBVIOUSLY WITH BJORN INVOLVED, HE IS OUR, OUR GURU, UM, ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THESE HIGHER VOLUME OPTIONS AND SPEAK TO THAT CONCERN FROM A DESIGN POINT OF VIEW. 
          SO YES, AGAIN, UM, WE HAD A PRETTY ROBUST DISCUSSION. 
          UM, THE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THE WHEEL WELL SECURE, UM, BJORN POINTED OUT IS CONSIDERED A HIGH DENSITY BIKE RACK. 
          UM, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THEY CAN STAGGER, UM, AND ALSO HE ASKED ME TO, TO REMIND COMMISSION THAT EVEN THAT THE, THE WAY THIS IS SET UP WITH THE RACK SPACING, UM, AS A REMINDER, EACH RACK ACCOMMODATES TWO BICYCLES, UM, AS IT'S SET UP. 
          SO, UM, 
          [02:20:01]
AND BECAUSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AGAIN, A LOT OF THESE, UM, PROJECTS ARE ABLE TO CONCESSION OUT OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS, KEEP IN MIND YOU CAN FIT THREE, YOU KNOW, THREE BICYCLES IN A NINE FOOT PARKING OR THREE RACKS IN A NINE FOOT PARKING SPACE. 
          SO, UM, IT, AFTER GOING THROUGH IT WITH HIM, WE FELT LIKE THIS, THIS SHOULD ALLOW FOR IT, IT BIKE RACKS THAT WE'RE ALLOWING FOR SHOULD FIT SUFFICIENT DENSITY AND SHOULD BE FLEXIBLE ENOUGH, UM, AS LONG AS THE DESIGNS THAT ARE PROPOSED, UM, ARE SUFFICIENT IN PROVIDING SECURITY, ACCESSIBILITY AND, UM, YEAH, SECURITY AND ACCESSIBILITY. 
          WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          WHEN I READ THROUGH THE STANDARDS, IT SEEMED LIKE THIS WOULD ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THE OPTIONS HE WAS REFERENCING, BUT I, I JUST WANTED TO CALL THAT OUT. 
          UH, 'CAUSE I KNOW HE, HE WAS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THAT ONE. 
          UH, AND FROM THIS IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, REGARDING TREES LINES 3 58 LINES TWO 11, SO THAT'S THE ONE TREE EVERY 500 SQUARE FEET. 
          AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE 50% PARKING COVERAGE, THOSE CURRENTLY ARE THE ONLY DESIGN STANDARDS RELATING TO TREES. 
          UM, IS THAT CORRECT? PARKING AND OPEN SPACE? YEAH, I THINK SO. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, I GUESS I, I CAN'T MAKE WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO SAY INTO A QUESTION, SO I'LL SAVE THAT FOR COMMENTARY. 
          UM, AND THEN ON LINES, THIS IS KIND OF A SMALLER ITEM, BUT ON LINES 360 3, I THINK WE DOUBLE UP ON A SENTENCE THERE, UM, ABOUT TREE PLANTERS OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          I APPRECIATED THAT ROOT BARRIER CHANGE, BUT JUST TWO SENTENCES IN A ROW THERE. 
          SO I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. 
          UM, AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER ISSUE BROUGHT UP LAST TIME, AND MAYBE WE HAD COMMISSIONER CONSENSUS ON THIS, SO IT DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH. 
          UH, AND THIS IS IN REGARDS TO BUILDINGS WITH STUCCO OR THE OTHER SIDINGS THAT WERE MENTIONED IN A TWO INCH WINDOW RECESS. 
          UM, I HAD SOME PASSIONATE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS EXTOL THE VIRTUES OF THAT DESIGN FEATURE TO ME. 
          AM I RIGHT THAT THIS IS NOT IN HERE? AND WOULD IT BE TOO LATE TO TALK ABOUT IT ON A COMMISSION AND ADD IT BACK IN IF IT'S, IF YOU WOULD LIKE THE TWO INCH RECESS? YOU CAN, YOU CAN DECIDE TO ADD THAT TO THE ORDINANCE. 
          IT IS CURRENTLY NOT IN THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          JUST, JUST ON THOSE SIDING TYPES THAT WERE MENTIONED, I ASSUME YOU GUYS STILL HAVE THAT LANGUAGE HANDY IF I'M NOT REMEMBERING FROM MEMORY, BUT I WANNA PUT THAT OUT TO, TO DISCUSSION FOR OTHER COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I WAS TOLD, UH, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS HOW GOOD OF A DESIGN IDEA THAT IS. 
          AND I WANTED TO GIVE THAT, UM, SOME CREDENCE. 
          UM, AND I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN ANSWERED, INCLUDING THE QUESTION ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE BARRIERS. 
          UM, SO YEAH, EVERYTHING ELSE FALLS TO COMMENTARY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, JUST TO GET, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS JUST TO GET THINGS STARTED WITH URGENCY. 
          ABOUT HOW MANY SB THREE 30 AND SB 3 35 PROJECTS DO WE HAVE IN PIPELINE RIGHT NOW? ONE AT, AT PRESENT WE HAVE A LETTER OF INTENT, UH, FOR AN SB 35 PROJECT THAT, UM, IN 2022, THE STATE REVISED ITS SB 35 LEGISLATION TO REQUIRE FIRST A LETTER OF INTENT PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A, A FORMAL APPLICATION. 
          THE LETTER OF INTENT TRIGGERS TRIBAL CONSULTATION AND TRIBAL CONSULTATION IS NOT LIKE AN AB 52 CONSULTATION. 
          AB 52 CONSULTATIONS ARE CONSTRICTED BY TIMEFRAME AND ALSO ALLOW FOR THE, UH, CITY TO, OR, OR THE TRIBE FOR THAT MATTER, TO, UH, UNILATERALLY CONCLUDE CONSULTATION. 
          THE, UH, REVISIONS TO SB 35 TO REQUIRE TRIBAL CONSULTATION. 
          DO NOT HAVE THOSE STOP MEASURES IN IT. 
          SO IT'S OPEN-ENDED. 
          UH, SO WE DO HAVE ONE SB 35 PROJECT. 
          WELL, ONE LETTER OF INTENT TO SUBMIT AN SSB 35 PROJECT THAT IS COMPLETING TRIBAL CONSULTATION, UH, AND WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT ITS, UM, APPLICATION WOULD COME FORWARD IN EARLY 2024 AS AN SB 35 THEN. 
          UH, OTHERWISE WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO SB THREE 30 APPLICATIONS, UH, ONE AT TWO RAVINA LANE, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IS, UH, DEER CREEK ONE AND TWO, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED EARLIER THIS YEAR. 
          SO IN 2023, WE RECEIVED THREE APPLICATIONS FOR QUALIFYING PROJECTS. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          AND THAT'S QUITE A FEW. 
          [02:25:01]
AND THIS HAS, I THINK, BEEN MORE THAN EXPLAINED IN NOT ONLY THE DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED, BUT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. 
          THAT BEING SAID, I DID RECEIVE SEVERAL COMMENTS FROM FOLKS WANTING TO KNOW WHY WE WERE PRIORITIZING OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS OVERALL VERSUS IN SOME OF OUR MORE HISTORIC DISTRICTS. 
          AGAIN, I SUSPECT I KNOW THE ANSWER, WHICH IS SIMPLY THAT THE THRESHOLD WE'RE DEALING WITH ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING EVERY PLACE ELSE. 
          AND THAT IS PRETTY SMALL HISTORIC, PRETTY SMALL SCOPE OF ACREAGE FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. 
          BUT I WANTED TO ASK FOR, FOR THE RECORD HERE. 
          SURE. 
          THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD PRECLUDE DEVELOPMENT OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT, UM, WOULD BE, THAT WASN'T HOW, HOW THE ORIGINAL EFFORT WAS SCOPED. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THAT WORK. 
          UM, I BELIEVE THAT WOULD TAKE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF EFFORT. 
          UM, AND THEN ALSO RESOURCES, BOTH TIME RESOURCES AND BUDGETARY RESOURCES TO DO THAT. 
          WE WOULD HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, DEVELOP THOSE CHARACTERISTICS, UM, THAT WOULD BE CONVERTED THEN INTO OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, BE, UM, QUITE A BIT OF EFFORT AND RESEARCH TO DO SO. 
          SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, IT IT, FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE CURRENT PROJECT, IT DOES SEEM MORE PRUDENT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, CONCLUDING THIS PHASE OF THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT. 
          MM-HMM. 
           WITH AN EYE TOWARDS WORKING ON, UM, THE, THE PROCESS OF, OF, UH, DEVELOPING THEM FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. 
          THE OTHER THING TOO, I THINK, AND, AND UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VERIFY THIS, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF VACANT PARCELS WITHIN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. 
          AND SO IT IS THE POINT THAT THE, THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ARE SEEING AND THE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE SEE ARE OUTSIDE OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. 
          SO, UH, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT FEELING THE PRESSURE TO RESPOND TO THE POTENTIAL FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS TO BE PROPOSED IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE ARE SEEING IT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, ONE MORE, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS, BUT ONE MORE CLARIFYING QUESTION THAT I WANTED TO ASK JUST SO IT COULD BE PUT IN THE RECORD. 
          'CAUSE I HAVE SEEN A FEW PEOPLE COMMENT ABOUT WHO HAS CONSULTED IN THIS PROCESS ABOUT HOW MANY ARCHITECTS AND LOCAL LAND USE EXPERTS WERE CONSULTED GOING THROUGHOUT THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROCESS. 
          I, I WOULD SAY THERE'S BEEN CLOSE TO 20, UM, A MAJORITY OF WHOM HAVE WORKED IN THIS COMMUNITY THEIR ENTIRE LIVES. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, NOW I'M GONNA GO TO BIKE PARKING. 
          I WAS GLAD TO SEE THE CLARIFICATION FOR 7.120 POINT D 4K, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE BIKING LOOP REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, BJORN WAS QUITE, WAS QUITE PASSIONATE ABOUT WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT PASSION JUSTIFIED. 
          UH, BUT I DID NOTE, AND I YOU FLAGGED THAT WE COULD ASK DYLAN ABOUT THIS, AND I'M GLAD YOU DID. 
          UH, YOU DID NOTE THAT MANDATING THE ABILITY TO BRING BIKES INTO THE ELEVATOR OR INTO HALLWAYS WASN'T SOMETHING WE COULD IMPLEMENT HERE, BUT FOR FUTURE MUNICIPAL CODE, I WANTED TO ASK WHY NOT IN THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          AND THEN I WANTED TO ASK, WITH REGARDS TO FUTURE MUNICIPAL CODE, WOULD THAT JUST MEAN SEPARATE AMENDMENT TO BUILDING CODE? YEAH, LET ME TAKE A STAB AT THAT. 
          AND ANDREW, HEATHER, PLEASE JUMP IN. 
          SO WE TALKED ABOUT IT, IT'S NOT REALLY AN OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARD TO REQUIRE THE BIKING TO, OR APARTMENTS TO ALLOW BIKING TO GO THROUGH THE APARTMENTS AND THE ELEVATORS. 
          UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD AMEND OUR MUNICIPAL CODE AND THAT WE WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO GO THROUGH CITYWIDE AND NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, FUTURE, UH, SB 35 AND SB THREE 30 PROJECTS. 
          AND I WOULD ADD TOO, I DON'T SEE WHY, AT LEAST FOR SB THREE 30, WHY THAT COULDN'T BE A CONDITION AS PART OF ANY FEATURE DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO YEAH. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          RIGHT. 
          THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT POINT, DYLAN, UM, ABOUT CONDITIONING SB THREE 30 PROJECTS BECAUSE THAT WOULDN'T IMPACT THE ABILITY OF THE PROJECT TO BE DEVELOPED AT THE DENSITY ALLOWED OR PROPOSED. 
          SO WHEN, WHEN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE SORT OF OPERATIONAL TYPES OF CONDITIONS, ALSO, I, I WOULD, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT COME FORWARD AS A POLICY IN THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT THEN, UH, TO DYLAN'S POINT, THEN WE COULD IMPLEMENT CITYWIDE REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND THEN GOING BACK TO WINDOW SHADING, I, 
          [02:30:01]
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO PROV, ESSENTIALLY NOT BEING ABLE TO PULL OFF THE SWEET SPOT OF HAVING SHADING STANDARDS FOR THIS ITERATION. 
          JUST GIVEN THE DISCUSSION AND DEBATE. 
          AND I'LL BE HONEST, I'M SURE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IN THE LAST MEETING THAT CAME OVER HOW SHADING WOULD WORK. 
          IT MADE SENSE TO ME THAT WAS REMOVED. 
          UH, BUT HOW WOULD THIS ACT, YOU DID NOTE THAT THIS WOULD PROBABLY COME FORWARD WITH, UH, ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS FOLLOWING THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW REALISTIC IT WAS TO EXPECT ROBUST SHADING STANDARDS WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE? OR IS THIS SOMETHING FOR SUBSEQUENT UPDATES DOWN THE LINE? SO I THINK IT WOULD BE A ZONING CODE UPDATE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I THINK THAT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGAIN, ACTUALLY MAYBE I SHOULD LET YOU TAKE THIS BECAUSE I DON'T, BUT I MEAN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE IDEA IS THAT ONCE GENERAL PLAN IS, ONCE WE GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THAT WE'RE GONNA DO THE BIG OMNIBUS ZONING CODE UPDATE. 
          AND AGAIN, THE ZONING CODE IS ALWAYS A LIVING DOCUMENT, INCLUDING THIS SECTION. 
          SO AS THAT GETS UPDATED, BUT AGAIN, THE IDEA IS THAT WE'RE NOT LEADING THE POLICY CHARGE WITH THIS, WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO DO THAT OVERALL. 
          AND AGAIN, IT MADE SENSE TO ADD STANDARDS WHERE YOU'RE LIKE, OKAY, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY IMPLEMENTED THROUGH DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          SO WE'RE NOT HOLDING THESE PROJECTS TO UNREALISTIC OR UNREASONABLE STANDARDS BECAUSE IT'S WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH OTHER PROJECTS WITH THE WINDOW SHADING. 
          IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN IN THE REVIEW PROCESS. 
          AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT SOMETHING WHERE IT WAS LIKE, OKAY, THIS IS A SIMPLE, EASY LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOME RUN STANDARD WHERE WE CAN PUT THIS IN THAT HAS, YOU KNOW, A CLEARLY IMPLEMENTABLE OBJECTIVE STANDARD THAT'S GOING TO HAVE AN A DIRECT EFFECT. 
          AND AGAIN, THERE ARE OTHER PROVISIONS THAT REQUIRE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE IN THE BUILDING CODE IN CAL GREEN FOR REQUIRING INSULATION AND COOLING REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO, UM, THE ANSWER IS, I, I, I CAN ADD A NOTE, UM, 'CAUSE I DO WORK WITH THE GENERAL PLAN TEAM AND MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T GET LOST. 
          HOPEFULLY THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR RIGHT NOW. 
          AND I ONLY, I ONLY ASK THAT IN PART BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING SO MUCH ON THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE IEO TO FOLLOW JUST BASED ON EVERY AGENDA ITEM WE'VE HAD THUS FAR. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO KNOW THERE WAS A PLACE TO COME BACK TO IT. 
          UH, AND THEN WITH REGARDS TO OUR 200 FEET, UH, FACADE, I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE AVERAGING WAS IMP WHY, WHY IT WORKED OUT THAT WAY. 
          AND I THINK IN TERMS OF OBJECTIVE STANDARDS, THAT'S AS GOOD AS JUSTIFICATION AS ANY THAT I CAN THINK OF FOR THIS. 
          UM, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          I ASSUME THIS IS THE CASE, BUT IN THE FUTURE, WHEN WE START TO HAVE MORE SPECIFIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE CITY, SINCE THAT'S TOPICS THAT KEEP COMING UP, AND I'M SURE WE WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS OVER TIME, I ASSUME THINGS LIKE THE 250 FOOT FACADE THAT'LL IMMEDIATELY AMEND BASED ON THE SPECIFIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OF THE AREA? YES, DEFINITELY. 
          AND, UM, SMART CODE ACTUALLY HAS A 200 FOOT MAXIMUM. 
          AND THE WAY THAT THIS IS, THE WAY THAT THE CODE IS WRITTEN, IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE TWO, SMART CODE TAKES PRECEDENCE. 
          SO IN THE SMART CODE 200 FEET IS THE MAX. 
          THANK YOU. 
          'CAUSE I'M JUST THINKING AHEAD FOR LONG TERM HISTORIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT WE MIGHT START ADDING OR ANY OTHER KIND OF SUB-COMMUNITY DESIGN EFFORTS THAT I COULD SEE US COMING FORWARD WITH FOLLOWING THE GENERAL PLAN? I DON'T EVEN WANT TO THINK ABOUT FOLLOWING THE GENERAL PLAN, BUT I THINK WE'RE AT THAT POINT. 
          UH, AND THEN THAT'S THE END OF ACTUAL JUST QUESTIONS. 
          AND I WOULD SECOND COMMISSIONER RAKUTEN'S POINT ABOUT BRINGING BACK THE, THE RECESS, THE TWO INCH RECESS, UH, I WAS VERY HAPPY TO SEE AGREEMENT ON THE VINYL ISSUE FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT BEYOND THAT, WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE, UH, RECESS BROUGHT BACK INTO IT. 
          THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. 
          AND I WILL ALSO AGREE WITH THAT, THE TWO SET, TWO INCH, UM, AT LEAST. 
          UM, AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS, UM, COULD, COULD YOU HAVE LIKE, UM, A SLIGHT, YOU KNOW, SO YOU CAN GET AIR CIRCULATION, A SLIDING WINDOW THAT'S NOT REALLY A BALCONY, BUT JUST HAS LIKE A FAKE FACADE. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY YOU DON'T WALK THROUGH IT. 
          I MEAN, I I'VE SEEN THAT IN OTHER PROJECTS. 
          AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE REQUIRED, LIKE A, SO IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE A, A FULL HEIGHT WINDOW OR A DOOR HEIGHT WINDOW, BUT YET YOU 
          [02:35:01]
WOULDN'T HAVE IT OPENING ONTO A BALCONY, IS THAT CORRECT? MM. 
          YEAH. 
          I MEAN, JUST SO YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE MORE, UM, TALK ABOUT JUTS THE FEELING OF, UM, A SETBACK. 
          YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF A SETBACK, YOU WOULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY SET OUT AND SO IT WOULD JUST GIVE DIFFERENT DESIGN STRUCTURES OR TEXTURES. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO IT'S ALLOWABLE. 
          IT'S NOT, IT DOESN'T MEET THE 30%, UM, PLANE CHANGE BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE STRUCTURAL. 
          SO THE JULIET BALCONIES ARE USUALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE IT HAS THE LITTLE FRENCH STYLE RIGHT. 
          BALCONIES. 
          CORRECT. 
          WHICH ARE LOVELY. 
          AND WE DO, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE DEFINITELY ALLOWABLE. 
          THEY JUST WOULDN'T MEET THE FACADE CHANGE BECAUSE AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THEY, THEY AREN'T THE STRUCTURAL BALCONIES, WHICH I THINK WE PUT MINIMUM DISTANCES ON IF I CAN. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT, BUT TO YOUR POINT ABOUT IT BEING USED FOR, FOR AIR CIRCULATION, UM, THIS WOULD NOT PROHIBIT IT, IT WOULD NOT, IT WOULDN'T PROHIBIT IT. 
          SO, SO THEY COULD CONTINUE TO USE THOSE FULL WINDOW, A FULL, LIKE A SLIDER. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          SO THEY HAVE TO PRESENT. 
          SO IT COULD BE PART OF THE DESIGN, IT COULD BE PART OF THIS INCORPORATED. 
          CAN THIS BE PART OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS TO, TO ADD IT INTO IT? YES. 
          WELL, AS OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HAVE A TWO INCH SETBACK OR YOU CAN HAVE OTHER OPTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I, WE CAN ADD IT IN, I GUESS. 
          I GUESS I'M THINKING THAT THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD PROHIBIT A PROJECT FROM DOING THAT, SO LET ME, MAYBE THEY WOULDN'T THINK ABOUT IT. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO IF IT'S, LET ME WORK ON THAT. 
          IF IT'S DESIGN STANDARDS, IT'S SOMETHING THEY COULD REVIEW. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UH, WE CAN DEFINITELY ADD IT IN. 
          IT'S, IT'S JUST THAT WE DON'T PROHIBIT IT CURRENTLY, BUT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO USE IT, IT WOULDN'T APPLY AS A CHANGE OF PLANE ON A FACADE IF YOU'RE TRYING TO USE IT FOR THAT, FOR THAT PURPOSE. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO USE IT FOR A PURPOSE OF INCREASING AIR CIRCULATION, UM, AND NOT AS ANOTHER, ANOTHER DESIGN TOOL, THEN WE CAN DEFINITELY CITE THAT AS A EXAMPLE OF WHAT COULD BE ALLOWED AND WE'LL GO IN THAT DIRECTION. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          GREAT. 
          AND THEN I JUST WANTED, UM, TALK ABOUT THE VINYL WINDOWS. 
          SO ARE THEY ALLOWED, THEY'RE ALLOWED, THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED. 
          WE, IN THIS VERSION, WE REMOVED, WE'RE PROHIBITING VINYL WINDOWS. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT I WAS CONFUSED. 
          AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE COMMENTS MADE. 
          AND, UM, YESTERDAY I WAS AT A SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY MEETING. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT OLDER HOMES AND UPGRADES THAT NEED TO BE DONE PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, FROM LIKE 76, YOU KNOW, UM, AND THAT THERE'S, THERE WERE LIKE 30, 34,000 HOMES BUILT BEFORE THE HIGHER STANDARDS. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT JUST WITH LOW INCOME, JUST, UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THERE WE'RE LOOKING, THE STATE IS LOOKING AT, UM, PROGRAMS, YOU KNOW, SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN UPGRADE SO YOU CAN HAVE HEALTHIER HOMES, BASICALLY. 
          AND SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE VINYL IS EXCLUDED. 
          NOW, IS THAT EXCLUDED? UM, IS THAT A CITYWIDE EXCLUSION OR CAN THAT BE, WELL, AT THIS POINT IN TIME ON THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, IT WOULD ONLY BE AN EXCLUSION FOR QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 
          SO NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, I THINK IF WE WERE TO EXCLUDE THAT CITYWIDE, WE WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT, UM, A MODIFICATION TO THE BUILDING CODE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD GO TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT TO, UM, REPLACE WINDOWS OR WHAT HAVE YOU ON EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. 
          AND WHEN, WHERE WOULD THAT PROCESS HAPPEN? WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD, THAT, UH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT ADDING THAT TO SOME OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING WITH REACH CODE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I THINK. 
          OKAY. 
          [02:40:01]
YEAH. 
          SO TYPICALLY WE, UH, THE BUILDING CODE GETS UPDATED EVERY THREE YEARS AND THAT FOLLOWS, SO WE JUST DID THIS THIS PAST YEAR, UM, UH, 2022. 
          AND SO THE STATE RUNS OFF OF THREE YEAR CYCLES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, AND SO RIGHT. 
          AS NEW EFFICIENCIES OR NEW REQUIREMENTS COME ONLINE, UM, WE WOULD TYPICALLY MAKE ANY OF THOSE CHANGES AT THAT POINT. 
          UM, THAT SAID, UH, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER, UH, WORK PLAN ITEM, UH, IF THERE IS A PRIORITY OR IF THERE'S A NEED, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD, UM, LOOK MORE, UM, LOOK AT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, UM, ON A QUICKER TIMELINE. 
          I'LL JUST ADD TOO, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THAT'S RIGHT WITH THE BUILDING CODE, UH, FOR LOCAL CODE AMENDMENTS, THROUGH OUR BUILDING CODE, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SPECIAL, UH, LOCAL FINDINGS BECAUSE, UH, THROUGH EITHER TOPOGRAPHICAL GEOGRAPHICAL CONCERNS OR CLIMATE CONCERNS. 
          AND I'M SURE WE COULD FIND THOSE FINDINGS TO PROHIBIT VINYL. 
          BUT IN THE INTERIM TOO, FOR ANY PROJECTS THAT COME HERE FOR SPAR, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO CONDITION OR SAY, NO, I DON'T LIKE THE VINYL. 
          REPLACE IT WITH, UH, WHATEVER OTHER WINDOWS MATERIALS ARE BAD YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND I JUST WANNA GO ON TO, UM, QUALITY CONSTRUCTION. 
          UM, HEIDI HAD, YOU KNOW, MADE SOME COMMENTS ON THAT, WHOOPS. 
          UNPLUG MYSELF. 
          UM, AND SO WHEN PROJECTS ARE BUILT, UM, I MEAN, THERE IS A CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW ACROSS THE BOARD WITH ALL BUILDING. 
          SURE. 
          THERE WOULD BE MINIMUM BUILDING STANDARDS THAT THEY WOULD MEET. 
          OKAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I GUESS THE, HER QUESTION WAS MORE OF JUST FOR THE LONG TERM, YOU KNOW, SO THINGS LAST LONGER THAN 20 YEARS. 
          I THINK THAT WAS HER POINT ON THE VINYL WINDOWS WAS THAT THE SORT OF THE, THE LONGEVITY OF A VINYL WINDOW IS FAR LESS THAN A FIBERGLASS WINDOW OR SOME OTHER MATERIAL. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND SHOULDN'T WE BE LOOKING AT, EVEN THOUGH IT COSTS A BIT MORE, IT WOULD LAST LONGER, UM, WHICH WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE RESIDENTS AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, SAY A WINDOW THAT, UM, THROUGH THE PROCESS OF, OF JUST OUR CLIMATE, YOU KNOW, IS WARPING AND, AND EVENTUALLY IN 10 OR 15 YEARS IS, UM, NOT AIRTIGHT, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S, IT'S BECOMING DRAFTY OR LETTING MOISTURE IN, BUT IT DOESN'T GET REPLACED. 
          UM, RIGHT. 
          AND SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE A, A WINDOW THAT'S NOT, NOT FUNCTIONING AS IT SHOULD, BUT YET ON BY THE SAME TOKEN, IT'S NOT BEING REPLACED. 
          WHEREAS IF WE GO WITH A HIGHER STANDARD, THEN WE WOULD GET A LONGER LIFE OUT OF THE WINDOW. 
          UM, AND IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE REPLACEMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          WHICH WOULD BE BETTER FOR TENANTS OVERALL. 
          AND THEN WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SHADE STRUCTURES INSTEAD OF SHADE STRUCTURES, IS THERE, UM, WAYS TO BUILD THE WINDOWS MAYBE FACING, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN DIRECTIONS? CAN THE GLASS BE MORE EFFICIENT? IT CAN. 
          AND I BELIEVE, UH, CAL GREEN HAS REQUIREMENTS ON, UM, GLASS AND ON, UM, GLAZING AND SUCH. 
          RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          GLAZING TO, TO REDUCE SOME SOLAR GAIN AND SUCH. 
          SO THAT IS, IS GOING TO BE COVERED UNDER THE, UM, BUILDING CODE AND, AND CAL GREEN, UH, MANDATORY STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO THAT'S ALREADY MM-HMM. 
          . 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE. 
          THEY'VE ASKED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE DOWN HERE SO I CAN ERASE 'EM. 
          UM, I GUESS THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. 
          I, I JUST THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE DESIGNS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST THE PICTURES THAT WERE SENT TO US, YOU KNOW, I'VE OBSERVED THIS JUST HOW UGLY BUILDINGS CAN BE JUST BY NOT HAVING, YOU KNOW, RECESSED, UM, WINDOWS. 
          I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF TEXTURE AND ESPECIALLY IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, BUT ESPECIALLY UNLIKE BOULEVARDS, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THEM AND WE JUST NEED TO DO BETTER JUST ACROSS THE BOARD. 
          THAT'S A, A GREAT COMMENT. 
          I KNOW THAT, UM, THE STAKEHOLDERS THIS FALL SPENT A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME REFLECTING ON WHAT ARE THOSE, THOSE SORT OF CORE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT REALLY FUNDAMENTALLY CONTRIBUTE TO, UM, WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TO BE A, A SATISFACTORY QUALITY DESIGN OR HIGH QUALITY DESIGN. 
          UM, AND I KNOW THAT, THAT THEY WENT INTO, UH, THEIR WORK REVIEWING THE DRAFT WITH THAT IN MIND AND TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THEY WERE, UH, INCORPORATING 
          [02:45:01]
THOSE DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT ARE REALLY CRITICAL TO A FUNDAMENTALLY WELL-DESIGNED BUILDING. 
          UM, WHICH THEN ALLOWS IT, YOU KNOW, ALLOWS THE STANDARDS TO BE ACHIEVABLE, FEASIBLE, AND IMPLEMENTABLE, WHICH IS ONE OF OUR GOALS AS WELL, GIVEN THAT, UM, THE INTENT OF, OF A QUALIFYING RESIDENTIAL PROJECT IS TO CONTRIBUTE TO HOUSING PRODUCTION AND TO ALLEVIATE THE HOUSING CRISIS. 
          SO, UH, I THINK THE MOVE TO, UH, REQUIRE THE RECESS IS A GOOD MOVE IN, UM, ACHIEVING, UH, UH, SATISFACTORY OR HIGH QUALITY FUNDAMENTAL DESIGN. 
          AND, AND I REALLY DON'T THINK, UM, I HATE THE WORD LOW INCOME HOUSING, UM, BUT IT SHOULD NOT LOOK DIFFERENT. 
          CORRECT. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, THAN WHAT IS NEXT DOOR. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT. 
          UM, WELL, I DO HAVE A COMMENT THAT I THINK YOU GUYS DID A REALLY GREAT JOB BECAUSE I WASN'T AT THE LAST MEETING. 
          AND THE STAFF REPORT WAS GREAT, BUT I MEAN, UM, THE COMMENTS, YOU, YOU, THE COMMISSION DID A FANTASTIC JOB. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          THAT WAS A LOT OF WORK AND STAFF ALSO. 
          WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, WE ARE GOING TO PIVOT STRAIGHT TO A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM. 
          WE HAVE ONE PERSON WHO'S BEEN WAITING QUITE A WHILE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. 
          IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND BRING IT TO THE CLERK. 
          I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY WE'LL HAVE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE DAIS. 
          UH, I JUST WANTED TO ASK, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING? YES, WE RECEIVED FOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. 
          UH, THEY HAVE BEEN POSTED ONLINE AND THEY'RE ALSO AVAILABLE IN THE BACK, UH, FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO READ. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ERIC. 
          TAKE IT AWAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, YEAH, MY NAME'S ERIC LELAND. 
          I'M REPRESENTING RELIEF PETALUMA TONIGHT. 
          UM, I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL AND THE PEOPLE NOT IN THE ROOM WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THESE DRAFT STANDARDS, IT'S A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF GREAT PEOPLE. 
          UM, AND WE APPRECIATE IT FOCUSES ON TREE CANOPY. 
          UM, THERE'S A COUPLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFINEMENTS WE HOPE YOU'LL CONSIDER. 
          AND IN LIGHT OF SOME OF THE INFORMATION I HEARD TONIGHT, CHANGING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE SAYING. 
          BUT THE FIRST ITEM IS THE, UH, UH, ITEM ON, UH, LINE 2 0 2 ABOUT SHADE TREES SHALL BE PROVIDED IN PARKING LOTS SO THAT THE AVERAGE ESTIMATED CANOPY DIAMETER AT 15 YEARS OF AGE COVERS 50% OF THE SURFACE, BUT THE LANGUAGE ALLOWS LATER ON LINE 2 0 8 FOR THE TREES TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT SUBSTITUTED BY SOLAR PANELS, SHADE STRUCTURES. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT WAS A COMPROMISE, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO, UM, RATCHET THAT BACK BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY LOST THE ABILITY TO HAVE TREES BETWEEN THE, UM, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND THE, AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING. 
          UM, AND IN ADDITION, I, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN EMPHASIZE THE ROOFTOP OPTIONS, AND IN PARTICULAR, ONE OF THE GRAPHICS SHOWED A ROOFTOP OPTION WITH SHADING, AND THE SHADING WAS CLOTH, COULD BE PANELS. 
          AND ANYWAY, I THINK WE CAN GET CREATIVE THERE, UM, AND TRY TO FIT IN MORE TREES. 
          PARKING IS ONE OF THOSE PLACES THAT IT IS A DOMINANT AMOUNT OF SPACE, UH, AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, TREES ARE GONNA GROW BIGGER. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE WITH CANOPY TREES. 
          AND TECHNOLOGY WITH SOLAR IS GOING TO BECOME MORE AND MORE EFFICIENT. 
          WE'RE GONNA BE DEVELOPING LESS TO PARKING ITSELF AND LESS TO PANELS ITSELF OVER TIME. 
          UM, THE SECOND IS, UH, RECOMMENDATION OR TWEAK, IF YOU WILL, UM, IS ON LINE 3 58 SAYS TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT A RATIO OF NO LESS THAN ONE TREE PER 500 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, THIS WAY OF TALKING ABOUT IT MAY HAVE THE EFFECT OF ENCOURAGING SMALLER TREES RATHER THAN THE LARGER SHADE CAN CANOPY TREES THAT WE NEED, UH, TO COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, ONE SMALL TREE WITHIN 500 SQUARE FEET LEAVES A VERY LARGE AREA EXPOSED. 
          SO THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN, UH, SO PLEASE CONSIDER, CONSIDER WRITING THIS DIFFERENTLY. 
          A A 30% TREE CANOPY COVERAGE REQUIREMENT FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT WAY TO LOOK AT IT. 
          BUT WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT YOU COULD HAVE FEWER LARGER CANOPY TREES, THE ONES WE REALLY NEED. 
          UM, I THINK THIS PERCENTAGE APPROACH TARGETS MORE PRECISELY WHAT I THINK WE'RE ALL AFTER HERE WITH THE TREES, UM, INCREASING COVERAGE, UH, OF THE CANOPY. 
          UH, AGAIN, APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ERIC. 
          WITH THAT, WE WILL CLOSE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'LL PIVOT BACK NOW TO COMMISSIONER COMMENT. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER WIMAN. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, WANT TO RECOGNIZE, UM, REALLY, UM, EXCELLENT WORK AS STAFF AND, AND ALSO THE COMMISSION AS, AS VICE MAYOR ALLUDED TO, UM, TO, TO PRODUCE THIS IN, IN THE TIMEFRAME. 
          AND WITH ALL THE INPUT THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN FROM MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS 
          [02:50:01]
AND EXPERTS. 
          UM, SO, UH, APPRECIATE ALL THOSE EFFORTS. 
          UM, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, MY OVERALL COMMENT IS IT IT REALLY TOUGH TO BALANCE THE INTEREST BETWEEN WANTING TO PROVIDE A VISION, UM, OF THE CITY, REFLECTS THE, THE, THE VALUES OF THE CITY, UM, BUT ALSO PRESERVES, UM, SOME AVENUE FOR CREATIVITY. 
          AND, UM, I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CITY WOULD REALLY BENEFIT FROM, UM, YOU KNOW, RESISTING TOO MUCH UNIFORMITY. 
          AND I THINK ONCE YOU START TALKING STANDARDS, UM, AND THEY'RE NECESSARY OBVIOUSLY FOR THE, FOR THE REASONS STATED, UM, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO BE OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE ON THOSE STANDARDS. 
          UM, AND THEN END UP WITH, YOU KNOW, A VERY KIND, KIND OF HOMOGENOUS LANDSCAPE OF ARCHITECTURE. 
          SO, UM, I, I, I APPRECIATE, I, I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB HERE BALANCING THOSE TWO INTERESTS, THOSE TWO COMPETING INTERESTS. 
          UM, SO I RECOGNIZE THAT I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE GO FORWARD, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, I, I WOULD JUST WANT TO ADVOCATE ON THE SIDE OF, OF PROVIDING MORE OR MORE OPENNESS TO CREATIVITY AND LESS SPECIFICITY. 
          UM, I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS WHERE, WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT IN THIS DOCUMENT BY, UH, FOR INSTANCE, UM, ADDING, UH, GIVING OPTIONALITY, IN OTHER WORDS, SAYING, OUT OF THESE, OUT OF THESE SIX ELEMENTS, CHOOSE THREE, RIGHT? RATHER THAN SAYING, DO THESE THREE. 
          UM, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, UH, I'D ADVOCATE TO, TO LEAN MORE ON THOSE TYPES OF, OF, UM, UH, THOSE TYPES OF OPTIONS WITHIN THE STANDARDS. 
          UM, UM, AND ALSO TO PROVIDE SOME GUIDANCE ON THE AESTHETIC THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. 
          UM, AND LESS SO ON SPECIFIC MATERIALS OR EVEN SPECIFIC ELEMENTS. 
          SO FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, I, I'M, I'M IN FAVOR OF RESTRICTING THE, UM, YOU KNOW, VINYL WINDOW, UM, FOR ALL THE REASONS STATED. 
          UM, BUT I THINK WHAT, WHAT THE IDEA THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT THERE IS WE DON'T WANT SOMETHING CHEAP LOOKING. 
          WE DON'T WANT SOMETHING SHINY. 
          AND I KNOW THOSE AESTHETICS ARE, ARE DIFFICULT TO PUT WORDS TO. 
          UM, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO, TO TRY TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THAT DIRECTION RATHER THAN BEING OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE ON A CERTAIN MATERIAL OR EVEN CERTAIN DIMENSIONS, AND TRY TO DESCRIBE THE STANDARDS, UM, IN A, IN A MORE GENERAL WAY. 
          SO WE, WE GET THE AESTHETIC THAT WE WANT, BUT WE DON'T RESTRICT, UM, CREATIVITY. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, HAVING BEEN SAID, UM, I, I DON'T, OTHER THAN THE QUESTIONS I ASKED, UH, EARLIER, I DON'T HAVE ANY, ANY OTHER SPECIFIC, UM, UM, REQUESTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODIFICATIONS. 
          UM, LIKE I SAID, I THINK THEY, A LOT OF HEAVY LIFTING WAS DONE, YOU KNOW, IN THE FOUR OR SO HOURS, UM, UH, OF THE LAST, UH, MEETING. 
          SO, UM, I'LL RESERVE MY, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE MY MIND HAVING HEARD, UH, MAYBE OR, OR IN REACTION TO OTHER COMMISSIONERS. 
          BUT, UH, I THINK I'LL LET MY COMMENTS REST. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER ESON. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND YEAH, THERE'S A LOT ABOUT THIS THAT'S WRESTLING WITH MAINTAINING THAT FLEXIBILITY AND LETTING ON A PRO PER PROJECT BASIS, DESIGNERS DO WHAT THEY DO, UM, BUT STILL HAVING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT COMPLY. 
          YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THIS HAS SPARKED A LOT OF GOOD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT IS THAT ESSENCE OF GOOD DESIGN THAT WE WANNA SEE. 
          WHAT IS THE MOST REALISTIC WAY THAT THAT CONVERSATION MOVES OUT OF JUST THE ODS? IS IT DESIGN GUIDELINES, WHICH WE'VE SEEN CITIES WITH KIND OF ROBUST DESIGN GUIDELINE DOCUMENTS THAT SHOW DIFFERENT TYPES OF ARCHITECTURE AND MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO CHOOSE FROM, BUT OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT PRESCRIPTIVE OR REQUIRING THEM. 
          UM, SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT COULD ALSO BE SORT OF AS A FILTER EVEN FOR DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS. 
          IS THAT THE KIND OF OFFSHOOT, 'CAUSE I'VE HEARD IT IN KIND OF WHAT THE VICE MAYOR'S BEEN SAYING, LIKE SOME OF THESE IDEAS SHOULD PROBABLY PERCOLATE OUTSIDE OF JUST THIS ENVIRONMENT. 
          HOW, HOW DOES THAT SHOW UP, DO YOU THINK? WELL, I, I FEEL THAT ONE OF THE STRUGGLES IN DEVELOPING THE CONTENT WAS THAT WE, WE COULDN'T TURN TO DESIGN GUIDELINES AND SAY, OKAY, THESE ARE THE FEATURES THAT WE WANT TO SEE. 
          NOW, HOW DO WE CREATE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS OUT OF THEM? UH, SO I, I THINK THAT, UM, YOU 
          [02:55:01]
KNOW, ONE OF THE CRITICISMS WE OFTEN HEAR FROM PROJECTS THAT COME FORWARD IS, IS THE CHALLENGES OF GETTING A PROJECT APPROVED IN PETALUMA. 
          I THINK PART OF THAT CHALLENGE IS BECAUSE WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT ARTICULATE OUR VISION FOR WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN OUR COMMUNITIES. 
          UM, WELL NOT IN OUR COMMUNITY BROADLY, BUT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND, AND SPECIFIC AREAS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          SO I, I WOULD, UM, I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR A PROCESS TO DEVELOP DESIGN GUIDELINES. 
          UM, THE QUESTION IS, WHERE DOES THAT, WHERE DOES THAT COME IN AND HAPPEN, GIVEN THE MULTITUDE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON CURRENTLY? SO IS THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE LOOK AT ADDING A POLICY TO THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, THAT THAT COULD GET AT, AT SORT OF, UH, A POLICY THAT WOULD, WOULD SEEK TO ENHANCE, YOU KNOW, CHARACTER AND, AND SUCH. 
          AND SO DESIGN GUIDELINES IS ONE TOOL FOR DOING THAT, FOR SORT OF ENSURING AND EXTENDING COMMUNITY CHARACTER. 
          UM, AND THEN IS THAT THE BEST PLACE FOR IT? AND THEN HOW, AT WHAT TIMEFRAME WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? SO I THINK THAT'S A CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE COMING OUT OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          THE LESSONS WE'VE LEARNED DURING THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROCESS, UM, AND THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, QUITE FRANKLY THE, THE, UM, THE FORM-BASED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT MARIN COUNTY WORKED ON THAT REALLY STARTED ABOUT A YEAR AFTER OURS DID, WAS, WAS A PRETTY NEW APPROACH TO THINKING ABOUT HOW, UM, YOU, YOU HAVE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT CAN BE VERY SENSITIVE TO, TO CONTEXT WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S OPPORTUNITY THERE TO REFLECT ON SOME BEST PRACTICES AND TO LOOK AT WHAT MIGHT BE THE RIGHT APPROACH AND THE BEST APPROACH THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO ACHIEVE WHAT WE WANT. 
          WHICH I THINK ALSO GETS TO COMMISSIONER WESTMAN'S POINT OF, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE GUIDE TOWARDS WHAT WE PREFER AND WHAT WE SEEK BECAUSE WE DON'T WANNA STIFLE THE CREATIVE PROCESS THAT OFTENTIMES CAN RESULT IN SOME IN SUPERIOR DESIGN. 
          WELL, I APPRECIATE SUCH A THOROUGH AND INSIGHTFUL RESPONSE, AND LIKE WITH MOST THINGS, WE'RE GONNA UNFORTUNATELY HAVE TO MOVE TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND TO COUNSEL TO CARRY THESE FORWARD, BUT I, I THINK I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT WILL, WILL HAPPEN. 
          UH, AND I WANNA SAY ABOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT, I ALMOST JUMPED OUTTA MY SEAT BECAUSE THOSE WERE SOME OF THE EXACT SAME. 
          I WAS TRYING TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT IT, MY QUESTION PERIOD, BUT IT WAS JUST A COMMENT. 
          UH, AND PRETTY MUCH THE EXACT SAME THINGS. 
          AND IN THINKING ABOUT LINE TWO 11, ABOUT SOLAR PANEL SHADING, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO HAVE SOLAR PLA UH, SOLAR PANELS SUPPLANT THE 50% CANOPY REQUIREMENT FOR TREES, I'M WONDERING IF WE CAN WORK SOMETHING IN THERE WHERE INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING TREES ALONG THE PERIMETER, WE COULD SAY AT LEAST 30%. 
          AND THE REASON THAT 30% NUMBER COMES UP IS IN OUR DRAFT URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN. 
          AND WITH A LOT OF CITIES, THAT'S KIND OF THE SWEET SPOT TARGET NUMBER, IF WE COULD SAY, NOT THIS LANGUAGE, OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING MUCH NICER, BUT, UM, INSTEAD OF 50% CANOPY COVERAGE THAT CAN BE REPLACED WITH SOLAR PANELS, BUT THEN THERE MUST BE AT LEAST AN ADDITIONAL 30% COVERAGE OF THE PARKING LOT BY TREES AT THAT 15 YEAR CANOPY METRIC. 
          SO IF YOU'RE GONNA NOT, BASICALLY, IF YOU'RE GONNA NOT DO 50% TREE CANOPY, YOU HAVE TO DO 50% SOLAR AND THEN ADD AN ADDITIONAL 30% TREE CANOPY ELSEWHERE. 
          AND I SEE FROM HEATHER'S FACE, THAT IS NOT THE MOST ELOQUENT WAY TO PUT IT AND , BUT I'M WONDERING IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED RATHER THAN ALONG THE PERIMETER. 
          I, I, I THINK THAT I, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE, THE BENEFITS OF TREE CANOPY MM-HMM. 
           VERSUS THE BENEFITS OF SOLAR POWER GENERATION AND, AND SORT OF WORKING THROUGH THAT CONVERSATION AND MAYBE WE'RE, WE'RE HAVING THAT CONVERSATION THROUGH THE, THE BLUEPRINT, UM, POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OR THE TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. 
          UM, I'M A BIT CON, I'M A BIT CONCERNED TO, TO TRY TO ADVANCE WHAT SEEMS TO BE, I MEAN, WE, WE, WE RECOGNIZE THE BENEFITS OF BOTH, RIGHT? WELL, THAT'S, YEAH. 
          WHY CHOOSE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE NEED TO, TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND SORT OF PIT THE BENEFITS AGAINST ONE ANOTHER AND COME TO A CONCLUSION AT THE POLICY LEVEL RATHER THAN TRY TO DO IT HERE AT, AT THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          SO THAT'S MY FIRST THOUGHT. 
          AND I'VE, I'VE FELT, UM, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF YEARS 
          [03:00:01]
AGO I WORKED ON A PROJECT THAT, THAT TENSION WAS VERY REAL OF THAT THE PROJECT WAS TRYING TO PRODUCE A NET ZERO BUILDING, BUT THE TRADE-OFF WAS, IT WASN'T GOING TO HAVE VERY MUCH TREE CANOPY ON SITE AS A RESULT OF THAT. 
          AND, AND SO THERE WAS A VERY REAL TENSION THERE ABOUT WHAT, WHAT DO YOU WANT? YOU WANT BOTH, RIGHT? YOU WANT TREE CANOPY AND NET ZERO. 
          UM, BUT IF YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT, THEN, THEN WHAT DOES YOUR POLICY LOOK LIKE THAT GUIDES THAT DECISION MAKING PROCESS. 
          SO THAT, BUT THEN I'LL LET HEATHER, UM, TALK PROBABLY IN MORE DETAIL. 
          UM, SO IT, IT LOOKS LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO CHANGE THAT WE CAN, UM, SO I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT WITH, WITH THE REST OF THE COMMISSION THEN. 
          WELL, AND I'LL, I'LL ADD ONTO THAT, THAT I DO ECHO THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, MAKING THAT AS WELL A CANOPY GOAL RATHER THAN THE EVERY 500 SQUARE FEET IS A 30% COVERAGE. 
          I LIKE THE 15 YEAR MATURE TREE FROM OVERHEAD METRIC. 
          I THINK THAT GETS SPECIFIC ENOUGH. 
          UH, AND YEAH, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT SOLAR VERSUS TREES AND I HATE MAKING IT A BATTLE BECAUSE I THINK BOTH ARE NEEDED, AND TREES OBVIOUSLY ARE A LOT MORE THAN JUST SHADE. 
          I MEAN, THEY ARE THE SKELETON UPON WHICH ECOSYSTEMS ARE BUILT. 
          AND I THINK WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T NEGLECT THAT EVEN IN OUR URBAN SPACES. 
          'CAUSE AS, ESPECIALLY AS WE DO INFILL, YOU KNOW, OUR URBAN SPACES ARE GONNA NEED TO FLEX AND OFF ALSO OFFER HABITAT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          UH, SO YEAH, LIKE I SAID, I KNEW THAT WAS AN IN ELEGANT WAY OF PHRASING IT. 
          AND I GUESS, ANDREW, FROM YOUR RESPONSE, DO YOU THINK THAT IS KIND OF A BRIDGE TOO FAR FOR PARKING LOT COVERAGE TO BASICALLY REQUIRE 80% THAT IF YOU'RE NOT GOING 50% ON TREE CANOPY COVERAGE, NOW YOU NEED TO GO 80% WITH AT LEAST 50% SOLAR. 
          I MEAN, IS THAT JUST A BRIDGE TOO FAR IN YOUR MIND? AND THEN, YEAH, I'D LOVE TO HEAR THE, WHAT COMMISSIONER SAID. 
          I, I THINK IT'S, I THINK THIS IS THE WRONG, THE WRONG INSTRUMENT TO DO THAT IN. 
          UM, AND, AND THIS IS A MORE PRAGMATIC APPROACH. 
          IT'S, IT'S AN INCREMENTAL APPROACH FOR SURE. 
          UH, AND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US HAVE A A, THE POLICY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, UM, BEFORE WE GO MUCH FURTHER ON IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AS IT RELATES TO, AS IT RELATES TO PARKING LOT COVERAGE, THE OTH THE OTHER ONE, I'M FINE WITH. 
          THE OTHER ONE I WOULD RECOMMEND, HOW DO WE REDUCE THAT FROM ONE TREE EVERY 500 SQUARE FEET? WHAT DO YOU, WHAT, WHAT IS THE RIGHT NUMBER? UM, IS IT 300 FEET? IS IT 250 FEET? AND, AND SO HOW DO WE, UM, WE THINK ABOUT THAT OR, OR FOR THAT ONE, COULD WE MOVE TO A CANOPY PERCENTAGE METRIC OF OPEN SPACE? YEAH. 
          THE 500 SQUARE FEET CAME OUT OF SPAR DIRECTLY FROM THE SPAR GUIDELINES FOR LANDSCAPING. 
          AND SO, UM, ON THAT CHECKLIST, SO MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO 30% ON OPEN SPACE, IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION TO, TO CHANGE THAT TO A 30% OPEN SPACE. 
          AND I SEE, I SEE A FEW NODDING HEADS, SO I'M FINE WITH THAT IF THAT'S THE WILL. 
          AND THEN CAN YOU REMIND US REALLY QUICK ON THAT PARKING ISSUE? WHAT WAS THE VERSION BEFORE? I BELIEVE IT WAS UP TO 25%, COULD BE SOLAR AND 25% TREE, IS THAT RIGHT? IT WAS UP TO 50% OF THE TREES OF THE, SO THE REQUIRED SHADING IS, IS 50% AND THEN UP TO 50% OF THE 50%. 
          SO YES, 25% COULD BE SOLAR PANELS. 
          AND THEN THE INSTRUCTION SEEMED LIKE THE CONSENSUS WAS TO CHANGE IT TO A BIGGER NUMBER. 
          BUT THAT'S, IF YOU GUYS WANNA ROLL IT BACK, THAT'S OKAY TOO. 
          I KNOW WE'RE MISSING MEMBERS, BUT YEAH, PLEASE. 
          SO I'M GONNA BIFURCATE THIS A LITTLE BIT. 
          WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF GIVING GENERAL COMMENT, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD ADDRESS THIS IN ITS OWN BUBBLE NOW. 
          'CAUSE IT'S A GREAT POINT. 
          UM, IT, ONE THING, AND YOU JUST RAISED WHAT I WAS GONNA RAISE. 
          WE ARE MISSING MEMBERS. 
          SO THIS IS A NEW, THIS IS EFFECTIVELY A NEW POLICY PUSH WHILE WE DON'T HAVE A FULL COMMISSION. 
          THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS I ALSO VERY MUCH SEE ANDREW'S POINT OF THIS BEING THE WRONG PLACE FOR THIS POLICY. 
          AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT COVERAGE FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, LAST MEETING WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, OKAY, WE'RE MANDATING 50% COVERAGE. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S THE BUCKET WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          DO WE ALLOW THE COMPLETE 50% TO BE SOLAR OR IS IT THE SPLIT? RIGHT? THAT WAS THE KIND OF THE CRUX OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAD. 
          THEN LOOKING AT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW WE'RE REALLY GETTING INTO A BROADER DISCUSSION OF, OKAY, WELL IF WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO THAT MUCH SOLAR, 
          [03:05:01]
FOR EXAMPLE, UM, WE NEED TO START AS A CITY TALKING ABOUT WHERE DO WE HAVE SUSTAINABLE ENERGY GAPS? ARE WE REQUIRING BATTERY STORAGE ON SITE? DO WE, ARE THERE SPOTS WHERE WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE TREE COVERAGE BECAUSE WE HAVE A COVERAGE ISSUE? OR ARE THERE SPOTS WHERE WE NEED TO COVER PRIORITIZE SOLAR BECAUSE WE HAVE RENEWABLE ENERGY ISSUE? DO WE HAVE A BROADER, BROADER MICROGRID POLICY AS A CITY? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE DO, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THESE ARE STIPULATIONS THAT WOULD COME WITH IT. 
          NOW THAT WE'RE PASSING OUT OF THIS KIND OF SAFE BUCKET AREA, UH, IT REALLY STARTS TO EAT INTO BROADER CITYWIDE POLICY DISCUSSION. 
          UH, I'M GONNA ASK, I'M GONNA ASK THE OTHER, OR COMMISSIONER WEISSMAN AND THE VICE MAYOR TO WEIGH IN AS WELL. 
          UH, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND JUST GOING OFF OF THIS IS BECAUSE WE ARE AGAIN, LIMITED TO THE FOUR, AND BECAUSE THIS IS BROADER CONSIDERATION, I WOULD PERSONALLY BE FINE WITH GOING BACK TO 25% SOLAR, 25% TREE COVERAGE FOR OBJECTIVE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND THEN AS THE CITY, WE CAN HAVE THE BROADER DISCUSSION OF WHAT ARE WE MANDATING FOR RENEWABLES. 
          'CAUSE UH, TO BE FAIR, TO BE FRANK, AND THIS IS JUST MY OPINION, UH, WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO AS A CITY IN TERMS OF DISCUSSING WHAT OUR RENEWABLE GRID LOOKS LIKE, HOW THAT GETS MAPPED OUT, HOW THAT GETS PRIORITIZED. 
          SO IT'S ABSOLUTELY FAIR TO DISCUSS WHERE IS IT NEEDED. 
          JUST AS FROM MANY MEETINGS NOW, WE'VE ABSOLUTELY CLARIFIED WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO WHEN IT COMES TO TREE COVERAGE. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S SO MUCH OF WHAT'S BEEN RAISED. 
          SO AT LEAST IF WE KEEP IT TO THIS KIND OF LIMITED COMPROMISE, I THINK THAT ALLOWS US TO COME OUT WITH A REASONABLE ASSERTION FOR OBJECTIVE DESIGN WITH IT BEING KEPT IN MIND THAT AS A CITY, WE HAVE TWO AREAS THAT WE VERY MUCH NEED TO HAVE THAT POLICY DISCUSSION ON. 
          I'M GONNA STOP GRANDSTANDING THOUGH. 
          I'M GONNA GO TO COMMISSIONER WIMAN AND THEN VICE MAYOR THOMPSON. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I, I THINK I, I, I'D AGREE WITH THE IDEA THAT THIS IS A, A VERY NARROW, UM, FORUM AND AND TOPIC TO BE TRYING TO ACHIEVE BOTH OBJECTIVES OF TREE CANOPY AND, AND SOLAR. 
          UM, I WOULD SAY WITHIN HAVING SAID THAT, WITHIN THIS FORUM, I WOULD WANT, I WOULD RESIST, UM, THE, THE PUSH TOWARDS SCALING BACK THE SOLAR JUST BECAUSE, UM, AS THE PUBLIC COMMENT COMMENTER, UM, STATED, THERE ARE LIMITED AREAS TO DO BOTH, BUT ESPECIALLY WITH SOLAR, THERE'S A LOT OF RESTRICTIONS AROUND WHERE YOU CAN CITE IT FOR PROXIMITY TO, YOU KNOW, THE POINT OF INTERCON ELECTRICAL INTERCONNECTION, SHADING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          UM, UM, SO, SO PARKING LOTS IS ONE AREA OTHER THAN ROOFTOPS THAT, THAT REALLY ALLOWS, UM, A GOOD PLACE FOR SOLAR, WHETHER, WHETHER NOT A LOT OF OTHER OPTIONS. 
          UM, AND I THINK AS WE LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE FROM A CODE PERSPECTIVE, ENCOURAGING ELECTRIFICATION, UM, NOT ONLY OF, UM, BUILDINGS, IN THIS CASE, RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS, UM, BUT ALSO OF TRANSPORT AND WANTING TO ENCOURAGE ELECTRIFICATION TO TRANSPORT AND HAVING THAT TRANSPORT, WHICH IS, WHICH IS, WILL BECOME THE GREATEST CONSUMER OF ELECTRICITY IN THIS CASE, RENEWABLE ENERGY. 
          I THINK IT WOULD BE GOING IN IN THE WRONG DIRECTION TO THEN TAKE THAT GREATEST LOAD FOR ELECTRIFICATION, WHICH IS VEHICLES, WHICH VEHICLES WILL BE PARKED HERE, AND GOING AWAY FROM, UM, THE SOLAR GENERATION AT THE SITE OF THAT, OF THAT, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT LOAD INCREASE IN ELECTRIFICATION. 
          SO, I MEAN, THO THOSE ARE KIND OF MY COMMENTS AND, AND MY PERSPECTIVE, I'M, I'M, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTIVE OF, FROM A BROADER PERSPECTIVE, LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS WHERE WE CAN, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE OR MANDATE, UH, CANOPY, UM, FULL AGREEMENT. 
          AND I, AND I THINK THAT THAT LARGER DISCUSSION GIVES US LITERALLY A LARGER LANDSCAPE TO, TO ENCOURAGE THOSE, THOSE, UM, TREE CANOPY, UM, OBJECTIVES. 
          OKAY. 
          VICE MAYOR, I WOULD AGREE WITH KIND OF ALL THE ENTIRE CONVERSATION. 
          I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S COMPLICATED AND UM, A LOT OF TIMES IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE SITE KIND OF DEPENDS ON, UM, WHAT DIRECTION YOU'RE GONNA BE GOING, WHETHER IT'S GONNA BE ON THE ROOF OR IF IT'S GONNA BE JUST CAR COVERAGE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK, UM, IT, IT'S ALMOST, UM, SIDE BY SIDE THAT YOU'D HAVE TO LOOK AT TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS. 
          [03:10:01]
AND I DO APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, SEPARATING THE TWO OUT AND NOT PUTTING IT THROUGH THE DESIGNS THROUGH THIS PROCESS. 
          I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE, UM, CERTAINLY DISCUSSION OUTSIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROCESS. 
          AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          I MEAN, I THINK IT COULD, THERE'S OTHER MEANS, UM, TO, UM, FOR THIS DISCUSSION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF LIKE VISUALIZING, YOU KNOW, WHERE A PROJECT MIGHT BE AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO DETERMINE, UM, WHAT IT'S, WHAT THE LAYOUT IS. 
          SO I THINK THEY DO NEED TO BE SEPARATED OUT, BUT, UM, IT'S COMPLICATED , YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO GO ELECTRIFICATION AND YET YOU'RE FINDING THAT, UM, I MEAN I PERSONALLY DON'T LIKE DRIVING AROUND AND JUST SEEING ALL THESE CARPORTS COVERED. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S AN AESTHETIC ISSUE ALSO. 
          SO THAT'S, OH, I HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, SO THIS, THIS BRINGS US TO BACK TO ANOTHER ISSUE, WHICH IS WE, WE WERE GONNA HAVE TO FIND CONSENSUS ON THIS. 
          UM, AND AS MUCH AS I WOULD ALWAYS VOTE FOR MORE TREE COVER, I DO FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALMOST SPLIT, UH, FROM THAT. 
          AND THE MAJORITY LAST TIME LED US TO WHERE WE ARE. 
          UM, SO I THINK IN THAT VEIN, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE KEEP WHAT'S HERE NOW THIS WILL GO THROUGH COUNCIL AS WELL, SO OF COURSE, I'M SURE STAFF HAS ALREADY MARKED THIS AREA SINCE WE'VE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT THIS MUCH. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT MAKE SURE THAT'S DISCUSSED AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL AS WELL. 
          UH, 'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE YEAH, OUR, OUR BODY HAS GONE OVER THIS AND IT FEELS LIKE WHERE WE'VE LANDED. 
          YI MEAN UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE FACT THAT THERE'S ONLY FOUR OF US WE COULD HAVE, WE COULD, I THINK, SAFELY AT LEAST DISCUSS, HEY, ARE WE GOING BACK TO 25 25? ARE WE GOING 100%? EITHER WAY IT'S THE ADDING BEYOND THE 50% WHERE I, I SUSPECT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE BYPASSING OR PASSING THE LINE OF WE ARE A LAND USE, SOMEWHAT LEGISLATIVE BODY TO PASSING A LINE TO WHERE COUNCIL'S PROBABLY SUPPOSED TO BE SETTING POLICY. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS OF JUST BECAUSE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE OBJECTIVE AND NOT NECESSARILY US CREATING NEW POLICY QUITE YET. 
          WELL, YEAH, AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMISSIONERS OFTEN OFFERING COMMENT AND BEING WILLING TO GO DOWN THAT LINE OF DISCUSSION. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, THOSE WERE KIND OF MY TWO BIG ITEMS. I DO WANNA POINT OUT AT THE LAST MEETING, AGAIN ON THE RECORD, THAT WE'RE NO LONGER DEALING WITH TREES, EFFACING, STREET FRONTAGES OR ANY, ANY TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH WAS KIND OF A BIG THING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE TREE COMMITTEE AND PBA JOINT MEETING. 
          UH, SO UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T HAVE THAT TO WORK WITH, BUT I DO WANNA CALL OUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE NO ARTIFICIAL TURF IN HERE. 
          THE IPMP IS STILL INCLUDED. 
          WE'VE CALLED OUT SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF POSITIVES THAT FALL IN LINE WITH CITY POLICY DIRECTIONS THAT PEOPLE ARE EXCITED ABOUT, AND I THINK A LOT OF THAT'S REFLECTED HERE. 
          UH, SO YES, THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR ENGAGING IN THAT LONG PROCESS AND GIVING US AN OUTPUT THAT I THINK COVERS US PRETTY WELL FOR THE NEAR FUTURE UNTIL THOSE DESIGN GUIDELINES OR SOMETHING ELSE COMES OUT OF THE WOODWORK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, I ALSO WANT TO, I WANNA THANK STAFF FOR GETTING US THROUGH TO THIS POINT. 
          I WANNA THANK THE COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS. 
          I THINK EVERY TIMELINE CHART YOU'VE SHOWN US THUS FAR HAS HAD SEVERAL DOZEN PEOPLE ATTACHED, ESPECIALLY FROM THE LAND USE AND THE ARCHITECTURE COMMUNITY HERE. 
          I, I ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS A OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARD FOR PETALUMA THAT WAS LARGELY CREATED AND REFLECTED ON BY EXPERTS IN PETALUMA. 
          I THINK SOMETIMES ONE OF THE ISSUES WE RUN INTO IS WE HAVE UNIQUE ISSUES AND SOMETIMES WE'RE LOOKING AT CASE STUDIES THAT JUST DON'T APPLY TO US. 
          AND IT'S, IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT THIS HAD A, A BASIS HERE AND IN THE HISTORY THAT WE HAVE HERE. 
          UM, ALL THAT BEING SAID, I DID WANT TO ASK FOR, FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION. 
          UM, ONE THING THAT THE DOCUMENTATION DOES REALLY WELL IN RETROSPECT, IT SHOWS EVERYONE THAT WAS INVOLVED. 
          IT SHOWS HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE ENGAGED AT EACH STEP, THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU GOT AT EACH STEP IN THE PROCESS, HOW THAT CHANGED FROM A MORE PRESCRIPTIVE PROCESS TO A KIND OF WALKING THE LINE TO ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY. 
          AND ALL OF THAT IS GREAT FOR US TO HAVE. 
          'CAUSE I'M SURE A LOT OF US WERE GOING IN WITH A PRESCRIPTIVE MINDSET AT THE START OF THIS. 
          UH, I REMEMBER GOING BACK MANY MONTHS NOW WHEN WE WERE, I THINK AS A COMMISSION MORE FRUSTRATED WITH NOT KNOWING WHERE IT WAS IN 
          [03:15:01]
PROCESS. 
          AND I CAN SEE IN THE TIMELINE THAT YOU WERE WORKING THE LITERALLY THE ENTIRE TIME ON THIS. 
          ONE THING I WOULD ASK FOR, AND LORD KNOWS THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANOTHER PROCESS LIKE THIS, BUT I, SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN. 
          ONE THING I WOULD , SORRY, ONE THING I WOULD ASK IN THE FUTURE, I UNDERSTAND NOT BEING ABLE TO DO A FULL PRESENTATION TO US ON HEY, HERE'S WHERE WE'RE AT. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE'VE WORKED ON HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY TIME CONSUMING. 
          BUT IT WOULD'VE BEEN GREAT, I THINK FROM A PUBLIC PERSPECTIVE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE WERE COMING INTO THIS NOT REALLY KNOWING WHAT IT WAS GONNA BE, JUST KNOWING, HEY, IT'S NOT COMING UP. 
          WE'RE ON A PROCESS RIGHT NOW. 
          WE JUST DID THIS, THESE LAST FIVE THINGS WE DID, WE'VE GOT PROBABLY ABOUT ANOTHER 10 THINGS TO GO. 
          IT WILL CHANGE. 
          HERE'S YOUR UPDATE. 
          LESS THAN 10 MINUTES THE END. 
          YOU CAN EVEN BORROW US FROM ASKING QUESTIONS IF THAT WILL GUARANTEE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO. 
          I I SAW YOUR SHOULDERS CHANGE WHEN I SAID THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT IF IT'LL GUARANTEE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE JUST THAT LITTLE BIT OF UPDATE. 
          'CAUSE SEEING IT IN RETROSPECT, I'M LIKE, OH YEAH, WHOLE TIME GOING THROUGH. 
          BUT IT, IT FELT LIKE A BLACK BOX THAT WE COULDN'T SEE INSIDE OF. 
          THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO DO, JUST DOVETAILING OFF THE, THE QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER KUSON AND THEN THE COMMENTS YOU MADE, UH, ANDREW ABOUT HAVING, HAVING A OBJECTIVE DESIGN GUIDELINE PROCESS AND WHERE THAT LIVES. 
          OBVIOUSLY I REMEMBER FROM MULTIPLE MEETINGS NOW THIS HAD TO FOLLOW A TIMELINE BASED ON THE FUNDING. 
          AND I RECOGNIZE GOING FORWARD, THE HOPE IS THAT THIS IS MORE TOUCHUPS AND CHANGES AND ITERATIVE CHANGES RATHER THAN STARTING FROM SCRATCH. 
          LIKE THIS PROCESS WAS KEEPING IN MIND THAT OUR GENERAL PLANS COMING UP AND THEN WE HAVE THE IZO SHIFT AND THAT'S ALL GONNA CREATE CHANGES. 
          SO PROBABLY A YEAR OR TWO AFTER THAT. 
          SO THIS IS SETTING FORWARD A FEW YEARS. 
          UH, IF THERE IS A WAY TO CREATE A YEARLY REVIEW WITH SOME OF THOSE EXPERTS, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB FOSTERING THAT, THAT COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE THAT YOU REACH OUT TO AND THAT YOU ENGAGE WITH, RATHER THAN LETTING THEM KIND OF FALL OFF KIND OF ENGAGING THEM AGAIN WITH, HEY, WE'RE GONNA DO A CHECK. 
          NOW, THIS IS WHY I SAY, WELL AFTER OUR GENERAL PLAN, WELL AFTER THE ICO, 'CAUSE IT'S ALL GONNA COME WITH NEW CHANGES. 
          I GET THAT. 
          BUT I THINK IF WE WANT THIS TO BE AN ITERATIVE CHANGE, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GONNA KEEP UP WITH MORE STATE LAW, THAT THAT MIGHT BE A HEALTHY WAY TO DO THIS. 
          I'M ALSO TRYING TO KEEP IN THAT IN MIND WHAT IS MINIMAL IN TERMS OF FUNDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY. 
          BUT I JUST WANNA THROW THAT OUT THERE. 
          THAT MAYBE BECOMES ONE OR TWO MEETINGS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOOKS AT, MAYBE ONE MEETING THAT THE COUNCIL LOOKS AT, BUT SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS US TO BUILD IN AN ITERATIVE PROCESS BETWEEN THIS GENERAL PLAN AND THE NEXT GENERAL PLAN IS, I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT. 
          I, I THINK THAT'S A, A GREAT SUGGESTION. 
          I ALSO THINK THAT ANY POLICY DEVELOPMENT EFFORT THAT WE WORK ON, WE SHOULD ASK IT. 
          WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT THROUGH THE LENS OF WHAT IMPLICATIONS MIGHT THERE BE FOR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, BECAUSE ABSOLUTELY, AS, AS HEATHER NOTED, THE STATE DOESN'T INTEND TO LET THEIR FOOT OFF THE GAS ON, ON, UM, DEVELOPMENT OF, OF FURTHER REGULATING HOUSING PRODUCTION. 
          SO, UM, IF AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, YOU KNOW, ONE, ONE THING THAT THE HOUSING ELEMENT DOES IS, IS IT, IS IT REALLY, I THINK THE SIXTH CYCLE POSES THE QUESTION, WHAT IS YOUR HOUSING PROGRAM? MM-HMM. 
          , WHAT DOES YOUR BUNDLE OF POLICIES LOOK LIKE? MM-HMM. 
          , WHAT, WHAT DIFFERENT PATHWAYS ARE YOU USING TO SUPPORT HOUSING PRODUCTION? THIS IS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS OF THAT HOUSING PROGRAM. 
          AND I THINK WE'LL START TO BRING, START TO DAYLIGHT THE PROGRAM AS A MORE RECOGNIZABLE WHOLE MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO THE COMBINATION OF BRINGING IT FORWARD FOR YEARLY REVIEW AS WELL AS EVERY TIME WE'RE ENGAGING IN POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY, ASKING THAT QUESTION MM-HMM , IS THERE SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADJUST IN OUR OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THESE POLICIES ARE IMPLEMENTED WILL GET US THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          MORE FULLY. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          I, I'M GLAD THAT WAS HELPFUL AND DIDN'T COME OFF AS JUST PREACHING. 
          UM, AND CHAIR, I'LL JUST ADD TO ANDREW'S COMMENTS TOO. 
          I THINK IT'S TOTALLY APPROPRIATE, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE SPECIFIC ORDINANCES NOW, BUT I KNOW THEY EXIST WHERE CITY COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES AS PART OF THEIR ORDINANCE. 
          IT IS THE YEARLY OR BI-YEARLY, KIND OF LOOK BACK, SEE WHAT'S WORKING, UH, AND MAKE, YOU KNOW, EVALUATE. 
          I THINK WE DID THAT WITH THE JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE THAT WE DID LAST YEAR TOO. 
          UM, AND I KNOW STAFF, I'M JUST THINKING THE VISIBILITY ORDINANCE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THE ORDINANCE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY, YOU KNOW, LOOK OR HAVE THAT ONE YEAR LOOK BACK, I THINK THERE WAS SOME JUST NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES, RIGHT? AND HOPEFULLY WE'RE TRYING TO CORRECT THAT HERE PRETTY SOON. 
          SO, UM, EVEN IF IT'S 
          [03:20:01]
NOT EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE ORDINANCE, I THINK STAFF PLANNING, WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S WORKING, WHAT ISN'T AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BEST FOR THE DEVELOPERS IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          WELL, AND ONE, ONE ASK THAT I WOULD ADD TO THIS, UH, GIVEN IT WOULD BE KIND OF A NEW THING THAT WE'RE REGULARLY REVIEWING AND WE HAVE HAD IN MULTIPLE MEETINGS HIGHLIGHT THIS LACK IN INCLUSION IN OUR REVIEW PROCESS. 
          HAVING GROUPS LIKE OUR SENIOR COMMITTEE HAVE A REVIEW OF THIS YEARLY AND OTHER COMMITTEES IN THE SAME VEIN OF MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE HAVING THAT SIGN OFF. 
          THAT IF THERE IS A PROVEN GAP THAT COMES UP BETWEEN ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE THAT FEEDBACK MORE RAPIDLY. 
          UM, MOVING PAST THAT, I DID WANNA MAKE A NOTE ON THE URGENCY. 
          I WANTED TO UNDERSCORE WHAT HEATHER BROUGHT UP. 
          UH, TWO THINGS IN THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW WE'RE ALMOST MOST OF THE WAY THROUGH BILL RESEARCH, THE BILL RESEARCH PHASE FOR THE NEXT SESSION. 
          UH, I CAN TELL YOU JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER BILL I HEAR ABOUT IS A HOUSING ONE AND ANOTHER ISSUE HAS HAPPENED, WHICH HAS SHIFTED EVERYONE'S LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. 
          UH, I WAS IN A, A BUDGET, IT WAS KIND OF A BUDGET HEARING SLASH CONFERENCE FOR A LOT OF STAFF WHAT THE UPCOMING BUDGET IS LIKELY TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT THE, THE GAPS ARE LIKELY TO BE. 
          WE HAVE A SHORTFALL THAT IS PROJECTED TO BE QUITE A BIT MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN WAS EXPECTED TO ATT TUNE OF, I THINK LAST LAST UPDATE WAS OVER $62 BILLION MM-HMM . 
          SO INSTEAD OF EXPECTING HOUSING BILLS OR TRANSIT BILLS THAT COME WITH FUNDING AND, AND ADDITIVES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THERE'LL BE SOME OF THOSE, BUT THEY WON'T ALLOW FOR IMPLEMENTATION UNTIL 2, 3, 4 YEARS FROM NOW. 
          THAT'LL BE THE WAY THEY GET AROUND IT. 
          UH, YOU CAN EX WE CAN EXPECT A LOT OF PRESCRIPTIVE BILLS ABOUT WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO. 
          'CAUSE THOSE DON'T HAVE FUNDING ATTACHMENTS. 
          AND THAT IS HOW, I WON'T SAY WHICH MEMBERS, BUT THAT IS HOW CERTAIN PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO FEEL LIKE THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB ON HOUSING. 
          UH, AND SO I DID WANNA FLAG THAT BECAUSE THE MORE WE CAN DO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, THE BETTER JUST BECAUSE I SUSPECT MINISTERIAL WILL EXPAND QUITE A BIT AS, AS THE YEARS MOVE FORWARD. 
          UH, MOVING PAST THAT SEGUE, UH, I JUST WANTED TO ALSO UNDERSCORE, UH, COMMISSIONER ATKINSON'S POINT OF REALLY BRINGING THE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL THAT THEY HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ON THE BROADER POLICY IMPLICA IMPLICATIONS FOR CANOPY. 
          UM, IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT, I, I'LL TELL YOU PERSONALLY, I'M OF THE MIND OF WHY CAN'T YOU HAVE A HUNDRED PERCENT CANOPY? WHY CAN'T YOU MANDATE 50% 50% AND CALL TODAY? BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A MAJOR ADDITION TO OBJECTIVE STANDARDS WHERE THERE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ADDITIONS. 
          THAT BEING SAID, IF THERE IS A WAY TO FRAME THAT FOR THE COUNCIL AHEAD OF TIME OF YES, THESE THINGS ARE LIMITED IN OBJECTIVE DESIGN, BUT HERE ARE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          JUST BECAUSE IT, IT WOULD BE NICE TO PLUG IN BOTH OUR TREE CANOPY AND OUR SOLAR POLICY IN, IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY THAT REALLY STARTS TO LOOK AT, OKAY, WHERE ARE WE LACKING IN THE CITY? WHERE DO WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE THESE KIND OF ADDITIONS? BECAUSE FOR OBJECTIVE DESIGN, YOU, YOU CAN'T GO SITE BY SITE. 
          BUT IF WE'RE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT IN LIKE, IN KIND OF ZONING OVERLAY ALMOST, OR MAP RESOURCE MAP, THEN THAT'S A PLACE FOR US TO DEFER TO THAT WAY. 
          UH, FINAL NOTE IN THE VINYL, THANK YOU FOR REMOVING THE VINYL WINDOWS. 
          I I DID WANNA NOTE, AS SOMEBODY WHO HAS LIVED IN LOWER INCOME HOUSING AND HAS DEALT WITH EXACTLY THOSE WINDOW TYPES, AND I THINK I BROUGHT THIS UP LAST MEETING, IT IS A ROYAL PAIN IN THE BUTT TO WATCH AS THE WINDOW THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE NEW WARPS IN A SUMMER THAT TRANSITIONS TO A QUICK WINTER AND BACK TO A SUMMER. 
          AND EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE A RENTER, YOU ARE SUDDENLY PAYING FOR THE NEW WINDOW. 
          AND THAT IS EXACTLY SOMETHING THAT YOU GET WITH PVC OR VINYL. 
          UH, I'D ALSO LIKE TO FLAG THAT THE, THE BYPRODUCT, THE TOXIC BYPRODUCT OF ITS PRODUCTION IS SOME OF THE WORST TOXINS YOU CAN PUT IN THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE. 
          SO ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO REDUCE THAT I THINK IS CRITICAL AS A CITY THAT'S TALKING ABOUT A A 2030, UH, CLIMATE CHALLENGE. 
          UH, AND ONE, ONE FINAL BIT. 
          I AM FAIR, I'M INCREASINGLY NERVOUS ABOUT HOW MANY THINGS WE HAVE PUT ON OUR GENERAL PLAN AND OUR IZO AND I KNOW THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN REALLY DO ABOUT THAT AT THIS POINT. 
          AND SO MUCH OF IT IS THAT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS. 
          AND THAT IS WHAT THE BROADER, LARGER PLANNING LANDSCAPE LOOKS LIKE AND THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE FALL UNDER. 
          I DO HAVE AN ASK THOUGH, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW REALISTIC THIS ASK IS, SO FEEL FREE TO TELL ME 
          [03:25:02]
TO GO HOME, MR. VOLUNTEER. 
          BUT AT SOME POINT I THINK IT'S GONNA BE IMPORTANT TO HAVE A VISUAL TRACKER THAT WE CAN ALL SEE OF HOW MANY CRITICAL PATHWAYS ARE RUNNING THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN AND ARE THEN RUNNING THROUGH THE IZO SO WE CAN VISUALLY START TO SEE, OKAY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS FOR, FOR OUR, UM, FAIRGROUNDS, FAIRGROUNDS, GRANTS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT. 
          MY BRAIN'S RUNNING OUTTA STEAM. 
          UH, WHERE ARE WE ON THAT STEP? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? HOW MUCH IS ON THAT? HOW MUCH IS GONNA BE AFTER THAT? AND ESPECIALLY KEEPING, HAVING IN MIND HOW MANY THINGS WE EXPECT TO BE HANDLED BY EITHER THE GENERAL PLAN OR THE SUBSEQUENT IZO THAT ARE REALISTICALLY AT THIS POINT GOING TO BE HANDLED BY THEIR OWN PROCESS AFTER THE IZO, JUST TO START TO SEE WHAT THAT WORKLOAD LOOKS LIKE AND TO SEE ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT THREADS, EVEN IF IT'S SIMPLIFIED, I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND AND HELPFUL FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE'RE ADDING MORE THINGS TO IT. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THAT MIGHT NOT BE REALISTIC TO ASK FOR ANY TIME SOON, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE'RE HAVING MORE MEETINGS LIKE THIS. 
          SO I'M, I'M HAPPY TO LOOK AND SEE IF WE ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HELP WITH THAT. 
          UM, THERE, THERE I SO YES, THE SCOPE OF THE GENERAL PLAN IS OVERWHELMING. 
          UM, , AS I SAY THAT, AS HAVING BEEN WORKING ON IT, IT'S, IT'S EXCITING 'CAUSE IT IS A GENERAL PLAN. 
          IT IS OVERALL GUIDING POLICY FOR MM-HMM. 
           LIFE, THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING AND MORE. 
          UM, SO IT IS, BUT I, I'M HAPPY TO, TO WORK WITH, KIND OF PROVIDE THAT FEEDBACK BACK TO HEATHER HEINZ AND CHRISTINA, PAUL AND BRIAN'S INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS TOO, A LITTLE BIT. 
          SO , AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING MORE, BUT I'M, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE THINGS THAT CAN, WE MIGHT ALREADY HAVE SOME MATERIALS ALREADY, I THINK. 
          UH, SO WE DO, AND I THINK, UH, WHAT WILL BE IMPORTANT, SO WE HAVEN'T QUITE SCOPED OUT THE ZONING CODE UPDATE. 
          UH, SO WE'LL TAKE A SIMILAR APPROACH TO WHAT WE DID ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. 
          UM, BUT TO YOUR POINT, HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE THIS, UM, EFFECTIVELY AND CLEARLY TO THE PUBLIC AND TO OUR DECISION MAKERS? UM, I MEAN, I MEAN REALLY WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO IS WORK PLAN, UH, FOR OUR DEPARTMENT. 
          UM, AND THAT'S A PLACE THAT WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO INVESTING A LOT MORE TIME IN, IN THIS NEW YEAR WITH, UH, THE ADDED CAPACITY FROM STAFF. 
          UM, AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF GOOD WORK THAT'S, UM, NOT ONLY STAFF THAT'S WORKING ON, BUT OUR COMMUNITY, UM, IS SPENDING, UH, AND POURING HOURS, UM, OF VOLUNTEER WORK, UH, THIS COMMISSION INCLUDED. 
          UM, AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ELEVATE AND, UH, APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UM, AND SO WE'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IS IT AN ANNUAL REPORT? IS IT QUARTERLY UPDATES? UM, YOU KNOW, VIA TRANSMITTAL, UH, TO PLANNING COMMISSION OF ALL THE WORK THAT'S, UM, GOING ON AND HOW THEY'RE ALL INTERTWINED. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, THIS COMMISSION SHOULD EXPECT TO SEE IN THE NEW YEAR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          I HONESTLY THOUGHT I WAS GONNA BE TOLD YOU'RE ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. 
          PLEASE STOP. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          UH, AND THEN JUST THE LAST TWO BITS, UH, I ALSO SUPPORT THE TWO INCH RECESS FOR THE WINDOWS BEING ADDED BACK IN. 
          AND I ALSO SUPPORT THE, OF THE TWO RELIEF PROPOSED CHANGES, I ALSO SUPPORT THE COVERAGE CHANGE, UH, RATHER THAN FIXATING JUST NECESSARILY ON THE TREE PER SQUARE FOOT. 
          SO, UH, BEYOND THAT, I WILL NOW HAND IT OVER TO THE VICE MAYOR. 
          WELL, PERSONALLY, I, I APPRECIATED THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON AND EVERYBODY DOESN'T REALIZE HOW EVERYTHING INTERCONNECTS. 
          AND YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT I'M SEEING IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT, I AM IN THE LAST YEAR BEING, ALMOST BEING ON THE COUNCIL FOR A YEAR, JUST WATCHING JUST, UM, CITY HALL COMPLETELY CHANGE. 
          AND A LOT OF IT IS BECAUSE, UM, BRIAN O UM, IS, YOU KNOW, BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST A YEAR. 
          I MEAN, JUST THE CHANGES ARE DRAMATIC AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. 
          AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I'M WATCHING JUST HOW, JUST LITERALLY HOW EVERYTHING INTERCONNECTS AND IT WILL ALL EVENTUALLY COME TOGETHER. 
          BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS PILING THINGS ON BECAUSE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE KIND OF COMMUNITY WE ARE, YOU KNOW, WE JUST LIKE, UM, 
          [03:30:01]
WE EXPECT EXCELLENCE AND WE EXPECT IT QUICK, AND IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT WAY. 
          THAT'S TRUE. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE, AND, AND THEN ALSO JUST, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS, YOU KNOW, IT STARTED, AND THEN, I MEAN, I HATE TALKING ABOUT COVID, BUT IT REALLY IMPACTED THE DIRECTION AND THE TIMING OF THIS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD'VE EXPECTED THE GENERAL PLAN TO BE BEFORE US IN 2023. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THINGS STALLED THE PROCESS, BUT AS THE PROCESS GETS GOT STALLED, I THINK WE'RE GONNA END UP WITH A BETTER PRODUCT. 
          AND SO IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, SO EVERY TIME LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING OVER SOMETHING NEW, IT'S JUST REALLY IMPROVING THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GOING AND IT'S GONNA TAKE TIME. 
          AND, UM, AND I LIKE THE IDEA OF, UM, INFORMATION LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS EACH COMMITTEE DOING? SO THE COMMITTEES KNOW WHAT OTHER COMMITTEES ARE ACTUALLY DOING. 
          IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ELABORATE, BUT JUST INFORMATION SO PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL THE PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH. 
          AND, UM, I JUST APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT, THAT EVERYBODY DOES, THE COMMISSION, ALL OF US ARE VOLUNTEERS, , AND YOU KNOW, IT'S PRETTY IMPRESSIVE THE THOUGHT AND THE TIME PEOPLE PUT INTO THIS. 
          I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY, UH, ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT THAT I AGREE WITH. 
          UM, CAN I MOVE THIS ? YES. 
          YEAH. 
          I WAS ACTUALLY HOPING, I WAS HOPING I'D LIKE TO MOVE THIS. 
          YES, THAT THAT'D BE PERFECT. 
          UM, SO IS THAT ALL I HAVE TO SAY? WHERE IS IT? I CAN'T JUST MOVE IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          CORRECT. 
          IT'S NOT A BUT WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE IT WITH, I BELIEVE YOU, I BELIEVE, HEATHER, YOU HAD SEVERAL EDITS. 
          IT WAS EITHER HEATHER OR ANDREW. 
          YOU CITED SEVERAL EDITS TO BE, AND IF WE CAN HEAR THE EDITS, THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC. 
          YES. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THEN ALSO WITH THE, I THINK WE HAD AGREEMENT ON THE TREE COVERAGE OR YEAH. 
          ON THE 500 SQUARE FOOT TO THAT 30% METRIC. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND JUST REMEMBER, THERE'S ONLY ONE THING THAT'S PERMANENT IN LIFE AND THAT'S DEATH. 
          OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND REVIEW THINGS. 
          SO IT'S NEVER, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT ONE BITE AT THE APPLE. 
          HUH? , YOU CHANGED. 
          I THINK THAT'S THE QUOTE OF THE MEETING , BUT YES, IF YOU COULD READ WHAT THOSE, UH, AMENDMENTS WERE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          THE CHAIR, THE FIRST, THE FIRST MODIFICATION WAS IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF, UM, TO MODIFY THE CQA FINDING TO REFLECT SECTION 1 5 0 6 1. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, FOR THE, THE FIRST, UH, EXEMPTION. 
          AND THEN HEATHER, ARE YOU PREPARED TO READ THE OTHER, OH, YOU ACTUALLY WANT ME TO LIKE COHERENTLY READ THEM? ? I CAN TRY, MIKE, IF I CAN READ MY SCRIBBLE. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THERE IS THE, SO WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE SOLAR, IT WAS THE, I'VE GOT IT. 
          WE HAD THE TWO INCH RECESS, RIGHT? SO WE HAD A, A TWO INCH RECESS ON ALL WINDOWS BASED UPON THE BUILDING MATERIAL TYPE THAT THEY'RE AFFIXED TO. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S A PRETTY CRITICAL ELEMENT. 
          AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE CAPTURED THOSE, THE DETAILS OF THAT TEXT IN, UM, MR. LYNCH'S EMAIL, SO WE'LL, WE'LL REFER BACK TO THAT. 
          AND THEN WE ALSO HAD TO, TO CHANGE THE, OR, YEAH. 
          TO CHANGE THE MEASUREMENT OR THE OBJECTIVE STANDARD OF THE TREE PLANTING SUCH THAT IT'S PLANTED TO PROVIDE A 30% SHADE OF OPEN SPACE WHEN VIEWED FROM ABOVE, UM, AT A 15 YEAR, UM, MATURITY, UH, STAGE. 
          AND, UH, REMOVE THE RATIO, REMOVE THAT REFERENCE TO A RATIO OF ONE TREE PER 500 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO I THINK THOSE ARE THE, THE LARGER CHANGES. 
          AND THEN WE WOULD OF COURSE ABSORB OR BRING FORWARD ALL OF THE, THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WE MADE FROM STUDY SESSION TO, UH, TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING THAT ARE REFLECTED IN THE RED LINE DOCUMENT. 
          I CAN READ THE WINDOW. 
          PERFECT. 
          UH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS MOTION? I'LL SECOND. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          UH, MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES? ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY? ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN? YES. 
          VICE MAYOR CATER THOMPSON. 
          YES. 
          CHAIR HOOPER. 
          YES. 
          THE VOTE HAS PASSED. 
          [03:35:03]
UH, I JUST, I JUST WANNA SAY THIS IS A SIGH OF RELIEF THAT WE'VE GOTTEN IT THIS FAR, UH, SINCE SB 35 PASSED. 
          AND I WAS WORKING FOR THE LEGISLATURE WHEN THAT FIGHT HAPPENED, AND IT WAS ABOUT AS UGLY AS YOU CAN IMAGINE. 
          THIS HAS BEEN THE THING IN THE BACK OF MY MIND BECAUSE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS BECAME IMMEDIATELY THE NEXT STEP THAT EVERY CITY HAD TO TAKE. 
          SO I AM GRATEFUL TO EVERYBODY THAT WE HAVE NOW PUSHED THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL. 
          UH, I WILL CLOSE MEETING ITEM FOUR AND CONTINUE WITH THE AGENDA, AND WE WILL 
          [COMMITTEE COMMENT]
PIVOT TO COMMISSIONER COMMENT. 
          I AM NOW GOING TO INVITE COMMISSIONERS TO PRESENT ANY COMMENTS THAT THEY HAVE, STARTING WITH COMMISSIONER WIMAN. 
          NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. 
          COMMISSIONER ATKISSON. 
          GREAT. 
          I WILL GIVE AN UPDATE FOR COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY, WHO'S NOT HERE, WHO'S OUR LIAISON TO TREE COMMITTEE. 
          UH, SO AT THE LAST TREE COMMITTEE ON NOVEMBER 15TH, WE SAW A PRESENTATION FROM RELEAF ON PLANTING PLANS IN SIX DIFFERENT PARKS ACROSS THE CITY. 
          UH, AND THEN WE ALSO SAW AN EXCITING UPDATE FROM FRIENDS OF THE PETALUMA RIVER ON THE NORTH RIVER GREENWAY PROJECT, AND I REALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO CHECK THAT PRESENTATION OUT BECAUSE THEY'VE REALLY MOVED FROM THE CONCEPTUAL STAGE TO GETTING TANGIBLE RESULTS, TALKING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS. 
          UH, AND IT'S REALLY EXCITING. 
          THEY'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SONOMA LAND TRUST AND THEY'RE, I THINK THEY'RE PUTTING TOGETHER WHAT COULD BE A GREAT KIND OF FUTURE LAND USE FOR, FOR THAT PART OF PETALUMA. 
          UH, WE ALSO FORMED AN ARBOR DAY AD HOC TO DISCUSS MAYBE PUTTING ON KIND OF A, A BIGGER CELEBRATION OF ARBOR DAY THIS YEAR BY THE TREE COMMITTEE. 
          AND WE MADE A RECOMMENDATION FOR, UH, KENTUCKY STREET IMPROVEMENTS, UH, INCLUDING THE CROSSWALK IN KENTUCKY STREET, AS WELL AS TWO TREES THAT WERE REMOVED ON THAT CROSSWALK. 
          AND WE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO REPLACE THOSE TREES WITH THE WESTERN SYCAMORE, WHICH IS A FAVORITE, I THINK, OF EVERYONE ON TREE COMMITTEE AS A GREAT STREET TREE, UH, AND SHADE TREE. 
          AND FOR PBA, UNFORTUNATELY, LAST WEEK'S MEETING WAS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST BLOCKBUSTER MEETINGS WE WOULD HAVE, AND I WAS SICK FOR IT AND HAVE NOT GOTTEN A CHANCE TO CATCH UP. 
          BUT JUST TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW, THEY GAVE FEEDBACK ON LYNCH CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS, FEEDBACK ON FRONTAGE, IMPROVEMENTS ON NORTH MCDOWELL AND CORONA ASSOCIATED WITH THE PETALUMA NORTH STATION PROJECTS AND THE MERIDIAN PROJECTS. 
          SO THAT'S A PRETTY HUGE PROJECT. 
          AND THEN THE ONE THAT I ALMOST WENT RISKED GETTING EVERYONE SICK JUST TO BE THERE FOR, UH, WAS REVIEW AND FEEDBACK ON DRAFT ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION MAPS. 
          UH, SO THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN IS IN PROCESS, AND THOSE MAPS ARE DETAILED AND THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION THERE. 
          SO, UH, ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO GO WATCH THAT MEETING, UM, FROM DECEMBER 6TH, AND I KNOW I WILL BE. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAVE. 
          CHAIR. 
          CAN I GRAB BACK MY, UH, YES, ABSOLUTELY. 
          YES, SIR. 
          UH, 'CAUSE AS USUAL, DARREN, UM, BROUGHT UP A, A NUMBER OF, OF KEY ITEMS, ONE OF WHAT'S, UH, SPECIFICALLY JO, MY MEMORY, UM, UH, FOR THOSE CELEBRATING. 
          UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU, UM, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A CHRISTMAS TREE AT THIS TIME, TO, UM, THERE IS A, UM, ONE RETAILER, UM, UH, STARTING WITH F UM, IN TOWN HERE THAT PROVIDES, UM, LIVE NUMBER OF LIVE CHRISTMAS TREES, UM, AND ALLOWS FOLKS TO BOTH, YOU KNOW, UM, CELEBRATE IN THAT WAY, BUT ALSO, UM, PLANT THE CHRISTMAS, UH, PLANT THE TREE, UM, AFTER THE SEASON'S OVER AND, AND THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, ADD TO THE TREE CANOPY AND THEIR SURROUNDINGS, UM, HABITAT AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS WE GET AROUND THAT. 
          SO, UM, I THOUGHT OF THAT AS I WAS WALKING THROUGH, UM, BOUGHT ONE MYSELF AND, AND ALSO JUST WANTED TO KINDA SHARE THAT, UH, WITH THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. 
          THANKS. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. 
          I HAVE TO SAY, I, I ACTUALLY DID WATCH THE LAST PAM MEETING IN PART BECAUSE OF THE DRAFT MAPS. 
          I, I SPENT MORE TIME THAN I WANT TO THINK ABOUT ON THE INITIAL STAGE FOR THE ACTIVE TRANSIT PLAN. 
          SO IT WAS INCREDIBLY SATISFYING TO SEE THAT COME FORWARD. 
          THANK YOU, THOUGH FOR NOT GETTING FOLKS SICK AS IMPORTANT THIS AS WE GO THROUGH THE FLU SEASON. 
          UM, ONE THING I WANTED TO ALSO FLAG ON THE NOTE ABOUT WHAT FRIENDS OF PELOMA RIVER ARE DOING, I WAS AT AN EARLY PRESENTATION FOR THAT ABOUT A YEAR BACK. 
          THE MODEL THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON SHOULD PROVE TO BE HIGHLY REPLICATABLE COUNTY-WIDE. 
          SO THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN SEEING THIS MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THIS COULD LEAD TO SOME INTERESTING FRONTAGE DESIGN. 
          UM, SO I, I WOULD SECOND THE POINT OF IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT'S BEING DONE, UM, UH, ONE THING I WAS GONNA FLAG, OR TWO THINGS I WAS AT WHAT AMOUNTED TO ARAN, IT WAS A TRANSIT SYMPOSIUM THAT THEY WERE HOLDING AT THE STATE. 
          UH, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT WHAT'S 
          [03:40:01]
COMING UP WITH REGARDS TO INTEGRATED BUS TRANSIT AND DOWNTOWN CORES BECAUSE OF THE NEW REQUIREMENTS REGARDING KIND OF HOUSING IN THESE AREAS AND THE INABILITY TO RESTRICT, THERE'S SEEMS TO BE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO START LOOKING AT HOW YOU EXPAND LOCAL, UH, BUS ROUTES TO MATCH, ESPECIALLY WITH, WITH MICRO TRANSIT, WITH SHUTTLES AND HOW YOU GET INTO MORE RURAL AREAS. 
          AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITIES UP AND DOWN THE STATE, A LITTLE BIT LIKE US, THAT ARE IN THESE LIKE MIXED URBAN MIXED RURAL PLACES WHERE THESE HIGHER DENSITY POLICIES KIND OF HELP BUT ALSO LEAD TO SOME INTERESTING POLICY QUESTIONS. 
          I SHOULD HAVE THE MATERIALS FROM THAT CONFERENCE IN THE NEXT WEEK, SO I'LL SEND IT OUT. 
          I THINK THERE'S SOME USEFUL STUFF THERE THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR US. 
          AND THEN THE LAST BIT I WAS GONNA UNDERSCORE, UH, WE ARE LIKELY GOING INTO A STATE RECESSION FOR PROBABLY THE NEXT TWO, MAYBE THREE YEARS, UH, GIVEN THE MOST RECENT BUDGET FORECAST. 
          SO A LOT OF WHAT WE DO GOING FORWARD IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE HAMSTRUNG BY EITHER EXISTING FUNDING OR WHAT WE CAN SAVE OURSELVES JUST IN TERMS OF FUNDING SOURCES THAT'LL BE AVAILABLE. 
          UH, AND WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, VICE MAYOR THOMPSON, UM, JUST MY SCTA MEETING YESTERDAY, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AND THE NEED, UM, FOR THESE MAPS BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE MAPS, IT'S REALLY HARD TO GET FUNDING. 
          AND SO, UM, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AND THERE, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EVENTUALLY UPGRADE HOMES SO THEY'RE MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT? AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, ABOUT POSSIBLE BILLS, YOU KNOW, COMING THROUGH. 
          BUT THEN OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE DEFICIT THAT'S COMING BECAUSE YEAH, I THOUGHT IT WAS 64 MILLION, SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR IT'S ONLY 62 MILLION , BUT WE'LL SEE. 
          UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, SO THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, GOOD DISCUSSION YESTERDAY THAT CTA AND UM, I JUST WANTED TO LET NICOLE KNOW THAT I HEAR, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN WATCHING FOR A DA AND CURB CUT ISSUES AND I HAVE MORE PICTURES ON MY PHONE OF THIS STUFF, AND SO I FEEL AS THOUGH THE CITY'S GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION THAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT, UM, MOBILITY FOR EVERYBODY. 
          AND YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A, YOU KNOW, THE EAST SIDE WAS BUILT IN THE 60, YOU KNOW, FIFTIES, SIXTIES, SEVENTIES, YOU KNOW, ABOVE. 
          AND THERE ARE JUST A LOT OF PROBLEMS. SAME WITH THE WEST SIDE AND INCREMENTALLY THE SEA IS MOVING FORWARD. 
          AND, UM, AND I JUST APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO. 
          AND I'M A SENIOR TOO, SO I GET IT. 
          BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL COMMUNITIES, IT, IT'S ABOUT EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT PERCENTAGE OF WHO IS WHO IT'S ABOUT. 
          WE HAVE TO INTEGRATE AND WORK TOGETHER. 
          SO, UM, IT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT FOR THE YOUNGER PEOPLE AND THE OLDER PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE. 
          [STAFF COMMENT]
WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE PLANNING MANAGER ANDREW TRIPLE TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT. 
          WELL, IF IT, IF IT WOULD, UH, PLEASE THE COMMISSION, I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT AT OUR MEETING NEXT WEEK. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          AND I THOUGHT I WOULD DO SORT OF A YEAR END WRAP UP WHEN MY MIND'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR. 
          I KIND OF HAD FAIRGROUNDS OVERLAY AND OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ON IT OVER  THE LAST FEW DAYS. 
          UM, BUT SO WE, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING ON DECEMBER 19TH. 
          OKAY. 
          THE, UM, PROJECT AGENDIZED AS A, THE CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SPIRIT LIVING MM-HMM. 
          UM, UH, RCFE RETIREMENT CARE FACILITY FOR THE ELDERLY, I BELIEVE IS SO, UH, WE'LL BE BRINGING THAT FORWARD AND, AND LIKE I SAID, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT A QUORUM AND, AND, UH, LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT MEETING, WRAPPING UP OUR WORK FOR THE YEAR, DAN. 
          SURE. 
          IF I COULD JUST HIJACK YOUR, UH, PLANNING MANAGER DISCUSSION REAL QUICK. 
          IT IS A SECOND DAY OF THE NEW CITY CLERK. 
          HER NAME'S KAITLYN CORLEY. 
          SHE SEEMS REALLY GREAT. 
          I'VE SEEN HER BOTH DAYS, SO SHE HASN'T RAN FOR THE HILLS, WHICH IS GOOD. 
          SO IF YOU SEE ANY EMAILS COMING FROM SEE CORLEY AT, UH, CITY OF PETALUMA.ORG, DON'T JUST IMMEDIATELY DELETE THEM. 
          MAYBE TAKE A LOOK AND SEE IF THEY'RE HELPFUL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          GREAT. 
          GREAT TO SEE THE CITY OF PETALUMA FAMILY EXPANDING. 
          UH, WELL WITH THAT I WILL DO WHAT I'M SURE SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE WANTED ME TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHICH IS ADJOURN THE MEETING FOR TONIGHT. 
          THANK YOU EVERYBODY.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.