* 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.
          [00:00:03]
          HOW ABOUT NOW? OH, HELLO. 
          GOOD 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
EVENING. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY ON SEPTEMBER 24TH FOR THE JOINT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE. 
          UM, WE'RE GONNA GET STARTED HERE WITH ROLL CALL CL UH, 
          [ROLL CALL]
CLERK, COULD YOU PLEASE TAKE ROLL CALL? YES. 
          I'M GONNA START OFF WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEN MOVE ON TO HCPC. 
          COMMISSIONER FRY HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER KERLAN. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER NOEL NOEL. 
          ABSENT. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CATER THOMPSON. 
          HERE. 
          CHAIR MOSES. 
          HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM. 
          NOW MOVING ON TO HCPC COMMISSIONER. 
          SORRY. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER BARCLAY SAXON. 
          HERE. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER LOPEZ. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER PINAL. 
          HERE. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER JENSEN. 
          HERE. 
          CHAIR WHITLEY. 
          HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE INTO 
          [GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT]
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          DURING GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO MAKE COMMENTS ON ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THAT ARE, THAT ARE WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, AND THAT 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. 
          PLEASE NOTE THOSE WANTING TO SPEAK ON THE OVERLAY AND OR THE HOTEL SHOULD SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THAT ITEM WHEN IT'S CALLED. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT  AND ASK SPEAKERS TO PLEASE BRING THEIR SPEAKER CARDS TO THE CLERK'S DESK IF THEY HAVE NOT DONE SO ALREADY. 
          IF SEEING NO ONE RUNNING. 
          UM, CLERK, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? WE RECEIVED NO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. 
          OKAY. 
          OH, YOU DID? I GAVE YOU ONE THAT SAID GENERAL COMMENT. 
          THAT WOULD BE PRIOR TO THE MEETING, SOMETHING THAT WAS EMAILED IN. 
          AND NEXT I'M GONNA ASK ABOUT IN PERSON. 
          OKAY. 
          SORRY. 
          NO WORRIES. 
          . 
          AND HOW ABOUT IN PERSON? DO YOU HAVE SOME CARDS FOR ME? CAN I GET YOUR NAME? SORRY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          JUST ONE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT HERE FROM CAROL REBEL. 
          AND YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES. 
          IF YOU WANNA TAKE THE PODIUM, PLEASE. 
          HI. 
          I WASN'T HERE FOR YOUR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE EIR. 
          SO I'M HERE TONIGHT TO, UH, TELL YOU THAT I'M A RESIDENT OF CASA GRANDE APARTMENTS PEP HOUSING AND THE NEW CREEKSIDE DEVELOPMENT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT US IN ITS CURRENT FORM. 
          I COME TO ASK WHEN THE SPAR, THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW IS REVIEWED BY YOU, UM, THAT YOU FIND A WAY THAT YOU CAN EITHER CHANGE THE THREE STORY, UH, CONDOS TO TWO STORIES, OR MOVE THE CONDOS TO ANOTHER LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY. 
          PLEASE REMEMBER, THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF THE CONDOS WOULD BLOCK THE SUN TO OUR VEGETABLE GARDENS AND TO A NUMBER OF OUR APARTMENTS DURING THE LATE FALL AND WINTER MONTHS. 
          WE USE THE SUN TO SAVE HEATING BILLS AND IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THE CONDOS WILL BLOCK THE SUN TO OUR SOLAR PANELS AS WELL. 
          SO I HOPE YOU WILL KEEP THESE THINGS IN MIND. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE'RE HEADING INTO PRESENTATIONS AND I'M PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT THERE ARE NO PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. 
          SO WE'RE GOING TO SWIFTLY CLOSE PRESENTATIONS AND MOVE ON OVER TO THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES WHERE SIMILARLY, THERE ARE NO MEETING MINUTES TO APPROVE IN TODAY'S MEETING. 
          SO WE WILL CLOSE THAT MEETING ITEM AND NOW 
          [PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION]
HEADING INTO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          UH, ANNOUNCING NOW MEETING ITEM ONE, A PUBLIC HEARING. 
          WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, RECEIVE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AND RECOMMEND THAT CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DOWNTOWN HOUSING AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY AND EKN APPALACHIAN HOTEL PROJECT. 
          BEFORE WE DIVE IN, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONERS TO, UM, REPORT ON ANY POTENTIAL RECUSALS IF YOU DO NEED TO RECUSE YOURSELVES. 
          PLANNING COMMISSIONERS SEEING HEAD SHAKES. 
          I'LL 
          [00:05:01]
SAY THAT I HAD, UH, SPOKEN WITH THE, UM, ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REGARDING MY OFFICE SPACE, WHICH IS IN ONE OF THE SUB AREAS. 
          BUT AS A MONTH TO MONTH TENANT OF THAT OFFICE SPACE, THE UM, ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CONFIRMED THAT THAT WAS NOT GOING TO REQUIRE RECUSAL, UM, CHAIR WHALEY. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN I ASK IF ANY OF THE HCPC COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES SEEING NO, THEN WE HAVE NO RECUSALS FROM THE HCPC. 
          OKAY. 
          ADDITIONALLY, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEREFORE DOES REQUIRE THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMITTEE TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION DISCLOSURES THAT ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE RECEIVED WITHIN, RESPOND INTO THE MIC. 
          COULD YOU I RECEIVED A NUMBER OF EMAILS BUT DID NOT RESPOND TO. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMITTEE HEAD SHAKES. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          WITH THAT, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M JUST GOING TO QUICKLY SHARE A SLIDE, IF I MAY, TO GIVE US AN, A SENSE OF WHAT THE PROCEEDINGS WILL LOOK LIKE TONIGHT, UM, FOR FOLKS WHO MIGHT NOT BE, UH, FAMILIAR WITH OUR USUAL, UM, GIMME JUST ONE SECOND HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO JUST TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF OUR MEETING FLOW FOR THIS ITEM, WE'RE GONNA START WITH A STAFF PRESENTATION. 
          FROM THERE, WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO COMMISSIONER AND COMMITTEE MEMBER QUESTIONS, AND THEN INTO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          FROM THERE, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER AND COMMITTEE MEMBER DISCUSSION, AND THEN WE'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO HCPC TO DO THEIR MOTION, UM, ON THE RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWING THEIR MOTION. 
          HCPC, AS WELL AS STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO LEAVE  AND THEN PLANNING COMMISSION WILL PROCEED ONTO FURTHER DISCUSSION, FINAL FEEDBACK AND AMENDMENTS, UM, AND THEN VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION. 
          SO THAT'S OUR OVERVIEW. 
          I'LL BE POPPING IN WITH A FEW MORE SLIDES JUST TO KEEP US ALL CLEAR ON THE PROCEDURE HERE. 
          UM, BUT FOR NOW, I WILL GO AHEAD AND TURN THINGS OVER TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BRIAN O THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          MY NAME IS BRIAN O, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY OF PETALUMA. 
          GOOD TO SEE SOME, UH, FAMILIAR FACES AS WELL AS NEW FACES, UH, BOTH UP AT THE DAIS, UM, AND, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AS WELL. 
          UM, IT'S QUITE A FEAT TO TRY TO LOGISTICALLY JUST TO, UM, BALANCE AND FACILITATE A JOINT HEARING. 
          AND SO I KNOW IT'S MAY FEEL SOMEWHAT AWKWARD JUST TO NOT HAVE, UM, ALL OF OUR ADVISORY MEMBERS, UM, SITTING WHERE THEY'RE ACCUSTOMED TO. 
          SO JUST THANKFUL AND GRATEFUL FOR, UH, ESPECIALLY THE TWO, UM, DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ME, JUST, UH, FOR YOUR FLEXIBILITY, UM, THIS EVENING. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, UH, IS ONE, UH, HEARING, UM, AMONGST A SEQUENCE OF HEARINGS ON THIS PROJECT. 
          AND, UH, YOU HAVE THE FULL, UH, STAFF FORCE HERE, UH, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          WE HAVE, UH, A REALLY NICE PRESENTATION, UM, AND THE OUTCOME REALLY OF TONIGHT. 
          UM, AND THE FOCUS IS REALLY ON THE DRAFT. 
          EIR, UM, HAS THE STAFF, UH, THROUGH THE ANALYSIS, UM, ADEQUATELY ANALYZE THE PROPOSED PROJECT. 
          UM, AND SO, UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN, UM, WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT, UH, THERE ARE PRODUCTIVE COMMENTS THAT HELP INFORM, UM, THE DIRECTION, UM, FOR STAFF TO GO POTENTIALLY TO PREPARE THE FINAL DOCUMENT. 
          UM, BUT WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO A ROBUST DISCUSSION, UM, AND A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT COMES, UH, THIS EVENING. 
          UM, AND SO THANKS AGAIN FOR THE TIME. 
          UM, AND WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPAL PLANNER. 
          OLIVIA IRVIN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND GOOD EVENING. 
          I AM OLIVIA URBAN. 
          I'M A PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER, AND I HAVE BEEN OVERSEEING THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. 
          AND I'M JOINED TONIGHT BY MY COLLEAGUES GREG POWELL, PRINCIPAL PLANNER AND ISABEL CASTANO, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SPECIALIST. 
          BOTH OF THEM ARE BEHIND ME TONIGHT AND THEY ARE PROCESSING THE PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS. 
          BUT TONIGHT WE ARE NOT HERE FOR PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS. 
          WE ARE HERE TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 
          AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS A MOUTHFUL. 
          SO YOU'LL HEAR ME SAY DRAFT EIR OR EIR. 
          AND I AM REFERRING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 
          UM, TO MY RIGHT IS MARY BEAN. 
          UH, SHE IS THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR FIRST CARBON SOLUTIONS. 
          THEY'RE THE FIRM THAT THE CITY ENTERED INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH TO PREPARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR 
          [00:10:01]
THE PROJECT. 
          AND BEFORE I HAND IT OVER TO MARY, TO WALK US THROUGH THE EIR, I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A QUICK REMINDER OF WHAT THE HEARING IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT, AND TOUCH ON A COUPLE OTHER THINGS. 
          SO THE ITEM BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT EIR FOR THE OVERLAY AND THE HOTEL PROJECT. 
          THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT'S HEARING IS TO RECEIVE, COMMENT, AND COLLECT THOSE COMMENTS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, WHICH CAN THEN BE RESPONDED TO IN THE FINAL EIR. 
          THERE AGAIN, ARE NO PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS THIS EVENING. 
          THERE'S NO ACTIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE THIS EVENING. 
          UM, AND THERE ARE NO, UM, DECISIONS THAT WILL BE MADE TONIGHT THAT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM WILL AUTHORIZE ANY PROJECT APPROVAL. 
          SO I JUST WANNA MAKE THAT REALLY CLEAR. 
          WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE EIR. 
          SO I'M GONNA START, UM, WITH A QUICK LOOK BACK ON WHERE WE'VE BEEN. 
          THE OVERLAY IN HOTEL HAVE BEEN UNDER REVIEW SINCE EARLY 2023. 
          AND THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A LIST OF ALL OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS THAT OCCURRED LAST YEAR, UH, AND THE INPUT THAT WENT INTO, UH, SHAPING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE OVERLAY, THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE LANGUAGE ITSELF, AND THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED DESIGN FOR THE HOTEL. 
          THE, UH, FINE FINAL LINE ITEM HERE NOTES THE LAST TIME THAT THE PROJECT WAS, UH, BEFORE THIS JOINT COMMITTEE AND BEFORE THE, UM, PUBLIC FOR A FORMAL HEARING. 
          AND, UM, THAT OCCURRED LAST YEAR ON NOVEMBER 14TH. 
          AND AT THAT TIME, WHAT WAS BEFORE YOU WAS AN INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION. 
          THAT WAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT THAT WAS UNDER CONSIDERATION AT THAT TIME. 
          AND FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, THE CITY DECIDED THAT AN EIR WOULD BE PREPARED. 
          AND SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN, UH, BUSY DOING. 
          AND SO, UM, WHAT YOU WILL SEE IS A, UH, AN EIR THAT ANALYZES COLLECTIVELY THE OVERLAY AT A PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL. 
          THOSE ARE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS. 
          AND SO THAT'S, UH, LOOKED AT PROGRAMMATICALLY AS IT, UH, MODIFIES THE LAND USE AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS UNDER WHICH DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CAN BE REVIEWED. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE A PROJECT LEVEL ANALYSIS OF THE HOTEL, WHICH, UH, TALKS ABOUT AND ANALYZES CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION. 
          UM, AND THOSE ARE, ARE LOOKED AT JOINTLY BECAUSE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, BECAUSE THEY'RE, UH, THE HOTEL IS DEPENDENT UPON APPROVAL OF THE OVERLAY AND THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIRES THAT THE WHOLE OF THE PROJECT BE EVALUATED. 
          AND IN THIS CASE, THE HOTEL CANNOT BE CONSIDERED WITHOUT THE OVERLAY. 
          AND AS SUCH, YOU HAVE AN EIR THAT, UH, LOOKS AT BOTH COMPONENTS. 
          UM, LET'S SEE. 
          SO FOR, UM, SO FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, PURPOSES, THE PROJECT COMPONENTS ARE, UM, NECESSARILY ADDRESSED COMPREHENSIVELY IN THE EIR. 
          SO WE TALK ABOUT BOTH OF THEM, BUT THE PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS ARE SEPARATE AND DISTINCT. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, THE COUNCIL HAS THE SOLE AUTHORITY TO ACT ON THE OVERLAY ENTITLEMENTS AND THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENT, WHILE THE HCPC HAS REVIEW AUTHORITY OVER THE HISTORIC SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. 
          AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE USE PERMIT. 
          SO EACH OF THOSE WILL BE, UM, CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AT A FUTURE DATE. 
          UM, AND, UH, AND AGAIN, TONIGHT, THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. 
          WE ARE HERE TO CONSIDER THE ADEQUACY OF THE EIR. 
          AND SO WITH THAT, I AM GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO MARY TO TALK US THROUGH THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT, ANALYZE THE EIR REVIEW PROCESS AND THE FINDINGS OF THE EIR. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S, THANK YOU, OLIVIA. 
          UM, GOOD EVENING. 
          MEMBERS OF, UM, COMMITTEES, COMMISSION, AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. 
          APOLOGIES, I HAVE MY BACK TURNED TO YOU, BUT, UM, SO YES, A COUPLE, UM, BASELINE THINGS THAT AN EIR IS AN INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT. 
          IT'S AN IMPARTIAL INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT THAT, UM, SUPPORTS THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING THROUGH AND HELPS THE, UM, COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND COMMISSION AND COUNSEL MAKE A DECISION ON, UH, THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT MITIGATION THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED AND POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES. 
          AN EAR DOES NOT EVALUATE THE PROJECT'S MERITS DOESN'T ADVOCATE FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL, AND IT DOESN'T GRANT ANY APPROVALS OR ENTITLEMENTS. 
          SO IT'S INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT TO SUPPORT THIS PROCESS. 
          HERE'S OUR TIMELINE. 
          GOING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT AND TOP TO BOTTOM. 
          WE'VE COMPLETED THE FIRST THREE STEPS. 
          WE'VE HAD OUR NOTICE OF PREPARATION. 
          WE HAD A SCOPING MEETING LAST MAY. 
          UM, WE PUBLISHED THE DRAFT DIR IN AUGUST, AND THAT IS CIRCULATING FOR A 45 DAY PERIOD THAT WILL END OCTOBER 7TH. 
          AND 
          [00:15:01]
HERE WE ARE RIGHT IN THE CENTER OF THE SLIDE AT, UM, A JOINT PC AND HCPC HEARING. 
          SO THE COMMENT PERIOD GOES TILL OCTOBER 7TH. 
          SO THERE'S STILL A COUPLE WEEKS LEFT TO, UM, PREPARE COMMENT LETTERS AND GET THOSE INTO THE CITY. 
          UH, AND THEN ON THE SEVENTH, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE WHETHER TO AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF THE FINAL EIR THAT WILL RESPOND TO ALL THE INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS RECEIVED. 
          AND THEN SOMETIME IN DECEMBER, IF WE ARE MOVING FORWARD, THEN THERE'LL BE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY THE FINAL EIR AND CONSIDER THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE IN HERE ON THE MICROPHONE. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS, UH, THE LAYOUT OF, UH, AREAS A, B, AND C THAT ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION. 
          THEY'RE OUTLINED IN ORANGE ON THIS SLIDE. 
          AND THE HOTEL SITE IS IN AREA A OUTLINED IN YELLOW IN THAT NORTHEAST CORNER. 
          UM, ALSO THAT RED DASHED LINE IS WHAT THE OVERLAY, UM, WAS BEING CONSIDERED AS IN JUNE, 2023. 
          IT'S BEEN REDUCED IN SIZE TO A, B AND C BASED ON INPUT RECEIVED FROM, UH, THE COMMISSION AND, UH, THE PUBLIC THROUGH ALL THOSE PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT OLIVIA ALLUDED TO AND, AND SHOWED IN A PREVIOUS SLIDE, GENERAL PLAN, LAND USE. 
          YOU SEE, MOST OF THE AREAS A, B, AND C ARE IN THAT LAVENDER COLOR, WHICH IS MIXED USE. 
          AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, BLUE GRAY, WHICH IS PUBLIC SEMI-PUBLIC IN, UH, AREA C. 
          THERE ARE A NUMBER OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS EVERYONE'S AWARE OF THAT YOU SEE THAT THE HISTORIC COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, UH, ABUTS AREA C ON ITS, UH, NORTHEAST SIDE. 
          UH, AND IT OVERLAPS A LITTLE BIT WITH AREA B AND WITH AREA A, MOST NOTABLY THE HOTEL SITE AND, UH, THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR RECS HARDWARE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, THE PROPOSED OVERLAY FEATURES INCLUDE A NUMBER OF THINGS. 
          I THINK PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH INCREASING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FROM 2.5, WHICH IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED UP TO SIX. 
          UM, ESTABLISHING A CUP PROCESS THAT'S CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHT UP TO 75 FEET WITH SPECIFIC FINDINGS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE SIMILARLY TO INCREASE LOCK COVERAGE ABOVE 80%, UP TO A MAXIMUM OF A HUNDRED PERCENT, AGAIN, WITH SPECIFIC FINDINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO ACCOMPANY THAT DECISION. 
          UH, ALLOWING FOR GROUND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, FACADE ACTIVATION ZONES, ELIMINATING SETBACK STANDARDS, AND ADDING NEW STEPBACK STANDARDS FOR, UM, HIGHER, UH, FLOORS, NOT GROUND FLOOR. 
          OKAY. 
          AS OLIVIA MENTIONED, THE REGULATORY SETTING FOR THIS, IT'S A SET OF REGULATIONS. 
          IT DOESN'T PROPOSE ANY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          THE OVERLAY DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY. 
          SO AS SUCH, WE'VE EVALUATED IT PROGRAMMATICALLY IN THE DOCUMENT. 
          SO THERE'S A PROGRAMMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE OVERLAYS POTENTIAL IMPACTS, AND THEN A PROJECT LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR THE HOTEL. 
          SO HERE'S THE HOTEL SITE FROM A AERIAL VIEW ON THE CORNER OF, UM, PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH, AND B. 
          AND THEN HERE IS A VISUAL SIMULATION OF WHAT THE HOTEL WOULD LOOK LIKE BASED ON THE CURRENT DESIGN, IT DOES SHOW THOSE STEP BACK OF THE UPPER FLOORS. 
          THAT'S PART OF THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE, THE OVERLAY REGULATIONS. 
          UM, AND THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT OTHER INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS MIGHT AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY, BE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE VISUAL SIMULATIONS, UM, ESPECIALLY WHERE THERE'S WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF, OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS OR, OR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT MIGHT, UM, SUPPORT A DECISION TO REQUIRE THIS KIND OF ANALYSIS. 
          SO THE INITIAL STUDY THAT WAS CIRCULATED WITH THE NOP BACK IN APRIL EVALUATED ALL OF THE SQA CHECKLIST QUESTIONS AND TOPICS. 
          AND BASED ON THAT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INCLUDES THREE TOPICS, UM, WITH THEIR OWN SECTION, AESTHETICS, CULTURAL AND TRIBAL, CULTURAL AND LAND USE AND PLANNING. 
          AND THEN ALL THE OTHER EFFECTS THAT WERE IN STUDIED IN THE INITIAL STUDY ARE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT DIR. 
          SO YOU'LL FIND, UM, NOT JUST A REPEAT OF THEM. 
          IN SOME CASES, WE ENHANCE SOME OF THE ANALYSIS WHERE WE FOUND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE, UH, HELPFUL TO, UM, TO PROVIDE TO THE DECISION MAKERS AND THE PUBLIC. 
          SO ALL OF THE CHECKLIST ITEMS ARE INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT DIR AND TO FURTHER SUPPORT THAT ANALYSIS, WE PREPARED A NUMBER OF OTHER ASSESSMENTS LISTED HERE. 
          AS I SAID, SIMULATIONS, WHICH WE'LL SHOW YOU IN A SECOND, UM, SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY, A LOT OF CULTURAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS. 
          [00:20:01]
WE DID GROUND PENETRATING RADAR AND DID, UH, CANINE DETECTION FOR HISTORICAL HUMAN REMAINS AT THE HOTEL SITE. 
          UM, HISTORIC BUILT ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AT THE HOTEL SITE, VEHICLE MILES TRAVEL ASSESSMENT FOR THE OVERLAY. 
          AND THEN AS REQUIRED BY CQA, IT'S CALLED OTHER CQA TOPICS AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. 
          THE KEY CONCLUSIONS ARE ONE THAT WE FOUND NO SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS. 
          SO WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASURES IN A NUMBER OF SECTIONS THAT WOULD REDUCE ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          AND THOSE ARE LISTED HERE. 
          UM, I'M JUST JUST GONNA GO THROUGH BRIEFLY THE AESTHETICS, THE CULTURAL AND THE LAND USE, UH, SECTIONS OF THE EIR TO GIVE YOU BROAD STROKES, UH, SUMMARY OF WHAT WE FOUND. 
          SO IN AESTHETICS FOR THE OVERLAY, WE FOUND THERE COULD BE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO SCENIC RESOURCES. 
          AND AS A RESULT, THERE'S A MITIGATION MEASURE IN THE DRAFT DIR CULTURAL, WE USE THE SHORTHAND CULL ONE E THAT AGAIN ALLUDES TO THIS PROCESS OF A CUP FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT WOULD GO ABOVE 45 FEET IN HEIGHT OR ABOVE LOCK COVERAGE OF 80%. 
          AND THAT, AGAIN, IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY. 
          YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHERE THE SITE IS. 
          SO IT'S SPECULATIVE ANYWHERE IN THE OVERLAY AN INDIVIDUAL PROJECT CAME IN, UM, YOU WOULD LOOK AT WHERE IT'S, UH, LOCATED, WHAT'S AROUND IT, AND WHETHER, UM, IT WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS BEYOND OR AS PART OF THIS CUP PROCESS. 
          UM, AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES THE REQUIRED FINDINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE MADE TO GRANT THE CUP. 
          SO WITH THAT MITIGATION, WE FOUND THAT IMPACTS OF THE OVERLAY IN TERMS OF AESTHETICS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT FOR THE HOTEL. 
          AGAIN, WE PREPARED THESE VISUAL SIMULATIONS FROM A NUMBER OF LOCATIONS SELECTED, UH, TOGETHER WITH THE CITY. 
          AND AGAIN, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT OTHER FUTURE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS MIGHT BE REQUIRED TO DO. 
          SO WE'LL GO THROUGH A FEW OF THEM. 
          IT SHOWS BOTH THE EXISTING AND THE FUTURE. 
          SO HERE IS THE FUTURE VIEW FROM PETAL PETALUMA BOULEVARD AND WESTERN STREET, LOOKING TOWARDS THE HOTEL ACROSS CENTER PARK, A CLOSER VIEW FROM THAT SAME AREA, UM, FROM SECOND STREET AND B, FROM WALNUT PARK OFF D STREET, STREET FROM B STREET AND FIFTH, AND THEN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER ON THIS SAME BLOCK. 
          SO IT GIVES YOU A SENSE OF, UM, THE HEIGHT, THE MASSING, THE SCALE, THE COLOR, THE MATERIALS ARTICULATION, ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS TO, TO HELP MAKE A DETERMINATION ABOUT WHETHER IT WOULD FIT WITHIN THE FABRIC OF THE DOWNTOWN AND BE COMPATIBLE. 
          UM, FROM AN AESTHETIC STANDPOINT. 
          WE ALSO, ALTHOUGH NOT REQUIRED BY QUA FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES, PREPARED SOME, UH, SHADOW ANALYSIS, THE DIFFERENT EQUINOXES AND DIFFERENT TIMES A DAY. 
          SO I PICKED A FEW OF 'EM THAT SHOW THE MOST, UM, EFFECT OF THE BUILDING. 
          SO THIS IS IN THE SPRING, IN THE MORNING, YOU CAN SEE IT WOULD SHADE ACROSS B STREET A LITTLE BIT TO THE, THE BUILDING ON THAT CORNER AND A LITTLE BIT OF A CENTER PARK. 
          AND OBVIOUSLY THAT AS YOU MOVE TOWARDS NOON, THE SHADOW, UH, DECREASES AND, AND SHRINKS BACK TOWARDS THE BUILDING. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF A, THESE ARE THE MOST EXTREME PARTS OF THE DAY. 
          EARLY MORNING AND LATE AFTERNOON, THERE'S THE FALL. 
          SO THEY'RE KIND OF SIMILAR SUMMER SOLSTICE, A LITTLE BIT LESS ONTO THE STREET AND THE SIDEWALK. 
          AND IN THE WINTER IS THE LONGEST SHADOW GOING ACROSS CENTER PARK, WHICH HAS A LOT OF TALL TREES ON IT ALREADY THAT PROVIDE SHADOW. 
          SO IT'S SORT OF CONTRIBUTE TO WHAT'S ALREADY OCCURRING THERE FOR A BIT IN THE MORNING, WINTER SOLSTICE IN THE AFTERNOON, IT'S SHADING ACROSS PETALUMA BOULEVARD TO THE BUILDING ACROSS THE WAY FOR A, A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME IN THE AFTERNOON. 
          I'M MOVING ON TO CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. 
          SO THIS IS AN EXHIBIT THAT WE CREATED THROUGH A LOT OF DATA ANALYSIS AT THE STATE AND LOCAL AND , UM, NORTHWEST INFORMATION SYSTEM, UM, CENTER HERE IN ROANOKE PARK, AND COMPILED THIS FOR THE CITY. 
          SO IT'S A LISTING OF, UM, PROPERTIES THAT EITHER HAVE BEEN UNASSESSED AND THAT'S THE, UM, MAGENTA OR LAVENDER COLOR. 
          A LOT OF THE PROPERTIES IN AREAS A, B, C, UM, IN ORANGE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AND FOUND I INELIGIBLE FOR LISTING. 
          AND THEN IN GREEN PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AND FOUND TO BE ELIGIBLE. 
          [00:25:02]
UM, IN TERMS OF CULTURAL RESOURCES ON THE OVERLAY, WE FOUND THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE OVERLAY COULD OBVIOUSLY AFFECT KNOWN OR ELIGIBLE RESOURCES. 
          SO AGAIN, WE HAVE A SERIES OF VERY ROBUST MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          CALL ONE A THROUGH ONE E THAT REQUIRE EVALUATIONS, COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS, WHETHER IT'S SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR OR HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDING SURVEY, OR DOING HISTORIC, UM, RESOURCE EVALUATIONS ON SPECIFIC SITES. 
          AND AGAIN, FINDINGS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE TO ENSURE THAT, UM, PROPERTIES ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH, WITH ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO WITH THAT MITIGATION, WE, WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE THE CONCLUSION THAT, UM, IN TERMS OF THE OVERLAY IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          WITH THAT MITIGATION INCORPORATED FOR THE HOTEL SITE, WE DID A SPECIFIC SITE-SPECIFIC HISTORIC BUILT ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT TO EVALUATE WHETHER THE HOTEL WOULD RES RESULT IN IMPACTS TO RESOURCES WITHIN OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO IT. 
          IT WAS CONDUCTED BY, UM, A QUALIFIED HISTORICAL, UM, ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN, AND WE USED BOTH SQL REQUIREMENTS, THE HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES, AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS. 
          THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF INFORMATION IN THE EIR AND THE CONCLUSION IS THAT THE HOTEL WOULD NOT INTRODUCE INCOMPATIBLE MASSING OR SCALE AND WOULD CONFORM TO THE LARGELY CONFORM TO THE HISTORIC COMMERCIAL DISTRICT GUIDELINES. 
          SO AGAIN, WITH MITIGATION, IT WAS FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF LAND USE. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE CHANGING THE REGULATIONS AND COULD ALLOW, UM, TALLER BUILDINGS, LARGER BUILDINGS, DENSER BUILDINGS, SO, UH, WOULD CONFLICT WITH WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE BOOKS IN THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THIS CUP PROCESS, THAT ALLOWS THE CITY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS TO LOOK AT PROJECTS THAT ARE PROPOSING EITHER HEIGHTS ABOVE 45 FEET OR LOT COVERAGE ABOVE 80%, AND HAVE TO MAKE ALL OF THESE FINDINGS TO, UM, CONFIRM THAT THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO THOSE FUTURE PROJECTS INCLUDE APPROVALS, INCLUDE SPAR, H SPAR, AND THE CUP PROCESS. 
          WE ACTUALLY PUT A LOT OF INFORMATION TOGETHER IN APPENDIX D THAT KIND OF LAYS OUT THE PROCESS SO PEOPLE CAN SEE ALL THE DIFFERENT STEPS THAT A PROJECT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE. 
          SO AGAIN, WITH, WITH THAT MITIGATION, IT WAS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          AND FOR THE HOTEL, SIMILARLY, BECAUSE IT'S, UM, OOPS, GO BACK, BECAUSE IT'S PROPOSING A HEIGHT THAT'S ABOVE 45 FEET AND LOCK COVERAGE AND SETBACKS AND ALL IT, IT RELIES ON, IT WOULD NEED THE OVERLAY TO BE APPROVED. 
          SO WITH APPROVAL OF THE OVERLAY, THE HOTEL WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS, AND IT WOULD ALSO BE PROCESSED AS PART OF THE, UM, CUP PROCESS WITH THE FINDINGS THAT GO WITH IT. 
          SO THE HOTEL WAS FOUND TO BE IMPACTS RELATED TO LAND USE. 
          PANELING AND PLANNING FOR THE HOTEL WERE FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT AS REQUIRED BY SQUA. 
          WE ALSO EVALUATED A NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES. 
          YOU HAVE TO EVALUATE THE NO PROJECT, NO BUILD WHERE THE HOTEL WOULD NOT BE BUILT, AND THE, THE, UM, PROJECT WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD AND THE OVERLAY WOULD NOT BE PUT IN PLACE. 
          WE ALSO LOOKED AT A REDUCED AREA C, WHICH I THINK THE COMMISSION HAD SUGGESTED, UM, AT A EARLIER TIMES. 
          SO WE WANTED TO INCLUDE THAT AS ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES. 
          AND WE LOOKED AT REDUCED HEIGHT IN WHICH THE HOTEL WOULD BE REDUCED IN HEIGHT TO 45 FEET. 
          THAT WOULD INCLUDE REMOVAL OF THE ROOFTOP TERRACE AND THE EVENT CENTER. 
          UM, AND SO OUT OF THAT, THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE WAS NO PROJECT. 
          AND WHEN THAT OCCURS, YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE AS AS THE SECOND IN LINE. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE THE REDUCED HEIGHT ALTERNATIVE. 
          SO THAT CONCLUDES THE QUA PROCESS. 
          YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LET'S SEE. 
          ARE WE BACK TO, OKAY. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, THANK YOU MARY FOR WALKING US THROUGH THE, UH, EIR PROCESS. 
          I'M GONNA TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL POINTS AS WE WRAP UP STAFF'S PRESENTATION. 
          UH, SO THIS, UH, SLIDE GIVES YOU THE FULL PICTURE OF THE PROJECTS REVIEW TIMELINE. 
          SO AGAIN, AS WE STARTED, UH, LOOKING BACK TO 2023, THE WORKSHOP STUDY SESSIONS, ALL OF THAT WAS COMPLETED LAST YEAR. 
          WE ARE NOW SQUARELY IN THE MIDST OF THE QUA EIR REVIEW PROCESS. 
          UM, WE HAVE TOUCHED ON, UM, THIS WITH RELEASE OF THE INITIAL STUDY, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC SCOPING AND COMMENT PERIOD DURING THAT PHASE. 
          AND THEN, UM, AT THE END OF LAST MONTH, PUBLISHED THE DRAFT DIR, WHICH AS, UM, MARY STATED, WE ARE IN THAT 45 DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD DURING WHICH WE WILL BE HAVING TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, THE ONE THIS EVENING. 
          [00:30:01]
UH, AND THEN ON OCTOBER 7TH BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON, ON THE DRAFT DIR TO COLLECT AND RECEIVE COMMENTS. 
          AND THEN THERE ARE MANY SUBSEQUENT STEPS IN, UM, THAT MUST OCCUR TO GRANT ANY PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS. 
          BUT BEFORE ANY OF THAT HAPPENS, THE CITY COUNCIL MUST FIRST CERTIFY THE FINAL EIR. 
          UH, AND THAT PROCESS INVOLVES A DETERMINATION THAT THE EIR IS ADEQUATE ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND, UM, CERTIFICATION, WHICH IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED TO OCCUR IN DECEMBER LATER THIS YEAR. 
          AND THEN ONLY AFTER THAT CAN THE ENTITLEMENTS BE CONSIDERED. 
          AGAIN, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS SOLE AUTHORITY OVER THE OVERLAY ENTITLEMENTS. 
          UM, THE, UH, THE FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, UH, FOR THAT WOULD BE TARGETED AT DECEMBER OF THIS, UH, OF THIS YEAR. 
          AND, UM, IF THE OVERLAY IS APPROVED, WHICH IS FULLY DISCRETIONARY, THEN THE HOTEL ENTITLEMENTS WOULD PROCEED. 
          THAT REQUIRES, AGAIN, THE HISTORIC SPAR TO COME BEFORE THE HCPC AT A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          AND, UH, THE USE PERMIT TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, SO THOSE, UH, THAT HEARING IS ANTICIPATED TO OCCUR AT THE, UM, EARLY PART OF 2025. 
          UH, SO THIS KIND OF REITERATES WHAT I JUST WALKED THROUGH IN TERMS OF THE ROLE OF THE VARIOUS, UM, REVIEWING BODIES. 
          SO, UH, I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT UP HERE FOR A MINUTE, BUT I JUST KIND OF COVERED ALL OF THIS, SO I DON'T THINK I NEED TO TALK THROUGH THAT AGAIN. 
          I THINK I'LL JUST, UM, QUICKLY SAY THAT AGAIN TONIGHT. 
          WE ARE HERE TO RECEIVE THE, UM, THE INPUT ON THE DRAFT EIR AND, UH, ON FROM BOTH THE PUBLIC AND, UH, THE DECISION MAKERS. 
          AND SO THAT IS, UM, WHAT WE ARE UP FOR TONIGHT. 
          SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT ABOUT APPROVAL OR DENIAL, DENIAL, WHETHER YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION. 
          THIS IS ABOUT, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THAT FOCUS ON THE ADEQUACY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. 
          AND SO, UH, WHAT WE ARE ASKING, UH, FOR THIS EVENING IS TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER AND RECEIVE THOSE COMMENTS THAT STAFF WILL COLLECT. 
          AND, UM, AT THE END OF THE 45, UH, DAY COMMENT PERIOD, WE WILL REVIEW ALL OF THOSE AND, UM, AND WE WILL ASSEMBLE THOSE AND RESPOND TO THOSE THAT RELATE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AS PART OF THE FINAL, I WILL SAY, AGAIN, THAT WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF THAT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. 
          WE HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY ON OCTOBER 7TH BEFORE CITY COUNCIL TO AGAIN RECEIVE, UH, VERBAL COMMENTS. 
          AND AT ANY TIME BETWEEN, UM, NOW AND OCTOBER 7TH, UH, THE PUBLIC IS WELCOME TO SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS AS WELL, THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE FINAL. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE ON TO THE FORMAL RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS TO CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER THE ADEQUACY OF THE EIR, PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE, ON THE DRAFT, EIR, UH, FOR THE HCPC TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT BY MOTION ON THE DIR ADEQUACY AND FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION, WHICH IS IN ATTACHMENT ONE TONIGHT, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF THE FINAL. 
          AND THAT COMPLETES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UM, WITH THAT WE WILL MOVE INTO PLANNING COMMISSION AND HCPC QUESTIONS. 
          IF I COULD JUST GRAB THE SCREEN SHARE QUICKLY HERE. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          SO JUST TO ADD A BIT OF STRUCTURE HERE FOR OUR QUESTION SECTION, UM, THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO ASK STAFF SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, INQUIRE ABOUT METHODOLOGY OR CLARIFY DATA. 
          I WILL ASK COMMISSIONERS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO PLEASE TRY AND AVOID LEADING QUESTIONS. 
          AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING, UM, ON THE TOPIC AT HAND, FEEL FREE TO PASS IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          UM, AND TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE STRUCTURE HERE, SINCE IT IS QUITE A HEFTY DOCUMENT, WE'RE GONNA PROCEED THROUGH THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS, UM, AESTHETICS, CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE AND PLANNING, AND THEN TALK ABOUT ANY QUESTIONS ON THE ADDITIONAL EFFECTS EVALUATED IN THE INITIAL STUDY, AND THEN HAVE SOME TIME FOR GENERAL QUESTIONS OF TOPICS NOT YET COVERED. 
          UM, I WILL ASK AS WELL, UH, AS WE SORT OF TICK THROUGH THESE SECTIONS THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO CLEARLY DENOTE IF IT'S A OVERLAY QUESTION OR A HOTEL QUESTION, THAT I THINK WILL HELP KEEP EVERYBODY STRAIGHT. 
          UM, AND I'LL GIVE, UH, A PLUG TO THE FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE UP NEXT. 
          SO GO AHEAD AND GET YOUR COMMENT CARD FILLED OUT. 
          IF YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, THEY'RE IN THE BACK NEXT TO THE WATER FOUNTAIN WITH PENS, AND YOU CAN TURN THEM INTO THE CLERK 
          [00:35:01]
HERE AT THE FRONT. 
          SO, UM, NOW'S A GOOD TIME TO GET YOUR COMMENT CARD IN ORDER. 
          AND IF YOU, ONE MORE PLUG, IF YOU ARE INTENDING TO SEED YOUR TIME TO ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, PLEASE NOTE THAT ON THE CARD SO THAT WE CAN KEEP TRACK OF, UM, FOLKS WHO ARE GETTING BUNDLES OF TIME. 
          SO WITH THAT, UM, LET'S MOVE INTO THE QUESTION PERIOD FOR ALL COMMISSIONERS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. 
          AND WE'LL KICK THINGS OFF WITH ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT AESTHETICS IN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 
          COUNCILWOMAN CATER THOMPSON. 
          I JUST, UM, WANTED, I HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT ON WHAT WE'RE HEARING ALL ON SOCIAL MEDIA ABOUT THE NINE STORIES. 
          IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH PEOPLE FEEL AS THOUGH WE'RE, UM, BUILDING NINE STORY BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN. 
          AND I'D LIKE STAFF TO AT LEAST COMMENT ON THAT. 
          BRIAN, DO YOU WANNA TAKE THAT? I SAW YOU REACHING FOR YOUR MICROPHONE, , CERTAINLY. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          UM, SO, UH, YES, WE'RE WELL AWARE OF THE, UM, DISCUSSION AND THE BACK AND FORTH AND THE ANALYSIS. 
          IT IS A, A CONCEPT, AN IDEA THAT, UH, STAFF HAS BEEN, UM, LOOKING INTO, UM, UH, REALLY SINCE THE START OF, UM, THE CONCLUSION OF THE, UM, PREVIOUS HEARING. 
          UM, AND JUST SPECIFICALLY WHAT I CAN MENTION IS, UH, THE QUESTION ABOUT DENSITY BONUS, UM, AND NINE STORIES. 
          IS THERE SOMETHING THAT THE OVERLAY, UH, POTENTIALLY CHANGES WHAT YOU KNOW, UM, AND TRYING TO STAY IN BOUNDS HERE? I, I SEE, UM, SOME MY STAFF MEMBERS, UM, UH, LOOKING AT ME HERE. 
          UM, SO THE PURPOSE OF THE DRAFT, EIR, UM, WHAT DID, WHAT DID THE DRAFT EIR EVALUATE? UM, AND AS PROPOSED, UM, WE LOOKED AT, UM, THE POTENTIAL FOR THE DENSITY, UM, OF THE HOUSING. 
          UM, AND WE FEEL THAT WE DID ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THAT, UM, IN THIS ANALYSIS. 
          UM, THAT SAID, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS, UM, YOU KNOW, HYPOTHETICAL PROJECTS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY, UM, BE PROPOSED, UM, EACH OF THOSE PROJECTS WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE THEIR OWN SQA ANALYSIS. 
          THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO, COME THROUGH, UM, UH, AND, AND SORT OF MEET THAT BAR, UM, AT THE PROJECT LEVEL. 
          BUT, UH, WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, UM, IS THE, IS A DRAFT EIR ON THE, UM, OVERLAY AT A PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, UM, WHICH WE FEEL, UM, HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, UM, FOR THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          UM, THERE'S A LOT OF HYPOTHETICAL PROJECTS THAT COULD HAPPEN, UM, WITH OR WITHOUT THE OVERLAY DENSITY. 
          BONUS LAW HAS BEEN, UM, IN EFFECT FOR, UH, A NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          UM, THERE ARE ALSO, UM, ECONOMIC CHALLENGES, WHICH IS ALSO WHY WE DON'T SEE, UM, PROJECTS, THEORETICAL PROJECTS, UM, ACTUALLY, UM, UH, MATERIALIZE. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SORT OF GROUNDED IN REALITY OF A, UM, OVERLAY THAT, UM, LOOKS AT IT PROGRAMMATICALLY. 
          AGAIN, IF THERE'S A PROJECT THAT COMES THROUGH, UM, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THAT, UM, FOR ITS PROJECT LEVEL IMPACTS. 
          UM, IF AND WHEN A PROJECT WOULD GET SUBMITTED, LEMME FOLLOW UP WITH THAT. 
          SO IF, UM, BUT WITHIN THIS OVERLAY, YOU CAN'T GO TO NINE STORIES, BUT THIS IS STATE LAW FROM 1979 THAT ACTUALLY ALLOWED THAT TO HAPPEN, BUT IT'S NEVER HAPPENED. 
          AND THAT IS FOR, UM, LIKE BONUS DENSITY FOR LOW INCOME, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          SO WHAT THE, THE PROJECT, THE OVERLAY DOES NOT PROPOSE A NINE, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY TO, TO DO THE NINE STORIES. 
          UM, HOWEVER, DENSITY BONUS IS A CHANGING LANDSCAPE. 
          SO THERE, THERE ARE, UM, WE ARE AWARE OF THE CONCERNS. 
          UM, AND SO FOR THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT, IF, IF THE PUBLIC, IF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE OR THE COMMISSION FEEL LIKE WE HAVEN'T, OR THE EIR DOES NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THOSE IMPACTS, THOSE ARE, UM, THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT TO BE RAISED. 
          SO WE COULD FURTHER LOOK INTO THAT FOR PREPARATION OF THE FINAL. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL STOP THERE AND I'LL HAVE MORE LATER. 
          COMMISSIONER RICKSON, JUST AS A FOLLOW UP ON THAT, UH, JUST TWO ITEMS 'CAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF MY MAIN QUESTIONS. 
          WITH EVERYTHING GOING 
          [00:40:01]
ON, GIVEN HC D'S STANCE ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOUSING, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS EXPECTED TO BE ANALYZED IN CQA AND IS IT ALLOWED TO BE ANALYZED IN CQA? UH, DOES THE STATE SAY YOU HAVE TO MITIGATE IMPACTS EVEN BASED ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAWS? I THINK COMMISSIONER CUSON, AND I'LL ANSWER IT, AND MAYBE OLIVIA, YOU'LL DISAGREE. 
          I THINK YOU DO NEED TO, UNLESS IT IS A MINISTERIAL PROJECT, LIKE AN SB 35, UH, AN ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD BE PART OF THE PROJECT. 
          AND SQL REQUIRES YOU TO REVIEW THE PROJECT. 
          I AGREE. 
          FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. 
          . 
          WELL, AND JUST ON A PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, JUST THINKING AGAIN WITH HC D'S STANCE ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, HOW PRO HOUSING THEY'RE RIGHT NOW ON A PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, DO WE HAVE TO ASSUME OR INCORPORATE THESE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAWS INTO THAT ANALYSIS? UH, NO, BECAUSE THEY ARE, UH, IMPOSED BY THE STATE. 
          AND SO, BUT TO DYLAN'S POINT, UM, IF AND WHEN A, UM, STATE DENSITY BONUS PROJECT COMES BEFORE ME, IT UH, AND IT'S FULLY DIS AND IT'S DISCRETIONARY, UH, THAT WOULD BE ANALYZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE USE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE, WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES. 
          AND I'LL ALSO ADD TO THE DENSITY BONUS LAW ALLOWS, IT'S A TOUGH STANDARD, BUT YOU CAN DENY DENSITY BONUS IF IT HAS A SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT. 
          AND IN THAT DEFINITION OF SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT AND INCLUDES TWO HISTORICAL RESOURCES. 
          SO THERE'S CQA, THERE'S ALSO THAT HARD STANDARD UNDER DENSITY BONUS THAT, UM, ARE THERE TO, I GUESS, PROTECT, UH, ANY, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CAUSED BY THOSE DENSITY BONUSES. 
          AND I WAS JUST GONNA ADD TO REITERATE, THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE ITSELF REQUIRES THOSE IN TYPE, THOSE PROCESSES TO PLAY OUT THE USE PERMIT AND THE SPAR PROCESS, WHETHER IT'S HISTORIC OR NOT. 
          AND WE ALSO WENT STEP FURTHER AND IN AND IMPOSED THAT USE PERMIT AS MITIGATION IN THE EIR ON THE OVERLAY. 
          SO THAT'S ANOTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, HOOK THAT THE CITY HAS TO, UH, MAINTAIN THAT USE PERMIT AUTHORIZATION, THAT THE, UH, THAT THE STATE DENSITY BONUS MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE SOME A, A WORKAROUND. 
          AND THEN IN THE SAME VEIN, THEN IT'S SAFE TO ASSUME THAT'S NOT IN THIS PROGRAM PROGRAMMATIC EIR ANALYSIS BECAUSE WE DON'T NEED IT AND INSTEAD WE DON'T INCREASE DENSITY HERE. 
          SO WE ARE ACTUALLY NOT ANTICIPATING ADDING ANY RESIDENTIAL POPULATION OVER WHAT THE GENERAL PLAN YEAH, I ALREADY HAS IN PLACE. 
          RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          THERE'S NO CHANGE PROPOSED TO THE DENSITY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I KNOW WE'RE ON AESTHETICS, BUT I JUST THOUGHT THAT WAS THE TIME TO ASK THAT, SO THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON AESTHETICS? GO AHEAD, ROGER. 
          YEAH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WITH THE, UM, THE OVERLAY, UH, DEALS WITH PARCEL A, B AND C PLUS SOME OTHER PARCELS. 
          THIS HAVE BEEN ADDED, I BELIEVE. 
          AND THEN, UH, IT'S RUNNING PARALLEL TO, UM, THE LAND USE ELEMENT AND, AND THE LAND USE ELEMENT IS PROPOSING HIGH DENSITY HOUSING. 
          THE LAND USE, UH, FRAMEWORK ELEMENT IS PROPOSING, UH, HIGH DENSITY HOUSING, UH, USING THE HEIGHTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TO ACHIEVE THAT. 
          YET THE OVER THE OVERLAY DOES NOT, UH, DEAL WITH HIGH DENSITY HOUSING. 
          IT DEALS WITH 30 UNITS PER ACRE. 
          SO I'M JUST WONDERING, UH, WHAT ARE WE ASSESSING HERE IN TERMS OF IMPACT? YEAH, SO WHAT WE ARE ASSESSING IS THE EFFECTS OF THIS OVERLAY AND THIS, UH, SUB AREA, THE SUB AREAS. 
          AND I WILL SHARE THE SCREEN SO WE ARE CLEAR ABOUT WHERE THOSE BOUNDARIES ARE. 
          UH, AND SO, UH, TO THE COMMISSIONER'S POINT, THERE IS A LARGER CONVERSATION HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT A GENERAL PLAN UPDATE THAT IS A SEPARATE PROCESS THAT IS A SEPARATE, UH, ACTION. 
          AND THAT WILL, UH, COME BEFORE THE DECISION MAKERS ALONG WITH CQA REVIEW AND THOSE ENTITLEMENTS WILL HAPPEN, UM, SEPARATELY AS PART OF THAT REVIEW PROCESS. 
          SO WHAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS THE, UH, EIR ON THE OVERLAY AND THE HOTEL AND, UH, THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY INCREASE IN THE CURRENT ALLOWED DENSITY, UH, RESIDENTIAL DENSITY COMMISSIONER HUBER. 
          YEAH, SO THERE WERE TWO AREAS WHERE I SAW A LOT OF COMMENTS AND I CERTAINLY RECEIVED A LOT OF EMAILS. 
          ONE HAD TO DO WITH CONFUSION OVER HOW, UH, SCENIC VISTAS ARE DEFINED AND HOW THEIR, 
          [00:45:01]
HOW THEIR MITIGATION IS DESCRIBED. 
          AND THEN THE OTHER IS JUST HOW SHADOWS ARE MODELED ON THESE BUILDINGS. 
          SO IF YOU COULD COVER BOTH, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. 
          SURE. 
          SO, UM, I'M GONNA TACKLE THE SCENIC VISTAS AND, UM, PASS IT OVER TO MARY TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SHADOW ANALYSIS SPECIFICALLY. 
          SO, UH, THE GENERAL, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT WE DO IS WORKING FROM THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE GENERAL PLAN EIR. 
          SO IN THAT DOCUMENT, UM, THE CITY HAS A HANDFUL OF SCENIC RESOURCES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED. 
          THOSE ARE THE RIVER, THE HILLSIDES, UH, AND IT SPECIFICALLY ASKS US TO LOOK AT THE VIEWS OF THOSE FROM A FEW KEY POINTS. 
          UM, BUT IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS, WE REALIZED THAT THE, UM, SKYLINE, THE CITY SKYLINE AND THE SPECIFICALLY THE HISTORIC, UH, BUILDINGS ARE SCENIC RESOURCES IN THEMSELF. 
          AND SO THE EIR ACKNOWLEDGES THAT AND STATES THAT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, UM, SAYS THAT AS WELL. 
          AND SO WE HAVE TREATED THE, UM, HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HISTORIC BUILDINGS AS SCENIC RESOURCES AND THE EIR ANALYZES IT THAT WAY. 
          AND I'M, UH, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE SHADOWS, I'M GONNA LET MARY TAKE A PASS. 
          YEAH, THANK YOU. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION 'CAUSE I'M LOOKING THROUGH THE DOCUMENT AND I SEE WE DON'T DEFINE WHAT KIND OF SOFTWARE PROGRAM IS USED TO DO IT, BUT, BUT IT'S, IT'S A COMMONLY USED THING THAT, UM, WE EMPLOY ON, ON PROJECTS WHERE WE PREPARE SHADOW ANALYSIS. 
          SO I CAN ADD SOME INFORMATION TO THE EIR TO EXPLAIN WHAT THAT SOFTWARE PACKAGE IS. 
          SO THIS, THAT'S ABOUT ALL I CAN SAY HERE, BUT IT'S NOT DONE, IT'S NOT DONE BY HAND, IT'S DONE BY CAD. 
          WE USE THE PLANS FROM THE HOTEL SO WE GET EXACT SPECIFICATIONS AND ARTICULATION OF THE BUILDING AND IT'S GEO-REFERENCED ON THE GROUND. 
          AND SO IT'S, IT'S, UH, ALL COMPUTER GENERATED. 
          UH, I TAKE IT THE SOFTWARE THAT'S USED IS INDUSTRY STANDARD. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, UM, GOING BACK TO THE, UH, SCENIC VISTA, I I APPRECIATE THAT YOU INCLUDED HISTORIC RESOURCES AS PART OF THE SCENIC VISTA AND WHAT, WHAT VANTAGE POINTS ARE. 
          UH, IN PART BECAUSE IN THIS DRAFT IT REALLY DOESN'T STATE THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE. 
          UH, HOW WOULD A, I GUESS, A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BE MEASURED AND WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? YEAH, SO THE EIR UM, UH, DOES SAY THAT THERE'S A POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, UM, TO THOSE RESOURCES BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE CHANGING THE RULES AROUND THE, UM, IN THE OVERLAY AND THAT ABUTS AND OVERLAPS WITH THE DISTRICT. 
          AND SO THERE IS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, AND THE EIR ABSOLUTELY SAYS IT'S POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT, BUT IT SAYS WE HAVE A REVIEW PROCESS THAT IS SET UP TO MAKE SURE THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY COLLECTIVELY, UH, HAVE INPUT AND A PROCESS WHERE WE REVIEW DESIGN, AND DESIGN AND AESTHETICS ARE VERY, UM, INDIVIDUAL AND SO SOMETHING SOMEBODY MIGHT, YOU KNOW, PREFER ONE DESIGN OVER ANOTHER. 
          AND SO, UH, THAT REALLY IS WHAT THE CITY'S PROCESS IS FOR THE HISTORIC SPAR AND THE, AND THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN MAKE THOSE FINDINGS, THAT THE MATERIALS ARE APPROPRIATE AND THAT THEY'RE OF THE HIGHEST, UM, AND BEST QUALITY. 
          AND SO, UH, THE EIR CONCLUDES THAT WITH THOSE PROCESSES AND THE, UM, REVIEW OF THE, THE GUIDELINES AND THE EFFECTS OF THE HISTOR OF THE, UM, HOTEL ON THE ADJACENT, UM, INELIGIBLE BUILDINGS AND THE DISTRICT THAT THE, UH, IMPACTS TO SCENIC RESOURCES WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON AESTHETICS? I'VE GOT A QUICK ONE. 
          UM, LOOKING AT, MM, OVERLAYS THE, UH, MITIGATION CUL ONE E, WHICH IS IN A VARIETY OF PLACES, BUT IF YOU'RE READING ALONG AT HOME, IT STRETCHES ACROSS THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ON PAGES 10 AND 11. 
          UM, AND WE'VE GOT HERE AT NUMBER TWO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT MAKES A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE OVERALL CHARACTER. 
          AND THEN THE POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION AND COMPATIBILITY WILL BE ASSESSED USING A COMBINATION OF VISUAL STUDIES, LINE OF SIGHT, UH, DRAWINGS, PHOTO SIMULATIONS, 3D MODELING AND VIEWSHED ANALYSIS, WHICH I APPRECIATE THAT DETAIL. 
          AND MY QUESTION IS DOWN AT NUMBER FOUR, WE SAY THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNREASONABLE RESTRICTIONS OF LIGHT AND AIR FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR OTHERWISE BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND OR WELFARE. 
          AND I'M CURIOUS HOW THAT WOULD BE ASSESSED, PLEASE. 
          SO AT THE PROJECT SPECIFIC LEVEL, I THINK THAT, UM, COMES BACK TO THE, UH, VISUAL, UH, SIMULATIONS AND THEN THE SHADE AND SHADOW STUDIES BECAUSE THAT'S, UH, WHAT LOOKS AT LIGHT. 
          AND, UM, AND SO THOSE ARE THE, THE TWO WAYS, UH, TWO TECHNICAL STUDIES THAT I CAN THINK ABOUT THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT, UH, COME BACK TO, UM, 
          [00:50:01]
EVIDENCE THAT WOULD SUPPORT A FINDING LIKE THAT YOU WANNA ADD SOMETHING? OH, AND I THINK ALSO THE, UM, THE STEP BACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE UPPER STORIES THAT HELPS TO, UM, ENSURE THAT LIGHT AND CIRCULATION ARE, UM, ENHANCED IN THE BUILDING DESIGN. 
          SO THEY'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO PROACTIVELY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DESIGN BUILDINGS THAT WOULD MEET THIS STANDARD. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRIGHT ON THE SAME, UH, MITIGATION OVERLAY, CUL ONE E DOWN IN SECTION THREE, UM, IT TALKS ABOUT EXCEPTIONAL ARCHITECTURE DESIGN, EXCEPTIONAL ARCHITECTURE DESIGN MAY BE DEMONSTRATED BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING. 
          UM, WHEN DOES ALL OF THAT GET ADJUDICATED OR LOOKED AT? BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS ABOUT INNOVATIVE, CREATIVE, OR ORIGINAL ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPTS. 
          THERE'S NOTHING LIKE THAT IN HERE, NOR IS THERE IN ANY OF THE RENDERINGS. 
          UH, SO WHAT YOU ARE POINTING TO IS THE LANGUAGE OF THE USE PERMIT. 
          SO THAT IS, UH, THOSE ARE ALL ITEMS, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE ITEMS ARE THINGS THAT, UM, HAPPEN RIGHT WHEN THE APPLICATION WALKS IN THE DOOR, THAT STAFF IS LOOKING TO, UM, MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FINDINGS CAN BE MADE AND THEN, UM, BROUGHT FORWARD AT THE, UH, DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS A USE PERMIT TO SUPPORT THOSE. 
          SO THOSE ARE, UM, SPECIFIC FINDINGS THAT, UM, THAT ARE SPELLED OUT IN THE USE PERMIT PROVISIONS FOR ANY PROJECT WITHIN THE OVERLAY. 
          SO WE WILL REVIEW THOSE WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING THE USE PERMIT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL HAVE TO FIND THOSE FINDINGS WHEN WE DO THE USE PERMIT. 
          RELATEDLY, I, I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT QUITE INBOUNDS FOR THE DRAFT EIR, BUT, BUT MORE A QUESTION ABOUT SORT OF WHEN IS IT INBOUNDS? IF THERE WERE TO BE, UM, THOUGHTS, COMMENTS ABOUT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ORDINANCE AND THE CHECKLIST OF THESE TYPES OF, UM, PROPOSALS, WHEN COULD COMMISSIONERS COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON THOSE? IS THAT WHEN I'LL LET YOU ANSWER. 
          IS THAT OKAY? YEAH, SO THAT I THINK WOULD BE AT THE TIME THAT COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING ADOPTING THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE, BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT USE PERMIT LANGUAGE IS PART OF THAT ENTITLEMENT BECAUSE IT IS A LEGISLATIVE ACTION AND IT'S, THAT'S THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO IT IS AT, UM, AT THAT TIME THAT, THAT THAT COUNCIL WOULD BE FINALIZING AND ACCEPTING FINALIZATION OF THOSE COMMENTS. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          UM, ANYTHING ELSE ON AESTHETICS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES? JUST A CLARIFICATION IS, UM, THE CUP PROCESS HAPPENS AT WHAT POINT AFTER THE DEVELOPER OR THE APPLICANT SUBMITS HIS PROJECT? UH, SO A APPLICATION IS, UH, RECEIVED AND IT IS SUBJECT TO A USE PERMIT. 
          SO IT IS, THAT IS WHAT THE, UM, APPLICATION IS FOR. 
          SO ANY PROJECT WITHIN THE OVERLAY THAT COMES INTO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WOULD, UH, BE REQUIRED TO DO A USE PERMIT. 
          AND SO WHEN THAT APPLICATION IS PROPOSED, IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS. 
          SO IT STARTS RIGHT WHEN IT WALKS IN THE DOOR. 
          SO THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD KNOW GOING INTO IT WHAT'S EXPECTED BY THE COP PROCESS. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          AND IT'S SPELLED OUT IN OUR, UM, ZONING CODE. 
          AND THEN, UH, THAT IS A STANDARD PROCESS THAT THE COMMISSION IS SEES, UH, AN AXON REGULARLY. 
          AND THEN WHAT THIS OVERLAY DOES IS IT ADDS ADDITIONAL FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE OVERLAY. 
          AND SO THAT IS WHAT YOU, THAT IS WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE OVERLAY IS. 
          AND, UH, I'M GONNA, ANDREWS WOULD LIKE TO ADD. 
          SURE. 
          AND ALSO I WANTED TO ADD COMMISSIONER THE, UM, AS WE'VE BEEN DOING, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR LARGER PROJECTS IN PRE-APPLICATION, SO DURING THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHASE, AND WE WOULD CONTINUE TO DO THAT. 
          UH, THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, BUT UH, WE DO FULLY INFORM ABOUT THE REGULATIONS THAT WOULD BE, UH, UNDER WHICH A PROJECT WOULD BE REVIEWED. 
          AND WE ALSO, UM, ADVISE ABOUT STUDIES THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE AS WELL AS, UH, SHOULD THE OVERLAY BE ADOPTED, THEN WE WOULD PUBLISH ALL OF THIS INTO A CHECKLIST AND IT WOULD BE AVAILABLE DURING THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHASE. 
          AND IF I COULD ADD ONE OTHER THING THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, UH, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OVERLAY, WHICH IS LEGISLATIVE AND UM, NOT SOMETHING WE CAN TOUCH AND FEEL, BUT THEN WE'RE, WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE HOTEL AND THAT IS, UH, WE ARE IN THE USE PERMIT PROCESS 
          [00:55:01]
FOR THAT RIGHT NOW. 
          SO THE HOTEL IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE KIND OF PROJECT THAT AND HOW WE WOULD PROCESS IT ONCE THE OVERLAY IS ESTABLISHED. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO I DID WANNA POINT EVERYONE TO, UM, THE, UH, LAND USE ANALYSIS IN THE EIR WHERE WE GO THROUGH AND WE HAVE A TABLE 3.3 DASH FOUR AND IT, UH, EVALUATES THE, THE HOTEL UNDER THE, UH, USE PERMIT PROVISIONS THAT WOULD APPLY UNDER THE OVERLAY. 
          AND UH, AND THEN WE ALSO TALK ABOUT, UM, 3.3 DASH FIVE, WHICH IS THE CRITERIA FOR BUILDINGS OVER 60 FEET. 
          SO WE HAVE MADE SOME, UM, PRELIMINARY, UM, FINDINGS ABOUT WHAT THAT IS, BUT THE, THE, THE DISCRETION OF THAT IS UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO THAT HAS BEEN ANALYZED IN THE EIR, WE HAVE PRESENTED THE INFORMATION TO THE BEST OF STAFF'S ABILITY. 
          UM, AND NOW IT, IT IS UP TO, AT THE USE PERMIT STAGE, IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE WITH THOSE MORE AESTHETICS. 
          JUST ONE. 
          YEAH. 
          ONE MORE QUESTION JUST ON WHAT THEY JUST SAID. 
          DID I HEAR YOU SAY CORRECTLY THAT THE USE PROCESS FOR THE HO USE PERMIT FOR THE HOTEL IS ALREADY UNDERWAY? WELL, IT'S UNDERWAY IN AS MUCH AS THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICATION IS BEING PROCESSED, AND THAT IS WHAT THE EIR HAS ANALYZED. 
          SO IT WILL COME BACK BEFORE YOU TO ACT ON IT, BUT WE'VE BEEN DOING ALL THIS WORK FROM DAY ONE TO BRING THAT FORWARD TO YOU. 
          SO HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU PROPOSE THE USE PERMIT IS DOING SINCE WE DON'T HAVE AN OVERLAY YET? ARE WE JUST GOING ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE IS AN OVERLAY? THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          SO WE HAVE TO ANALYZE, UH, WHAT WE KNOW AND WHAT'S REASONABLY FORESEEABLE. 
          AND SO THE, UM, AGAIN, THE EIR ADDRESSES THE OVERLAY AND ASSUMES THAT THAT BECOMES WHAT IS THE, THE DEFINING LEGISLATION TO, UH, UNDER WHICH THE HOTEL WOULD BE PROCESSED. 
          AND SO THAT MUST HAPPEN FIRST. 
          AND SO THE FIRST ACTION, UM, FOR ENTITLEMENTS FOLLOWING THE FINAL EIR IS FOR COUNSEL TO, AT THEIR DISCRETION ACT ON THE ESTABLISHING THE OVERLAY, WHICH ESTABLISHES THE USE PERMIT REGULATION. 
          AND THEN AFTER THAT IT CAN COME BACK FOR ACTION UNDER THOSE USE PERMIT REGULATIONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSIONS CONSIDERATION. 
          BUT I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THE USE PERMIT WHEN WE DON'T HAVE AN OVERLAY YET, WHICH IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT. 
          THEY, THEY DON'T APPROVE ANY USE PERMITS. 
          WE DO. 
          NO, I KNOW, BUT YOU'RE IN THE PROCESS OF, OF CREATING WHAT THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO HAVE, RIGHT. 
          OR TELLING THE DEVELOPER WHAT HE NEEDS TO PROPOSE. 
          SO CAN I JUST ADD TO THAT? UM, SO THERE'S A REASON WHY, UH, ON THE TIMELINE IT IS SEQUENTIAL. 
          AND SO, UH, WHAT I, I'LL JUST REITERATE WHAT OLIVIA IS SAYING. 
          YES, THERE HAS BEEN A, UM, AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED. 
          THAT APPLICATION WHILE IS TECHNICALLY IN PROCESS, IT CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT SOME FINALITY SOME CONCLUSION TO THE OVERLAY DISCUSSION. 
          SO IF SOMETHING WERE TO CHANGE, UH, WITHIN THE DISCUSSION OF THE OVERLAY, MAYBE THE, UM, THE CUP FINDINGS, UM, ARE SLIGHTLY MODIFIED TO BETTER REFLECT WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS, UM, WANTING TO SEE, UM, ONLY THEN WILL WE HAVE SOME FORM FOR THE HOTEL CUP TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          UM, SO THAT'S WHY IT, IT'S NOT TRACKING, I MEAN, YES, THE EIR WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE HOTEL EIR AS WELL AS THE OVERLAY. 
          UM, FOR GOOD REASON. 
          UM, BUT WE CAN'T, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE CUP FOR THE PROJECT ITSELF UNTIL WE HAVE, UM, A, A FINAL OVERLAY. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THERE'S A SEQUENCING TO IT. 
          SO IT'S JUST A SLIGHT MODIFICATION TO WHAT OLIVIA'S SAYING. 
          IT'S, IT'S IN PROCESS, BUT IT CAN ONLY PROCESS SO FAR WITHOUT THE OVERLAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THOUGHT I DID IT. 
          IF THE OVER OR IF AND WHEN THE OVERLAY IS APPROVED, THEN THE NEXT DAY THAT HE CAN GO FOR HIS USE PERMIT, IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING? SO, SO MUCH IS BEING PROCESSED AHEAD OF US HAVING AN OVERLAY? I'LL TRY TO ANSWER THAT. 
          WELL, I THINK THAT IS CORRECT, EXCEPT WE WOULD NEED TO DO THE PUBLIC NOTICING, WHICH REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, UH, MAIL AROUND A THOUSAND FEET OF THE PROPERTY, UH, AS WELL AS PUBLISHING IN THE ARGUS. 
          SO IT WOULDN'T BE THE VERY NEXT DAY. 
          THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE, I THINK IT'S 10 DAYS TO PUBLISH IN THE ARGUS IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION NEXT DAY. 
          [01:00:03]
OKAY. 
          LAST CALL FOR AESTHETICS. 
          NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES QUESTIONS THERE. 
          FIRST TO, UH, COMMISSIONER HOOPER, UH, THIS WAS ACTUALLY AN AESTHETICS QUESTION. 
          OH, I HAD ONE MORE, I'M SORRY. 
          OKAY, WE'LL BACK UP TO AESTHETICS. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          . 
          NO, I, 'CAUSE I HAVE, I'VE GOT THIS STUCK IN MY HEAD NOW. 
          'CAUSE WHEN WE WERE ORIGINALLY LOOKING AT THE OVERLAY, WE WERE LOOKING AT IT AS SEPARATE. 
          I RECOGNIZE THAT WITH THE EIR BECAUSE THE STATE LAW, THE TWO HAVE HAD TO BE BLENDED TOGETHER, WHICH FRANKLY MADE FOR AN INTERESTING READ, BUT HOW DO I PUT THIS? THEORETICALLY, THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM HERE FOR WHAT THE OVERLAY MIGHT LOOK LIKE. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE GOT STILL FAIRLY VAGUE GUIDELINES ON WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS COULD, COULD PUT FORWARD, WHAT KIND OF DESIGN GUIDELINES MIGHT BE IN PLACE. 
          SO SINCERELY, I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND CLEARLY IS THIS, YOU'VE PUT THE APPLICATION IN, IT'S A HANDFUL OF THINGS DONE. 
          YOU'RE WAITING FOR US TO GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS IF WE DO IT ALL, OR IS IT REALLY YOU'VE WORKED OFF OF WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT NOTHING WILL CHANGE? UM, IF I COULD CLARIFY FOR THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WE DO NOT HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION BEFORE US. 
          WE CANNOT RECEIVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION UNTIL THE OVERLAY HAS BEEN ADOPTED. 
          OKAY, THAT'S MUCH CLEARER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. 
          GO AHEAD. 
           CHAIR WHITLEY. 
          OKAY. 
          THIS KIND OF TIES INTO THE SAME THING TO SOME DEGREE. 
          UM, SO LET'S BACK UP TO THE NOTION OF THE OVERLAY VERSUS THE HOTEL. 
          LET'S SAY THAT THE HOTEL WAS NEVER PROPOSED AND WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT AN OVERLAY. 
          WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT THIS EIR RIGHT NOW, WOULD IT NEED AN EIR OR COULD THIS JUST BE A MINISTERIAL CHANGING OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS? UH, IT WOULD DEFINITELY NOT BE MINISTERIAL BECAUSE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS ARE SUBJECT TO FULL DISCRETION. 
          UM, IT IS A, IT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. 
          UM, I, IT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CALL TO GO DOWN THE EIR ROUTE IS ABOUT, UM, POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. 
          SO I THINK HERE WE WOULD ULTIMATELY LAND WITH DOING AN EIR BECAUSE WE ARE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC, UM, DOWNTOWN DISTRICT AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, UH, A CHANGE TO THE HEIGHT LIMIT THAT WHAT GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE GENERAL PLAN ANTICIPATED. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, HYPOTHETICALLY, IF IT WAS JUST THIS, I HYPOTHETICALLY WOULD SAY PROBABLY WE WOULD LAND WITH AN EIR. 
          SO, UM, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE, UM, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER WAS. 
          UM, MITIGATION MEASURE, CUL ONE E, UM, WHAT ADVERSE EFFECT IS THAT MITIGATING? YEAH, SO IT IS, UM, POINTING BACK TO THE REGULATION AGAIN THAT I TALKED ABOUT UNDER, UM, WHAT THE USE PERMIT PROVIDES, WHICH IS THAT ADDITIONAL LAYER OF DISCRETION IN FINDINGS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE FOR ANYTHING OVER 45 FEET. 
          SO IT'S THE, UM, THE REITERATION AND ESTABLISHING THOSE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS. 
          IT'S THE, UM, THE HISTORIC SPAR PROCESS, WHICH LOOKS AT THE, UM, THE DESIGN AND THE CONTEXT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES. 
          AND IT'S THE USE PERMIT, WHICH IS FULLY DISCRETIONARY. 
          ALL OF THOSE ARE DISCRETIONARY, BUT IF THE OVERLAY DIDN'T EXIST, THE HA PROCESS WOULD STILL BE THERE? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          SO THEN YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY MITIGATING ANYTHING, YOU'RE ACQUIRING, UH, REQUIRING THE SAME EXISTING REGULATIONS UNDER THE OVERLAY. 
          UM, SO THE, THE USE PERMIT, THE LANGUAGE OF THE USE PERMIT ITSELF IS NEW, UH, FINDINGS AND A AND ADDITIONAL REGULATION. 
          SO THAT IS ALL, UM, THAT IS ALL NEW AND ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE CURRENT USE PERMIT FINDINGS ARE. 
          WHAT ARE THE ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS THOUGH? THE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS TO GET THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IF IT'S ABOVE 45 OR ABOVE 60, BUT THAT'S ALL STILL PART OF THE H BAR PROCESS. 
          SO THERE CURRENTLY ISN'T NO. 
          THAT PROCESS IN H BAR, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          THERE'S THAT DOESN'T EXIST. 
          YES, BUT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATION. 
          SO THESE CHA THESE ADDITIONAL CHANGES ARE NOT MORE RESTRICTIVE, THEY'RE LESS RESTRICTIVE. 
          SO IT'S NOT A MITIGATION OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT, IT'S CREATING AN ADVERSE EFFECT. 
          I'M NOT, WE CURRENTLY, IT'S MAKING IT, WE, WE CURRENTLY DON'T REQUIRE A, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 
          [01:05:01]
BUILDING HEIGHT IN, IN THE MU TWO ZONING DISTRICT. 
          SO YEAH, THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS RESTRICTED TO 45 FEET. 
          TO 45 FEET, CORRECT. 
          SO THEN, SO IF YOU ALLOW IT ABOVE THAT, EVEN IF YOU GO UNDER A UP PROCESS, THAT'S NOT MITIGATING AN ADVERSE EFFECT, THAT'S CREATING AN ADVERSE EFFECT. 
          WELL, THE MITIGATION IS, IS WITHIN THE, THE DISCRETIONARY REQUIREMENT AND THE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS BECAUSE YOU ARE SEEKING TO, THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS, IF YOU DO HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS, THEN YOU ARE SEEKING TO MITIGATE THEM. 
          AND THAT'S PART OF THE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS. 
          SO I, I'M, I DON'T, I WOULD HAVE TO, AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO EXPLAIN A BIT MORE HOW YOU'RE ASSERTING THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE CREATING ADVERSE IMPACTS RATHER THAN MITIGATING ADVERSE IMPACTS THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF A DISCRETIONARY PROCESS. 
          WELL, THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT THE INCREASED HEIGHT WOULD BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT, OR THE LARGER FOOTPRINT WOULD BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT. 
          AND THOSE ADVERSE IMPACTS ARE NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATION. 
          SO THIS WOULD, THE OVERLAY WOULD ALLOW THEM TO OCCUR. 
          AND MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT STATING THAT THE CU PROCESS IS, THERE IS NOT A MITIGATION ITSELF, IT'S CREATING A PROCESS, BUT THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITHIN THE CUP PROCESS DO MITIGATE. 
          SO WE, WE ALWAYS ARE MITIGATING ADVERSE FINDING. 
          I DON'T SEE HOW A FINDING OF A FACT IS MITIGATING THE ADVERSE EFFECT. 
          IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT DIMINISHING THE ADVERSE EFFECT. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S JUST MY, MY TAKE ON IT. 
          SURE. 
          CORRECT. 
          JUST LIKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT THAT GOING OVER 45 FEET WOULD CREATE ADVERSE IMPACTS, THAT'S, YEAH. 
          IT COULD BE A POSITION THAT YOU TAKE. 
          CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          I JUST FIND IT CONFUSING THE WAY THAT THE TWO ARE, ARE BOUND TOGETHER. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK THAT, UH, BUNDLING THE EIR, UM, FOR THE OVERLAY WITH THE HOTEL CLARIFIES ANYTHING. 
          I THINK IT MAKES IT MORE CONFUSING. 
          AND MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT ARE REALLY RELATED TO THAT. 
          DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY WAY OF CLARIFYING THAT? UH, I CAN JUST RESPOND BY SAYING YOUR COMMENT'S BEEN NOTED AND WE'LL CONSIDER IT IN THE FINAL. 
          AND, UM, WE HAVE, UH, FULLY COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CQA AND, UM, THE PROCESS AFFORDS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT AND INPUT INCLUDING ON, UH, ADEQUACY OF MITIGATION. 
          SO IF THERE'S, UH, YOU KNOW, SUGGESTIONS OR INPUT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE THERE, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY THE TIME FOR THAT. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, ONCE AGAIN, QUESTIONS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES? TRIBAL, GO AHEAD. 
          UM, YEAH, JUST IN LOOKING THROUGH, UM, THE REPORTS THAT WERE DONE AND ONE OF THE TABLES THAT, UH, ONE LOOKED AT, I THINK IT WAS TABLE OR EXHIBIT 3.2 DASH 22, AND IT'S THE, UM, IT'S A MAP OF THE SUB AREAS, UH, COLOR CODED TO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED. 
          IF YOU COULD SPEAK STRAIGHT INTO THE MICROPHONE SO THAT WE'VE GOT THE RECORD, THAT'D BE APPRECIATED. 
          UM, IT SHOWS PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED, UH, PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN UNASSESSED. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE I THINK FROM THE TABLE THAT, UM, ONE OF THE SUB AREAS, UM, IS ALL GREEN, I THINK, AND, SORRY, UH, PURPLE AND IT HASN'T BEEN ASSESSED. 
          RIGHT. 
          UH, A LOT OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE SUB AREAS ARE GREEN. 
          OH, THERE IT IS. 
          THIS'LL MAKE IT A LITTLE EASIER. 
          THIS SHOWS ASSESSED AND FOUND ELIGIBLE, AND THEN THERE'S ORANGE ASSESSED AND FOUND IN INELIGIBLE. 
          SO YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF THE GREEN THAT'S AROUND THERE, AROUND THE PURPLE. 
          AND THE AREA CB PART OF A, UH, RIGHT, ARE UNASSESSED AT THIS POINT. 
          AND IN LOOKING THROUGH THE PAINTER REPORT, SHE MAKES A RECOMMENDATION, I THINK AT SOME POINT THAT THERE BE SOME SORT OF, UM, RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY DONE ON THOSE AREAS TO MAKE A DETERMINATION OR, OR NOT NECESSARILY A DETERMINATION, BUT IF THERE ARE ANY HISTORICAL RESOURCES WITHIN THOSE AREAS. 
          AND I'M WONDERING WHY THAT RECOMMENDATION DIDN'T GET PULLED THROUGH, UM, YOU KNOW, BY FIRST CARBON, WHY THEY DIDN'T DO THAT IN THE SUB AREA SO THAT WE HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT RESOURCES MAY OR MAY NOT BE THERE. 
          UM, SO THAT'S THE QUESTION. 
          SO I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, AS WITH THE HOTEL, UH, ANY OTHER PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN ONE OF THE SUB AREAS AT THE TIME THAT THAT COMES IN, IT WOULD BE EVALUATED. 
          AND THE REASON THAT WE 
          [01:10:01]
DO THAT IS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A FULL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECTS EFFECT. 
          RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A PROGRAMMATIC OVERLAY. 
          WE DON'T KNOW WHAT, UM, A NEW OR REDESIGNS EFFECT WOULD BE AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT BUILDING IS EVEN ELIGIBLE. 
          SO YOU'LL SEE ON THE SUB AREA, A ALL OF THE PROPERTIES NOW ADJACENT AND THE HOTEL SITE AND SURROUNDING THE HOTEL SITE, THOSE WERE PREVIOUSLY UNASSESSED. 
          AND THEY, THROUGH THIS PROCESS, HAVE NOW ALL BEEN ASSESSED. 
          AND, UM, THE DETERMINATION WAS OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO BUILDING ON THE HOTEL SITE, SO IT'S NOT ELIGIBLE. 
          AND THE REX BUILDING, UM, THAT ONE WAS, UH, MOSTLY DESTROYED IN A FIRE IN 2006, I BELIEVE. 
          AND, UM, THAT COMPROMISED ITS ABILITY TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE DISTRICT AND THE BANK. 
          THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WAS ASSESSED. 
          AND, UH, SIMILARLY, THAT WAS FOUND TO NOT BE ELIGIBLE AS A CONTRIBUTOR TO THE DISTRICT. 
          SO, UM, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THEY WOULD BE ASSESSED AT THE TIME THAT, UM, PROJECTS COME IN THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT THEM. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          YEAH, THIS, THIS IS LESS TO DO WITH THE TOPIC, BUT MORE TO DO WITH THE PRIOR QUESTION. 
          'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF TENSION ON A SUBJECT THAT I DON'T THINK THERE REALLY NEEDS TO BE. 
          UH, YOU'VE, YOU'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED THIS AT LEAST ONCE, BUT IF YOU COULD JUST GO INTO IT IN A BIT MORE DETAILS FOR EVERYBODY REALLY WHY WE ARE FORCED TO HAVE TO HAVE THE HOTEL AND THE OVERLAY AS ONE EIR AS OPPOSED TO SEPARATE DOCUMENTS. 
          'CAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY EVEN I, LOOKING AT THIS WAS A LITTLE BIT FRUSTRATED AND I KEPT GOING BACK TO THE REMEMBRANCE OF SE QL LAW, BUT IF YOU COULD JUST COVER THAT IN A BIT MORE DETAIL SO FOLKS UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THIS HAS BEEN IMPOSED. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          SO IT DOES COME DOWN TO THE TEXTBOOK EXAMPLES OF, UM, THE, UH, CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND WHAT IS REQUIRED, UM, THROUGH CASE LAW AND THROUGH THE GUIDELINES OF, UM, HOW FAR YOU TAKE AN ANALYSIS AND, UM, WHAT IT SAYS. 
          AND THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, TERMINOLOGY THAT'S USED. 
          IT'S CALLED PIECEMEALING. 
          THE IDEA IS THAT YOU'RE BREAKING UP A PROJECT THAT WOULD BE COLLECTIVELY THE WHOLE, AND IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE THE, THE, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE HOTEL IS TOTALLY CONTINGENT ON THE OVERLAY AND IT MUST HAVE THAT. 
          SO WE ARE DRIVEN BY THAT, UM, LINK TO ANALYZE THESE UNDER ONE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. 
          UM, AND SO THAT IS WHAT WE, THAT'S WHAT WE DID HERE. 
          GOT IT. 
          AND THEN JUST FOR THE CLARIFICATION, 'CAUSE I'M SURE THIS WILL COME UP AGAIN LATER, WHY DID THE CITY INITIALLY HAVE US LOOK AT THIS SEPARATELY? I DON'T RECALL THAT WE LOOKED AT IT SEPARATELY. 
          WELL, MEANING WHEN WE LOOKED AT, 'CAUSE ORIGINALLY WE LOOKED AT JUST THE OVERLAY WITH THE IDEA THAT IF IT MOVED FORWARD, WE'D EVENTUALLY LOOK AT THE HOTEL. 
          OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE SEPARATE PROJECTS FOR THE CITY, BUT NOT FOR THE EIR. 
          SO IF YOU COULD JUST CLARIFY THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'D BE APPRECIATED. 
          SO I'M THINK I, I THINK YOU'RE GETTING AT WORKSHOPS AND WHY WE BROUGHT FORWARD A WORKSHOP SEPARATE FROM THE HOTEL. 
          SO, UM, THAT IS A, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT PROCESS DOES HAPPEN SEPARATELY, BUT WHEN WE CAME FORWARD WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT M AND D THAT WE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU A YEAR AGO THAT DID THE SAME THING, IT HAD BOTH OF THESE IN THERE. 
          SO I, UM, I THINK THE WORKSHOPPING AND THE INITIAL KIND OF, HEY, IS THERE AN APPETITE FOR THIS? MM-HMM. 
           THAT I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. 
          AND THAT WAS VERY EARLY ON WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO, UM, ASSESS IF THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT EVEN HAD THE POTENTIAL TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SURE. 
          WHITLEY AND THEN ROGER. 
          UM, YEAH, SO I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY, UM, I UNDERSTAND WHY THE, THE TWO ARE BUNDLED TOGETHER AND WHY ONE EIR IS NECESSARY FOR THIS. 
          BUT, UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO ASK IS, UM, DO YOU SEE THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT, UM, BENEFITS AND, UM, ADVERSE EFFECTS FOR THE OVERLAY COMPARED TO THE HOTEL? UM, SO THE, I MEAN, THE OVERLAY WOULD HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS ON ITS OWN COMPARED TO WHETHER THE HOTEL WAS THERE OR NOT. 
          YEAH, YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, UH, AND THE EIR DOES DO A, UM, A SIDE BY SIDE ANALYSIS OF EACH OF THOSE FOR, FOR EVERY AND ALL ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICS. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, EXCEPT IT DOESN'T, FOR THE CULTURAL RESOURCES, THE, IT DOES NOT EVALUATE, UM, SOME OF THE ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BY OVER WAY. 
          UH, AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR, BUT I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          WHEN I MAKE COMMENTS RATHER THAN ASK QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          ROGER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON CULTURAL, UH, AND LET ME KNOW IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE QUESTION OR NOT AT THIS POINT, BUT THE, UH, OVERLAY OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT 
          [01:15:01]
GUIDELINES ALLOW THE HOTEL OR A PROJECT IN THAT LOCATION TO, UH, IN, IN THIS CASE, FACE THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE ON THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          SO, SO THE PROPOSED HOTEL HAS FOUR, FOUR OR FIVE STORIES OF ROOMS ORIENTED TO THE SOUTH. 
          IF THE PROPERTY NEXT TO THE HOTEL SOUTH OF THE HOTEL DEVELOPS THE SAME RIGHTS, UH, OF PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, IT WOULD ELIMINATE THE HOTEL LIGHT AND AIR. 
          IS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, UH, COULD HAPPEN? UH, ONLY WITH THOSE SPECIFIC FINDINGS? SO, UM, I WOULD, I WOULD SPECULATE PROBABLY NOT, UM, IF WE COULDN'T MAKE THAT FINDING THAT WAS REFERENCED BEFORE REGARDING LIGHT AND AIR, UM, WELL, THE HOTEL IS PLANNING ON THAT AS VIEWS FROM THEIR ROOM. 
          BUT IF THE PROJECT IS BUILT SOUTH OF THE HOTEL, IT CUTS OFF THE VIEWS FROM THE ROOM. 
          AND I THINK THAT IS, WHO IS IT? WHO GETS THERE FIRST? OR WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY SOUTH VERSUS THE HOTEL? I, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT THAT THE, THE OVERLAY REGULATIONS DON'T REQUIRE THAT ROOMS HAVE A VIEW AND THEY DON'T REQUIRE THAT ROOMS HAVE A VIEW. 
          SO, SO IT'S THE PREFERENCE OF THE DEVELOPER OF THE MARKET TO FIND VALUE IN THAT VIEW AND TO, TO TAKE THE RISK THAT DEVELOPMENT COULD HAPPEN ADJACENT TO THE HOTEL AND REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THAT VIEW. 
          WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THOSE FINDINGS FOR LIGHT AND ERROR FOR PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE PURPOSES. 
          BUT THE FINDING OF THE, THE, THE PERCEIVED VALUE OR THE MARKET VALUE OF A VIEW IS NOT A FINDING THAT WE WOULD BE ASKING THE REVIEW AUTHORITIES TO MAKE. 
          I GUESS I'M QUESTIONING CAN THE HOTEL OR THE SOUTH PROPERTY IMPACT THE, IN THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WHAT'S GOING ON? IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE A PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE. 
          THE HOTEL IS NOT PLANNING ON THAT, THAT SOUTH PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED, IT WOULD BLOCK ITS EXPOSURE, PERHAPS, PERHAPS. 
          SO SHOULDN'T WE GUIDE THE HOTEL TO HAVE ROOMS THAT FOCUS OUT THE PETALUMA BOULEVARD AS OPPOSED TO THE SOUTH PROPERTY? THAT COULD BE A RECOMMENDATION, I BELIEVE. 
          YES. 
          OR AN OBSERVATION. 
          YES. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES OR TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES? OKAY. 
          LET'S MOVE ON TO LAND USE AND PLANNING QUESTIONS ON LAND USE AND PLANNING. 
          COMMISSIONER ACKERSON. 
          YEAH, JUST ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION HERE. 
          UM, IMPACT LAND TWO, SO THIS IS ON PAGE 2 72 OF THE PDF. 
          THERE'S A PHRASE IN THERE ABOUT FAR THAT I SAW NOWHERE ELSE THAT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          IT SAYS, HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED OVERLAY, AND THIS IS IMPACT LAND TWO, WOULD INCLUDE A GENERAL PLAN TAX AMENDMENT THAT WOULD RAISE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FAR FROM 2.5 TO 6.0 FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES. 
          I HADN'T HEARD THAT. 
          NON-RESIDENTIAL CLARIFICATION. 
          DOES RESIDENTIAL GET THE FAR INCREASE OR JUST NON-RESIDENTIAL? UH, THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND FAR APPLIES TO NON-RESIDENTIAL. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST A, A SEMANTICS THERE AND A TERMINOLOGY, UH, CLARIFICATION. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT, BUT TECHNICALLY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS STILL HAVE THAT 6.0 BY RIGHT, EVEN THOUGH THE DENSITY ISN'T CHANGED. 
          THIS IS IN LAND TWO ON 2 72 OF THE EIR AND AGAIN, EVERYWHERE ELSE I ASSUMED IT WAS JUST THEY WERE TRACKING TOGETHER. 
          THAT WAS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE IT CLARIFIED NON-RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD. 
          OKAY. 
          I, YEAH, I KNOW THE INTENT, AGAIN, OF THE, UM, THE, UH,  GENERAL PLAN, UM, LAND USE REGULATION MODIFICATION IS TO INCREASE FROM 2.5 TO SIX. 
          UM, AND YOUR QUESTION IS IF IT APPLIES TO RESIDENTIAL OR NON-RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO LET IT, WE WILL MAKE A, LIKE I SAID, IT, IT, I ASSUMED IT APPLIED TO BOTH. 
          THIS WAS THE ONLY SENTENCE I COULD FIND WHERE IT CLARIFIED AND SAID NON-RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY. 
          YEAH, AND I GUESS IF I THINK ABOUT IT, IF WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A MIXED USE PROJECT, WE WOULD APPLY THE SIX, UM, THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, UH, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING, BUT IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY COMMISSIONER WILL, 'CAUSE THEY CAN STILL ONLY HAVE 30 UNITS PER ACRE FOR A DENSITY. 
          WELL, IS FAR AN ANALOG FOR DENSITY? NOT HERE. 
          NO. 
          NO. 
          SO THAT, SO THAT REFERENCE IS IN OUR EXISTING GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO OUR GENERAL 
          [01:20:01]
PLAN MAKES A DISTINCTION BETWEEN NON-RESIDENTIAL, UM, AND RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO THAT'S WHERE THAT'S BEING GENERATED. 
          YOUR QUESTION ABOUT SORT OF NOT HAVING SEEN THAT, UM, AND THIS SORT OF GOES BACK TO THE EARLIER CONVERSATION AROUND, UM, DENSITY BONUS AND THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE OVERLAY. 
          RIGHT? SO HALF OF THIS IS IT'S ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, BUT IT'S ALSO HOUSING, UM, AS PART OF A CONCESSION AS PART, AND LEGAL, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT, UM, ONE OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT A POTENTIAL PROJECT, UM, COULD SEEK, UH, WOULD BE RELIEF FROM, UM, ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. 
          SO FAR BEING ONE OF THEM. 
          UM, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, OR JUST TO REITERATE MY ANSWER, THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL STEMS FROM OUR EXISTING GENERAL PLAN, AND I CAN JUST CLARIFY THAT, IS THAT IS A TYPO. 
          SO WE'VE LOOKED AT IT. 
          SO IT SHOULD SAY NON-RESIDENTIAL. 
          SO IT IS NOT APPLIED TO RESIDENTIAL? NO. 
          THAT THAT IS WHAT IT SAYS. 
          I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. 
          SO RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS THAT COME IN DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO ON THE LOT OF 6.0? THEY DO. 
          THEY THEY DO. 
          THE TYPO IS THE NON, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          WHAT, WAIT NOW? YEAH, NOW I'M CONFUSED. 
          SO, SO THERE'S, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT BOTH RELATE TO DENSITY. 
          ONE IS FLOOR AREA RATIO, WHICH IS GOING FROM TWO AND A HALF TO SIX. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND ONE IS RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, AND THAT'S 30 AND STAYING UNCHANGED, CORRECT? WELL, YEAH. 
          AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. 
          'CAUSE I THINK THIS DOES FAR NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL TYPICALLY THE FAR STANDARDS OR IS THAT IS IN RESIDENTIAL CONTEXT, DO WE USE DENSITY INSTEAD? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT'S, I'M GLAD I ASKED. 
          YEAH, I LEARNED SOMETHING. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, THANK YOU. 
          THAT WAS MY ONLY CLARIFYING QUESTION. 
          CHAIR WHITLEY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, THE OVERLAY IS IDENTIFIED AS AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY, CORRECT? I MEAN, THAT'S, YES. 
          SO THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT THE OVERLAY IS, OR THAT THE LACK OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS A, B AND C IS A PRODUCT OF THE CURRENT FLOOR AREA RATIO, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND THE OTHER RECOMMENDED, UM, CHANGES TO THE OVERLAY. 
          SO DID THE CITY OR THE APPLICANT DO ANY RESEARCH TO DETERMINE THAT THESE ARE IN FACT, LEADING CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ABSENCE OF DEVELOPMENT? UM, SO I, I DO WANNA JUST RESTATE THAT WE, THE FOCUS HERE SHOULD BE ON THE, THE DRAFT DIR I'M HEARING, UH, YOUR QUESTION ABOUT, UH, SOMETHING RELATED TO BACKGROUND RESEARCH. 
          I, UM, WILL RESPOND BY SAYING THAT I THINK THE EVIDENCE IS WHAT WE HAVE HAD IN, UM, LACK OF DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT DOWNTOWN UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATION. 
          AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE DRIVERS FOR, FOR WHY, UM, THE OVERLAY WAS BEING IS BEING PURSUED. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO IF, UM, WE EXPECT THAT 25% OF THE OVERLAY WILL BE FILLED IN 20 YEARS ACCORDING TO THE AR WITH THE CURRENT, UM, CITY GROWTH STATISTICS AND THE CHANGES IN DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINTS GOING FROM 1.1 MILLION SQUARE FEET TO 1.5 MILLION SQUARE FEET, UM, HAS THE CITY OR THE APPLICANT CALCULATED WHAT FINANCIAL NUMBERS THIS REPRESENTS? LIKE INCREASES IN CITY REVENUE? OH, IN TERMS OF THE VALUE DOLLAR THAT WOULD BE GENERATED? UH, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO, UM, WHAT I'M MISSING FROM SEEING, UH, FROM READING THE EIR IS, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE ADVERSE IMPACTS FROM THE PROPOSED OVERLAY AND THE ECAN PROJECT. 
          UM, THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT ASIDE FROM THE MITIGATIVE ACTIONS ON THE ADVERSE IMPACTS, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF SOME KIND, UM, INCLUDING TAX REVENUE, UH, FOR THE HOTEL PROJECT. 
          BUT WHAT'S MISSING, I DON'T REALLY SEE ANY EVIDENCE FOR THAT. 
          THE OVERLAY WILL PROVIDE INCREASED TAX REVENUE. 
          THERE'S THIS, UM, SUGGESTION THAT IT COULD CREATE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF JOBS, BUT, UM, THESE ARE, AND UH, YOU KNOW, THESE KINDS OF, UM, SUGGESTIONS ARE MADE IN THE EEIR, BUT I DON'T SEE EVIDENCE FOR WHERE THOSE COME FROM. 
          IT'S JUST SPECULATION. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? I MEAN, 628 JOBS IS WRITTEN DOWN IN THE EIR THAT THAT COULD CON, UH, COULD COME FROM THAT. 
          AND I'M NOT SEEING WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE THAT THOSE JOBS WILL BE CREATED? UM, WOULDN'T 
          [01:25:01]
YOU KIND OF EXPECT THAT TO BE IN THE EIR? UH, I'D, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND STEP IN HERE, COMMITTEE OR COM CHAIR RATHER. 
          SORRY. 
          THE, THE PURPOSE OF THE EIR IS TO EVALUATE THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF A PROPOSED ACTION. 
          I BELIEVE YOUR QUESTION ABOUT JOBS ABOUT TAX REVENUE GENERATED BY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNDER AN EIR SHOULD IT BE ADOPTED, IS A QUESTION TO BE ASKED ABOUT THE ADOPTION OF THE OVERLAY, NOT ABOUT THE ENVIRON POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE OVERLAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT I, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE THE OVERLAY AND WE HAVE THIS POTENTIAL HOTEL, AND I CAN SEE THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, UM, UH, ANALYSIS DONE ON THE HOTEL. 
          BUT, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE OVERLAY ITSELF IS STILL VAGUE AND KIND OF FLOATING OUT THERE IS, IS WE EXPECT CERTAIN THINGS TO HAPPEN. 
          AND THESE ARE, THESE ARE WRITTEN DOWN IN THE ERR AS IF THOSE ARE BENEFITS. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT AN EIR IS, I'VE BEEN READING THEM FOR 30 YEARS. 
          BUT, UM, I EXPECT THERE TO BE SOME EVIDENTIARY BACK, UM, SUPPORT FOR WHAT THE BENEFITS WE EXPECT TO SEE OR WHAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PRESENTING EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT FOR WHAT ADVERSE IMPACTS THEY'RE GOING TO BE. 
          BUT WE DON'T PRESENT EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT FOR WHAT BENEFITS ARE DRIVING THE, THE OVERLAY IN THE FIRST PLACE. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, IT'S, WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT AND WE'LL CERTAINLY WE HAVE IT RECORDED FOR WHEN WE DO GET TO COMMENTS. 
          UM, I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION IN THERE. 
          THE QUESTION, WELL, YOU STARTED OUT AS A QUESTION, BUT THEN THE QUESTION IS WHY INTO A COMMENT. 
          WE TALKING ABOUT THESE ADVERSE IMPACTS IN THE ABSENCE OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE BENEFITS ARE, BUT I'LL MOVE ON BECAUSE I JUST MADE THOSE COMMENTS. 
          UM, I DO WANT TO STATE THAT, YOU KNOW, IN ONE PORTION OF THE AR THERE'S OPPORTUNITY SITES IDENTIFIED WITHIN THOSE A, B, C AREAS. 
          AND, UM, MY QUESTION IS, WELL, THOSE ARE IDENTIFIED AS VACANT LOTS, VACANT STRUCTURES, AND LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS ON LOTS DOMINATED BY PARKING. 
          UM, UH, WHY IS THERE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE, THE OVERLAY BOUNDARY ITSELF AND THE OPPORTUNITY AREAS? IS THERE SOME, UM, DIFFERENCE IN CRITERIA THAT WILL BE APPLIED TO EITHER OF THOSE? THE, WHEN I THINK WE CAN, CAN WE SEE IT ON THIS? WE STARTED OUT WITH A, A LARGER OVERLAY BOUNDARY AREA THAT WAS, WAS MORE INCLUSIVE, KIND OF THINKING MORE HOLISTICALLY ABOUT DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND THEN THROUGH THE, THROUGH 2023 IN THE REVIEW PROCESS, THAT WAS NARROWED DOWN TO SUB AREAS A, B, AND C FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. 
          BUT THAT ACTION TO REDUCE THOSE, THOSE, THE AREA TO THOSE THREE SUB AREAS WAS ENTIRELY IN RESPONSE TO REVIEW AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          SO YEAH, NO, I KNOW THAT, I MEAN, WITHIN THE A, B, AND C THAT ARE THERE CURRENTLY IN THE EIR THERE'S OTHER AREAS IDENTIFIED AS OPPORTUNITY ZONES. 
          SOMEWHERE IN THE AR I SAW THAT GRAPHIC. 
          SO EVERY PARCEL WITHIN EACH SUB AREA, A, B AND C WOULD BE TREATED THE SAME. 
          THESE, UM, THIS WAS JUST WHAT ANDREW'S, UM, RIGHT. 
          PURPLE AREAS WITHIN A, B AND C THERE. 
          SO WHY ARE THESE IDENTIFIED AS OPPORTUNITY SITES? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? AND UM, WHY, WHY IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, UM, OVERLAY AREAS AND THESE OPPORTUNITY SITES? UH, SO I DO WANNA KIND OF FOCUS US BACK ON THE EIR I'M HEARING WHAT YOU'RE, UM, THIS IS AN ER WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT IS SPECIFICALLY WHY THE OPPORTUNITY SITES, OR WHAT I'M HEARING YOU ASK ABOUT IS WHY THOSE OPPORTUNITY SITES WERE IDENTIFIED. 
          UH, WE DO HAVE A LOT OF, UH, BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND I'M HAPPY TO JUST TELL YOU THE, THESE ARE, UM, IDENTIFIED AS VACANT LOTS, VACANT STRUCTURES, LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, AND SO THOSE WERE IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL, UH, PLACES WHERE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REDEVELOPMENT. 
          AND SO, UH, THE EIR ANALYZES THESE AND THE WHOLE OF THE OVERLAY. 
          AND THAT IS, UM, WHAT IS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, RIGHT? I'M ASKING WHY IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OPPORTUNITY SITES AND THE BOUNDARIES? IS THERE SOME INTENTION TO MAKE SOME ZONING CHANGES THERE AT SOME POINT? OLIVIA, CAN I? YEAH. 
          UH, THERE'S NO INTENTION TO TREAT THE OPPORTUNITY SITES ANY DIFFERENTLY. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, WITHIN THE OVERLAY THAT ANSWERS THAT. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S GOOD. 
          ANYTHING ELSE ON LAND USE AND PLANNING QUESTIONS? 
          [01:30:01]
ALRIGHT, MOVING ON TO QUESTIONS ON ADDITIONAL EFFECTS EVALUATED IN THE INITIAL STUDY. 
          SO THERE, THAT'S ANY OF THE OTHER CQA CHECKLIST ITEMS THAT WE HAD IN THE INITIAL STUDY. 
          ANY ADDITIONAL EFFECTS EVALUATED THAT YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS ON? I'M GONNA GO WITH COMMISSIONER FRY FIRST. 
          I'M NOT SURE THIS IS WHERE I'M SUPPOSED TO BE ASKING QUESTIONS, BUT MY QUESTIONS HAVE TO DO WITH THE HOTEL, AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND TRANSPORTATION. 
          UM, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I DON'T FEEL IS ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED IN THE, IN THE DRAFT EIR IS THE ISSUE OF VEHICLES TRAFFIC AND PARKING. 
          GIVEN THAT THE PROJECTED NUMBER OF VEHICLES GENERATED BY AND FOR THE HOTEL IS SEEMINGLY AND WOEFULLY UNDERESTIMATED IN THE EIR, I FEEL THAT ANY MITIGATION IS PUT FORTH AND IT IS BASED UPON INACCURATE INFORMATION. 
          MY QUESTION, SINCE I NEED TO ASK AN ACTUAL QUESTION IS, WHY WAS THE DRAFT EIR IN? WHY HAS THE DRAFT EIR FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF VEHICLES TRAFFIC AND PARKING IN A SPECIFIC AND ACCURATE MANNER? AND WHY? HAS NO CONCISE AND ACCURATE SURVEY BEEN UNDERTAKEN? TO DETERMINE WHAT ACTUALLY WOULD HAPPEN ON A SPECIFIC BUSINESS DAY, LIKE A FRIDAY OR A SATURDAY, I TOOK SOME TIME TO PUT TOGETHER A BREAKDOWN OF THE POTENTIAL TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES THAT COULD RESULT IF THE HOTEL IS BUILT AND OPERATED SPECIFICALLY ON A GIVEN FRIDAY AND SATURDAY, I DID NOT LOOK AT THOSE TIMES WHERE THERE WAS AN EVENT OR A PARADE OR SOMETHING SPECIAL HANGING DOWNTOWN. 
          I MERELY LOOKED AT THE VEHICLE'S TRAFFIC AND PARKING THAT WOULD BE GREATER ISSUE ON THOSE DAYS OF FRIDAY OR A SATURDAY. 
          SO HERE GOES THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY RATE IS 93 ROOMS, BUT GIVEN THE OCCUPANCY RATE MIGHT BE 50 TO 80%, SOME STAYING ONE NIGHT, SOME STAYING TWO NIGHTS, SOME COMING AND GOING ON A FRIDAY OR A SATURDAY, I ESTIMATE THAT IT WOULD LEAD TO 25 TO TO TO 46 CARS. 
          I DID READ THAT THEY WERE PROJECTING THAT SOME TRAVELERS WOULD COME BY SMART TRAIN. 
          THERE'S NOTHING TO BACK THAT UP, IT'S JUST AN ASSUMPTION. 
           HOTEL STAFF MEMBERS, THE STAFFING OF THE HOTEL INCLUDES A MANAGER, ASSISTANT MANAGER, RECEPTIONIST, CONCIERGE, RESERVATION AGENT, FRONT OF THE HOUSE MANAGER, GENERAL MANAGER, OPERATIONS MANAGER, NIGHT MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING, HUMAN RESOURCES, REVENUE MANAGER, SALES MANAGER, IT MANAGER, ACCOUNTING MANAGER, SECURITY MANAGER, NIGHT AUDITOR, PARKING ATTENDANT, PAL, PARKING, VALET, PORTERS, HOUSEKEEPING STAFF, JANITORIAL STAFF, MAINTENANCE STAFF, SALES AND MARKETING, EVENT MANAGER, ET CETERA. 
          PROJECTING THESE TWO SOMETIMES COME ON THEIR CAR. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH, UM, THERE'S A WAY THAT THEY COULD GET THEIR OTHER WAYS. 
          UM, WITH HAVING A LOCAL REGIONAL HOTEL IN OUR AREA THAT HAS 90 ROOMS, THEIR STAFF IS NUMBERED TO BE 50 TO 60 PEOPLE WITH NO ONSITE RESTAURANT. 
          THE PLAN IS TO ENCOURAGE EMPLOYEES TO WALK CARPOOL, USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, UM, WHERE THE FIRST BUS FROM THE EAST SIDE OF PETALUMA ONLY HITS THE HOTEL SITE AFTER SIX 30 AND THE LAST BUS LEAVES AT EIGHT O'CLOCK. 
          I JUST DON'T THINK THE BUS, OUR CURRENT TRANSIT IS A GOOD SOLUTION. 
          UM, THEIR IDEA FOR BUS PASSES IS NOT VIABLE BECAUSE PETALUMA TRANSIT IS FREE. 
          I THINK BIKES ARE GREAT, BUT IT'S LIMITED BECAUSE BIKE PARKING ON THE SIDEWALK IS SIX STALLS AND FOUR IN A LOCKED SPACE UNDERGROUND. 
          SO I PROJECT FOR STAFF. 
          THERE'S 20 TO 25 FOR EACH EARLY AND DAY SHIFT. 
          THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT SHIFTS. 
          THE NIGHT STAFF WILL BE MUCH LESS. 
          OF COURSE YOU MIGHT KNOW THAT I'M UNDERESTIMATING THE NUMBERS, BUT I'M TRYING TO BE MORE THAN FAIR. 
          THEN YOU HAVE A RESTAURANT STAFF MANAGER, COMMISSIONER, MANAGER, EXECUTIVE CHEF, COMMISSIONER FRY, CHEF TO CUISINE, A SOUS CHEF, A PASTRY CHEF, UH, CHEF, GRAND MANAGER, A PANTRY PREP, COOKS THE LINE, COOKS THE EXPEDITER, THE SOMMELIER, THE MARE D THE SERVERS, THE FOOD RUNNERS, THE HOSTESSES, UM, THE BUSERS, THE DISHWASHERS, ABOUT 35 PEOPLE. 
          UM, THERE'S ALSO THE BAR STAFF, BARTENDERS, SERVERS, RUNNERS, BUSES. 
          THERE'S THE EVENT STAFF. 
          YOU GOT YOUR BARTENDERS, YOUR SERVERS, YOUR RUNNERS. 
          IF THEY'RE PLANNING ON BRINGING FOOD FROM THE LOWER LEVEL RESTAURANT TO THE UPPER LEVER LEVEL, YOUR BUSES ARE GOING TO BE MUCH GREATER. 
          BUT AGAIN, I'M UNDERESTIMATING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE EMPLOYED THERE. 
          I'M SAYING MAYBE 25 CARS. 
          THEN YOU HAVE RESTAURANT AND BAR PATRONS. 
          THEIR SEATING CAPACITY IS 150, THAT'S LUNCH, 150 FOR DINNER, 150. 
          IF THEY DO A SPLIT SERVICE WHERE THEY HAVE AN EARLY 
          [01:35:01]
SERVICE OR A NIGHT SERVICE OR A DI LATE DINNER SERVICE THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 50 TO 60, MAYBE POTENTIAL CARS, BUT IT COULD BE AS LOW AS 25 IF EVERYBODY AT THE HOTEL EATS AT THE HOTEL ON THE SAME NIGHT. 
          THIS IS LEADING TO A POTENTIAL OF 150 TO 200 DAILY CARS ON A FRIDAY OR A SATURDAY. 
          REMEMBER, THAT DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY TIME THERE'S A SPECIAL EVENT IN DOWNTOWN, BUT IT'S ALREADY IMPOSSIBLE TO PARK THESE DAYS, ESPECIALLY ON A FRIDAY, SATURDAY. 
          THERE'S STREET PARKING, THERE'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS THEMSELVES. 
          UM, ALL OF THE VE VEHICLES PROJECTED WILL LEAD TO INCREASED GREENHOUSE GASES AND EMISSIONS AND VM TS VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, WHICH IS NOT ADDRESSED IN IN THE DRAFT ERR AT THIS RATE OF TRAFFIC. 
          NOW GIVEN MY NUMBER OF POTENTIAL VEHICLES AND REMEMBERING THAT I AM UNDERESTIMATING THE NUMBER BY ABOUT ONE HALF, LET'S LOOK AT THE POTENTIAL FOR PARKING, UNDERGROUND PARKING. 
          COMMISSIONER F FRY, IF I COULD INTERRUPT PLEASE, IF WE COULD JUST BACK UP TO WHERE YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT HOW THEY ANALYZED PARKING. 
          I'LL REPEAT IT AGAIN AND, AND WE'LL LET STAFF ANSWER THAT SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT HOW THE DRAFT EIR ADDRESSED PARKING IN VMT, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          WHY HAS THE DRAFT EIR FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF VEHICLES TO TRAFFIC PARKING IN A SPECIFIC AND ACCURATE MANNER? AND WHY HAS NO CONCISE AND ACCURATE SURVEY BEEN UNDERTAKEN TO DETERMINE WHAT ACTUALLY WOULD HAPPEN SPECIFICALLY ON A BUSIEST TIME OF THE WEEK, A FRIDAY AND A SATURDAY? DO YOU WANNA HIT THAT OR DO YOU WANT ME TO GO ON WITH PARKING? AND THEN YOU DO COMBINE IT TOGETHER?  UH, I MEAN, I WILL JUST SAY THAT WE ARE COLLECTING AND RECEIVING YOUR COMMENTS AND WE'LL RESPOND IN THE FINAL REGARDING PARKING. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ACTUALLY REMOVED PARKING BACK IN 2013 BECAUSE WHAT IT ENDS UP DOING IS, UM, CREATING POLICIES THAT INCENTIVIZE, UH, PARKING AND PROMOTING THAT. 
          AND THAT ACTUALLY HAS, UM, BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE MORE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          SO I SAY THAT WITH FULL AWARENESS THAT PARKING IS VERY MUCH A COMMUNITY ISSUE, THAT IT IS, UH, REQUIRES, UM, UH, A SOLUTION TO HAVE PARKING. 
          UH, WE DO HAVE THE DOWNTOWN, UH, PARKING DISTRICT. 
          UM, WE DO HAVE, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A STUDY GOING ON TO, UM, EVALUATE PARKING NEEDS DOWNTOWN AND THAT WILL BE AN ONGOING THING. 
          UH, BUT WHAT WE ANALYZE HERE, UH, AND THEN I ALSO WANNA ADD THAT WE DO HAVE, UM, THE REQUIREMENT TO LOOK AT, UH, VMT AND PARKING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DOWNTOWN SMART STATION. 
          AND SO THE OVERLAY OF THE HOTEL IS ALL WITHIN WHAT'S CALLED A HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR. 
          AND SO IT DOES NOT REQUIRE US FOR SQA PURPOSES TO UNPACK THE PARKING OR THE VMT ISSUE. 
          IT IS IN THE, THOSE ARE ADDRESSED, UM, DI INDIRECTLY IN THERE. 
          BUT I WANTED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHY THAT'S NOT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOW, THAT IS NOT TO SAY IT'S NOT AN IMPORTANT COMMUNITY ISSUE AND THAT THERE'S ANOTHER WAY IN PLACE TO ADDRESS THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO, UH, MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE STATE REMOVED PARKING, UH, FROM THE CHECKLIST BECAUSE IT INCENTIVIZES, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT AND MORE PARKING AND MORE, UH, PARKING GARAGES AND MORE SPACES. 
          AND THAT MAY BE WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS. 
          DOWNTOWN IS IS MORE OF THAT. 
          AND THAT CERTAINLY IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL. 
          SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, BUT I KNOW THERE'S A LOT MORE THERE AND I APPRECIATE YOU RAISING SOME OF THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS 'CAUSE THAT GIVES US SOMETHING TO RESPOND TO IN THE FINAL EIR. 
          SO, UM, COMMENT NOTED AND HOPEFULLY THAT GIVES A A LITTLE BIT OF AN ANSWER IN TERMS OF WHEN WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO TALK ABOUT PARKING AND TRAFFIC. 
          IS THAT A SPAR REVIEW TYPE OF TOPIC? YEAH, I THINK IF THE CONCERN IS THAT THE HOTEL DOESN'T, UM, HAVE ENOUGH PARKING TO MEET THE DEMAND, UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RAISED AT SPAR. 
          BUT I CAN, UH, I CAN SAY RIGHT NOW THAT IT DOES MEET THE CITY'S STANDARD REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, SO IT DOES MEET WHAT IS ON THE BOOKS AND YOU CAN ALWAYS ASK FOR MORE, BUT, UM, IT DOES, DOES MEET THE STANDARD. 
          OKAY. 
          YOU'RE JUST GONNA READ MY QUESTION STILL. 
          SANDS. 
          THIS IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE HAVING TO DO WITH GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, WHICH IS CLEARLY UNDER THE DRAFT. 
          EIR IT HAS TO DO, UM, WITH VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND I READ THAT SECTION ABOUT VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND THAT DIDN'T ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT WOULD BE, UM, AT THE HOTEL OR WITHIN THE HOTEL. 
          UM, AND 
          [01:40:01]
IT ALSO, THERE'S A SECTION CALLED TRANSPORTATION AND THAT DID NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES THAT OCCUR WHEN THERE ARE THIS NUMBER OF VEHICLES PROJECTED TO BE THERE. 
          I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT. 
          AND FOR, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSES, WE HAVE CAPTURED IT AND WE CAN, UH, FURTHER CONSIDER AND RESPOND IN IN THE FINAL. 
          AND IF WE WANNA GET INTO MORE OF THE SPECIFICS ON YOUR CRITICISM, WE CAN IN THE COM IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          OKAY. 
          IF YOU, IF WE WANNA GET INTO MORE OF THE SPECIFICS OF YOUR CRITICISM, WE CAN DO THAT IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION LATER ON. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON, THIS IS THE PERFECT TIME FOR A FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF MY PARKING QUESTIONS. 
          NICOLA, I BROKE THAT DOOR OPEN. 
          UH, THE FIRST ONE WAS JUST CONFIRMING IN THE PARKING DETERMINATION TO MAKE SURE IT MET CITY REGULATIONS WE'RE RESTAURANT AND HOTEL EMPLOYEES PART OF THAT CALCULATION. 
          I THINK WE READ THAT IN THE MND, BUT I JUST CAN'T RECALL THE, UH, THE MINIMUM PARKING STANDARDS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO APPLY, UH, THROUGH THE IZO DO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS EMPLOYEES. 
          SO THOSE ARE IT BASED STANDARDS AND, AND, UM, INDUSTRY STANDARDS. 
          SO YES, THEY ARE GOING TO BE COMPREHENSIVE FOR ALL OF THE NEEDS OF THE USE, UM, THAT THEY'RE BEING APPLIED TO. 
          AND SO WHEN WE COMPARE TO THOSE STANDARDS, DEFINITELY HOTEL EMPLOYEES WERE WERE BAKED IN THERE. 
          AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES? CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT THE PARKING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. 
          DOES IT MATTER WHAT THE SIZE OF BUILDINGS AND INTENSITY OF USES WERE ALLOWED BY THE GENERAL PLAN WHEN A PARKING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IS FORMED? SO WHEN YOU HAVE SUBSEQUENT CHANGES TO PROJECTED BUILDING SIZE, LIKE IN THE OVERLAY AND INTENSITIES OF USE THAT ARE OCCURRING WITHIN THIS PARKING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, DOES THAT CHANGE THE APPLICABILITY OF THE DISTRICT? IS THERE SOME KIND OF MAXIMUM CAPACITY? UH, I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY MAXIMUM CAPACITY THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PARKING DISTRICT ITSELF. 
          UM, I I THINK YOUR POINT IS THAT IT WAS ESTABLISHED, UM, AT A DIFFERENT TIME THAN WE ARE TODAY. 
          AND THAT PERHAPS THERE'S A NEED TO RE-LOOK AT THAT, WHICH COULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU, UH, PASS ALONG AS A RECOMMENDATION TO, TO COUNCIL. 
          OKAY. 
          PERFECT. 
          YEAH. 
          'CAUSE IF, IF THE OVERLAY IS DOING A BIGGER BUILDING HEIGHTS, OSTENSIBLY MORE PEOPLE, IS THAT STILL SUITABLE? AND THEN THE PARKING AREA WITHIN, UH, SECTION C OF THE OVERLAY LIKELY NOT CHANGING OR GOING AWAY, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, THAT DESIGNATED ZONING? UH, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. 
          I WILL JUST RESTATE THAT THE OVERLAY DOES, OR THE HOTEL DOES NOT IN ANY WAY CHANGE THE PARKING REGULATIONS. 
          THERE'S NO MODIFICATIONS PROPOSED AS PART OF, I GUESS IT WAS MORE A FOLLOW, BUT THAT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, IF WE HAVE A PARKING STRUCTURE THAT'S PART OF THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IN AN OVERLAY, INCENTIVIZING REDEVELOPMENT, OBVIOUSLY IF THAT PARKING STRUCTURE GOES AWAY, THAT'S A PRETTY FORESEEABLE MATERIAL IMPACT. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK WE'LL RUN INTO IT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT CHANGING THAT ZONING. 
          UM, AM I, AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT PRETTY WELL? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND THERE'S AND THERE'S NOTHING IN THE OVERLAY THAT WOULD PROPOSE DEMOLITION OF ANY STRUCTURE SURE. 
          ON, ON ANY PROPERTY. 
          SO THAT'S CORRECT. 
          BUT THE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT, COMMISSIONER, IS THAT, UM, THE RECENTLY ADOPTED STATE BILL AB 2097 DOES PROHIBIT, UH, JURISDICTIONS FROM REQUIRING MINIMUM PARKING FOR ANY LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL WITHIN HALF A MILE OF PUBLIC TRANSIT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF HOTELS AND EVENT CENTERS. 
          SO WE HAVE TO, WE DO WANT TO THINK ABOUT THAT SPECIFICALLY WHEN WE THINK ABOUT, UH, POTENTIAL PARKING IMPACTS FOR THE OVERLAY. 
          EVEN WITHOUT THE OVERLAY, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REQUIRE PARKING. 
          WE, WE COULD REQUIRE IT FOR THE HOTEL, PROVIDED THAT WE DON'T EXCEED OUR MINIMUMS AND PERHAPS THROUGH THE DISCRETIONARY PROCESS YOU COULD ASK FOR MORE. 
          BUT FOR NON-HOTEL OR NON-EVENT CENTER LAND USES, INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, UH, WE CANNOT, UH, APPLY A MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND I'M GONNA WRAP UP WITH A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE KIND OF IN THIS OTHER SECTION. 
          UM, SO I, I KNOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE TO SAY ABOUT PARKING, BUT MOVING US TO, UH, THE MITIGATION FOR MM, E-K-N-G-O THREE, AND I DON'T HAVE A PAGE NUMBER THERE. 
          UH, SO IF I BRING THAT UP. 
          SO THIS IS THE IMPACT AND CONTINUED MONITORING OF POTENTIAL SEISMIC DISTURBANCE, SEISMIC DISTURBANCES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE ON SOIL THAT'S LIKELY TO MOVE AS THEY'RE, UH, YOU KNOW, DURING CONSTRUCTION AND ESPECIALLY AS THEY'RE DIGGING OUT 
          [01:45:01]
THE UNDERGROUND PARKING STRUCTURE. 
          AND MY QUESTION WAS, UM, WHETHER OR NOT, 'CAUSE THERE'S A LOT IN THERE ABOUT MONITORING OR PREPARATION BEFORE CONSTRUCTION AND DURING, BUT POST-CONSTRUCTION AND ONCE IT'S IN USE, DO WE HAVE ANY ONGOING MONITORING IN PLACE? IS THAT IMPLIED? MAYBE NOT NECESSARY, BUT HAVE WE LOOKED AT IF THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING NECESSARY GIVEN THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE FORCES AND STRESSES GOING ON NOW IN THIS SUBTERRANEAN AREA WITH LIFTS OF VEHICLES IN AND OUT TRAFFIC ALL DAY? I'M WONDERING IF IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO LOOK AT THOSE KIND OF ONGOING ONCE WE'RE IN SERVICE TYPE OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS. 
          WELL, I'LL START WITH A, UM, RESPONSE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE IS DESIGNED TO, UH, ENSURE THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AND ENGINEERING MEET SPECIFICATIONS. 
          AND THOSE ARE PRETTY HIGH STANDARDS. 
          AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE, UM, MUST HAVE CERTIFICATION BY A, AN ENGINEER WITH A DATE STAMP AND ALL OF THAT STUFF. 
          SO I THINK THE, UM, INTENT BEHIND THAT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS, UM, STRUCTURALLY SOUND FOR THE LIFE OF THE BUILDING. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          AND THEN, UH, JUST OF OTHER KIND OF MORE BROAD QUESTIONS, THERE'S ONLY TWO PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS. 
          ARE ALL PUBLIC AND AGENCY COMMENTS THAT WE COLLECTED DURING THAT I-S-M-N-D WE HAD BACK IN NOVEMBER, 2023, ARE THOSE PART AND PARCEL OF THIS REVIEW PROCESS? OR FOR ANYONE WHO SUBMITTED COMMENTS, YOU KNOW, WAY BACK IN NOVEMBER 23, SHOULD THEY BE DOING THAT AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THOSE ARE IN THERE? YEAH. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. 
          SO, UM, UH, WE HAVE A BIT OF A, A MULTIPLE STEP PROCESS HERE. 
          SO, UH, I WANNA BE REALLY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, THAT WHEN THE M AND D, UH, PATH TERMINATED, WE ABSOLUTELY CONSIDERED ALL THOSE COMMENTS IN INFORMING THE EIR. 
          BUT NOW THAT WE HAVE OPENED AND REOPENED THE INITIAL STUDY, UM, THAT CREATED A PATHWAY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THEN FURTHER REFINE THE SCOPE OF THE EIR. 
          UM, SO IF PEOPLE HAVE, UH, SO THOSE, UH, COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED, THEY HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AND THE INTENT WAS TO ADDRESS THOSE IN THE EIR AND I THINK WE DID THAT ONE BY PREPARING THE EIR AND LOOKING CLOSELY AT AESTHETICS AND, UM, CULTURAL RESOURCES, THE MAIN, THE HISTORIC RESOURCES, THE MAIN CONSIDERATIONS THAT CAME UP. 
          UM, BUT WE ARE ABSOLUTELY IN THAT PROCESS OF COLLECTING COMMENTS AND, UM, THE PUBLIC SHOULD SUBMIT COMMENTS THAT ARE RE GERMANE TO THIS EIR AND UM, AND THAT IS WHAT WE WILL BE EVALUATING IN THE FINAL. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF SOMEONE HAD A COMMENT BACK THEN THAT THEY FEEL LIKE IT WAS STILL NOT ADDRESSED, RESUBMIT IT TO MAKE SURE IT'S PART OF THE RESPONSE IN THIS DRAFT EIR. 
          OKAY. 
          AND COMMISSIONER, I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WHEN THE OVERLAY AND, UM, THE SUBSEQUENT DISCRETIONARY ENTITLEMENTS COME FORWARD, WE WOULD BRING FORWARD ALL THE COMMENTS AS PART OF THOSE, UH, PUBLIC REVIEWS AS WELL. 
          SO YOUR QUESTION WAS SPECIFIC TO THE M AND D AND THOSE COMMENTS COMING FORWARD TO THE A IR, BUT WE WOULD ALSO PULL THOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS FORWARD AS PART OF THE DISCRETIONARY ENTITLEMENT REVIEW. 
          OKAY. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND THEN THE, OH, THEN THE LAST QUESTION I HAD WAS, UH, JUST IN REGARDING THAT DE UM, OH, SORRY, SECOND TO LAST QUESTION IN OUR SQA GUIDELINES, UH, AND I BOTHERED WRITING IT DOWN 'CAUSE I LOOKED IT UP. 
          RESOLUTION 93 1 16. 
          UH, IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING PLANNING COMMISSION CAN REQUEST TO REVIEW THE FEIR IF AND WHEN IT IS PREPARED? 'CAUSE I KNOW RIGHT NOW WE'RE ON A TIMELINE WHERE THE FEIR WON'T COME BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UH, THAT IS WHAT THE REGULATIONS, UH, STATE. 
          OKAY. 
          I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT CORRECTLY. 
          UH, AND THEN THE FINAL ONE, WHEN WE HEAR ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES, SO OBVIOUSLY THE OUTPUT OF AN DRAFT EIR IS AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE. 
          WE HAD THIS COME UP AT CREEKWOOD RECENTLY. 
          WHAT DOES THAT IMPLY? IS THERE ANY POWER TO COMPEL DECISIONS BY THE DEVELOPER? ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IF AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE IS NOT THE PROJECT THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE SEEING, SO IN THIS CASE IT WAS THE REDUCED HEIGHT OPTION. 
          WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT IMPLY IN TERMS OF THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD? YEAH, SO THAT'S, UM, A MERE DISCLOSURE OF THE SQA PROCESS. 
          UM, AND THEN FINDINGS AT THE TIME OF CERTIFICATION FINDINGS HAVE TO BE MADE, UM, ACCEPTING OR REJECTING EACH OF THE IMPACTS, EACH OF THE MITIGATION AND EACH OF THE ALTERNATIVES. 
          SO IN YOUR, UH, REVIEW, YOU MAY WISH TO INDICATE A PREFERENCE OR A, UM, UH, DESIRE TO, UM, SUPPORT ONE OF THOSE ALTERNATIVES OR UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT ONE OF THEM. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. 
          [01:50:01]
CHAIR WHITLEY? UH, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITIONAL FIX, UM, SO IN THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS SECTION OF THE EIR, THERE'S A NO ALTERNATIVE, A REDUCED AREA C ALTERNATIVE AND A REDUCED HEIGHT ALTERNATIVE. 
          UM, BUT THE ALTERNATIVE HOTEL LOCATIONS ARE REJECTED SINCE THE APPLICANT DOES NOT OWN NOR CAN THEY REASONABLY ACQUIRE ANY OF THE SUGGESTED SITES. 
          WHAT DOES REASONABLY ACQUIRE MEAN IN THIS CONTEXT? DID THE APPLICANT REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, AT THOSE IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS INQUIRING ABOUT WHETHER THEY WERE FOR SALE OR NOT? UM, WERE THEY JUST NOT SELLING? DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT? UH, I DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT, UM, THE APPLICANT OTHER INTERESTS ARE IN OTHER PROPERTIES. 
          I DON'T, I I DON'T. 
          SO THEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT REASONABLY ACQUIRE MEANS. 
          UH, REASONABLY ACQUIRED HERE REFERS TO AN ABILITY TO, UM, UH, EVALUATE THAT AS A FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE. 
          SO, UM, SO GIVEN THAT THE OPPORTUNITY AREAS OR THE, THE AREAS WITHIN THE A, B AND C OVERLAY AREAS ARE IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WHY WERE THEY NOT EVALUATED AS POTENTIAL ALTERNATE HOTEL LOCATIONS? I MEAN, IT'S, UH, PRESUMABLY THEY WOULD BE REASONABLE SINCE WE'RE SUGGESTING OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT DEVELOP THEM. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          SO THE PROPERTY O OWNER DOESN'T OWN THOSE. 
          UM, BUT HAPPY TO RECEIVE A COMMENT FROM YOU SUGGESTING THAT THE, UM, ONE OF THE OTHER SITES BE BE FURTHER CONSIDERED. 
          YES. 
          I MEAN, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ANY OTHER ALTERNATE SITE NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AND THAT THAT'S A DEFICIENCY, BUT THAT'S MY COMMENT ON THAT. 
          SO I, I WANNA TAKE A MINUTE AND JUST CLARIFY. 
          YOU KNOW, SQ DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT WE LOOK AT EVERY POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE. 
          IT REQUIRES THAT WE ANALYZE A REASONABLE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES IN ORDER TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE HOTEL ON EVERY OTHER POSSIBLE SITE, UM, I WOULDN'T WANT YOU TO YEAH, I RECOGNIZE, I RECOGNIZE THAT. 
          I'M JUST SAYING THAT AN ALTERNATE LOC NO ALTERNATE LOCATIONS WERE EVALUATED AND I THINK IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO EVALUATE AT LEAST ONE COMMENT NOTED. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          YEAH, SO PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING I HAD ON PARKING HAS BEEN COVERED IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. 
          UM, I WANT TAKE THIS IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. 
          IT, IT HAD BEEN BUGGING ME FOR A WHILE, UH, THE CONVERSATION ABOUT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          AND SO I, I SPENT SOME MORE TIME LOOKING AT, UH, LOOKING AT THE SITE ON THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD 'CAUSE IT IS A, A LUST SITE OR LOW THREAT UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK SITE. 
          AND LOOKING AT WHAT WAS DONE WHEN IT WAS THE CHEVRON TO GET RID OF THE TANKS THAT WERE THERE. 
          IT, IT LOOKS LIKE SO FAR IN ORDER TO MEET THE MITIGATION AND MEET THE COVENANT ABOUT 10 FEET OF SOIL WAS MORE OR LESS TAKEN OUT AND REPLACED AND A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF GROUNDWATER, UH, AND WITH A NUMBER OF MONITORING WELLS. 
          MY, MY CONCERN THOUGH IS THE, THE SOIL THAT WAS UNDERNEATH WAS NOTED TO BE, UH, I'M FORGETTING THE WORD, BUT ESSENTIALLY HAVING BEEN A, A FORMER RIVER BED SITE AND GIVEN PROXIMITY TO THE PETALUMA RIVER, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WHAT IS THE ACTUAL PLAN FOR THE POTENTIAL RELEASE OF BENZENE, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THERE THAT MIGHT RELEASE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 
          ARE WE CONCERNED THAT THERE MIGHT BE A MOVEMENT OF SOIL WHEN TRYING TO DIG THIS UNDERGROUND PARKING STRUCTURE THAT MIGHT PUT EITHER THE WORKERS NEARBY RESIDENTS OR THE RIVER AT RISK? YES. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO THERE ARE VERY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST BE IMPLEMENTED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE THAT, UM, CONTAMINATION DOESN'T, UH, INTRUDE INTO GROUNDWATER. 
          AND SO YOU'LL SEE THOSE INTO IN THE MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          UH, AND THOSE ARE, ARE DESIGNED WITH THE, UM, INPUT FROM THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD AND INFORMED BY THE, UM, NUMEROUS VOLUMES OF RECORDS THAT YOU SAW AND, AND SORTED THROUGH ON THE, UM, CASE CLOSURE FROM THE, THE RECORD OF THE REMEDIATION THAT HAD HAD HAPPENED. 
          MY, MY QUESTION THOUGH, BECAUSE I, I WENT AND LOOKED UP THE ACTUAL CASE CLOSURE POLICY AND, AND FRANKLY ONCE, ONCE THE, THE SITE HAD BEEN TESTED AND THEY GOTTEN ABOUT 10 FEET DOWN AND THEY DID THEIR BOUNDARY, THAT WAS FRANKLY ENOUGH, ONCE THE MONITORING WAS DONE, UH, THEY NEVER ACCOUNTED FOR WHAT WE THEORETICALLY MIGHT DO THERE. 
          SO I HAD A QUESTION TO ASK IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MONITORING TO GO DEEPER THAN 10 FEET INITIALLY BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ELSE, I JUST WANT CONFIRMATION THAT THERE'LL BE SINCERE 
          [01:55:01]
TESTING BEFORE WE GET TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          A FEW THINGS. 
          UM, SO FOR THE UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE, THEY DO HAVE TO EXCAVATE A LOT MORE, ANOTHER 7,100 AND SOME CUBIC YARDS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO THAT WILL LIKELY, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE LAYER OF, UM, PROTECTION THAT HAPPENS UNDER ALL KINDS OF REGULATIONS FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR THE WORKERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THAT AND TESTING OF THE SOIL. 
          'CAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST TAKE IT ANYWHERE. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE MM-HMM. 
           WHAT YOU'RE BRINGING TO THE OFF HAUL FACILITY. 
          BUT THEN IN THE COVENANT IT DOES REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SAMPLING AND TESTING, UM, ONCE THE BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED. 
          AND SO WE, IF, IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, WE HAVE PLANS TO WORK WITH THE, THE DEVELOPER TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING, WE HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH VAPOR INTRUSION BARRIERS AND, AND THINGS OF THAT. 
          SO REMEDIATION AND SITE CLEANUP. 
          SO A LOT OF ADVICE OR ASSISTANCE OR INPUT WE COULD GIVE THEM TO, UH, ENSURE THEY CAN COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING THEY'RE, THAT'S IN THE COVENANT. 
          GOT IT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, JUST WANTED TO REALLY CONFIRM. 
          THE TESTING WILL HAPPEN BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION THOUGH, RIGHT? JUST TO DO THE MONITORING WELLS? THAT'S RIGHT. 
          IT'S BOTH BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN THIS IS, THIS IS GOING TO SOUND A LITTLE BIT LIKE A JOKE, BUT IT'S A SINCERE QUESTION. 
          'CAUSE I WAS READING THROUGH THE MITIGATIONS ON THIS AND I WAS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED. 
          YOU CAN HAVE A DAYCARE RESIDENCE SCHOOL OR ANYTHING TO THAT NATURE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, BUT WE CAN HAVE A GROUND FLOOR RESTAURANT. 
          AND I, I HONEST QUESTION IS HOW THOSE TWO THINGS CAN BE AREN'T CONTRADICTORY . 
          IT'S ABOUT, UH, YEAH, TERM OF EXPOSURE. 
          SO PLACES WHERE PEOPLE WOULD STAY OVERNIGHT, UM, BE THERE 24 HOURS A DAY, BE THERE, YOU KNOW, ALL EIGHT HOURS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, IF YOU'RE COMING AND GOING FOR, UM, A MEAL, IT'S NOT THE SAME KIND OF REQUIREMENTS FROM THE REGULATORY PERSPECTIVE. 
          WHERE WILL THE KITCHEN STAFF BE WORKING DURING THE DAY? IT'S, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN. 
          I'M JUST SAYING THAT THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ARE, ARE WHAT THEY ARE. 
          YOU CAN'T HAVE A DAYCARE, YOU CAN'T HAVE A RESIDENCE, BUT YOU CAN HAVE OTHER COMMERCIAL OFFICE, UH, ET CETERA IN JAIL. 
          UH, SO THEN I'LL, I'LL TAKE THIS QUESTION IN A DIFFERENT, UH, DIFFERENT DIRECTION. 
          UH, IF IT IS FOUND THAT THERE IS REASON TO HAVE CONCERN AFTER DOING THE TESTING, AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'LL BE MITIGATION, BUT STILL SOME RISK, UM, WHERE WILL IT BE APPROPRIATE? AT WHAT STAGE WILL IT BE APPROPRIATE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING KITCHEN STAFF IN THE FIRST FLOOR IN THAT SCENARIO? IS THAT SOMETHING THE COUNCIL DECIDES? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS WHEN THIS COMES BACK FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? AT WHAT POINT DO WE GET TO MAKE THAT EXTRA CLARIFICATION? RIGHT. 
          SO I, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I WANNA TAKE IT BACK TO MY, MY, UH, HAZMAT STAFF TO ASK THEM FOR, TO GIVE SOME MORE INFORMATION IN THE FINAL. 
          SO WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU WITH, UH, MORE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE FINAL TO ADDRESS THAT SPECIFIC QUESTION THAT YOU RAISED. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING EITHER OUR ADDITIONAL SUBJECT, UH, EFFECTS IN THE INITIAL STUDY OR TOPICS NOT YET COVERED? LAST CALL FOR QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA CALL, UH, CLOSE QUESTIONS AND AS WE APPROACH EIGHT O'CLOCK HERE, I THINK WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK RECESS. 
          AND THIS IS A GREAT TIME AGAIN FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SUBMIT COMMENT CARDS AS PUBLIC COMMENT IS NEXT. 
          SO WE'LL BE BACK AT ABOUT 8 0 5. 
          ALL RIGHT, LET'S BRING IT BACK HERE AT 8 0 7. 
          UM, FIRST, JUST AN APOLOGY TO THE FOLKS IN THE ROOM. 
          WE KNOW IT'S CHILLY. 
          WE'VE TURNED OFF THE AC IT'S A NEW SYSTEM THAT'S  MORE POWERFUL THAN WE REALIZED. 
          SO, UM, I CAN TELL YOU A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO, IT WAS AWFULLY, AWFULLY WARM. 
          SO , IT'S, UH, IT'S A BALANCING ACT, BUT APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH THAT. 
          UM, SO NOW WE WILL HEAD INTO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          UM, THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. 
          UP TO TWO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY SEED THEIR TIME TO A THIRD INDIVIDUAL PRIOR TO THE THIRD MEMBER'S PUBLIC COMMENT, SUCH THAT A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY HAVE UP TO NINE MINUTES TO SPEAK. 
          IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE SO, PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND BRING IT TO THE CLERK. 
          THE COMMISSION REQUESTS THAT YOU FOCUS YOUR COMMENTS TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT BEFORE US TONIGHT. 
          AS A REMINDER, NO PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS WILL BE DECIDED TONIGHT. 
          NO PERSONAL ATTACKS OR COMMENTS ON ANY INDIVIDUAL'S INTEGRITY WILL BE TOLERATED. 
          AS ALWAYS, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM CLAPPING, BOOING, CHEERING, ET CETERA. 
          AND PLEASE RESPECT 
          [02:00:01]
THE CLOCK AND REFRAIN FROM GOING OVER YOUR ALLOTTED COMMENT TIME. 
          UM, I'M JUST GONNA SHARE A QUICK SLIDE HERE TO REITERATE SOME OF THAT. 
          AGAIN, WE ASK THAT YOU BE RESPECTFUL OF THE TIME LIMIT AND MAINTAIN DECORUM. 
          AGAIN, IF YOU ARE SEATING YOUR TIME, JUST TO BE CLEAR, 'CAUSE THIS HAS COME UP IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, THAT HAS TO BE ANNOUNCED EITHER BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL YOU ARE SEATING TO BEGINS OR NOTED ON YOUR CARD. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, ALL RELEVANT COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIR WILL BE REVIEWED AND RESPONDED TO IN THE FINAL EIR. 
          UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAYBE HAVEN'T BEEN TO MANY OF THESE MEETINGS, IT'S REGRETTABLY A ONE-WAY CONVERSATION. 
          YOU'RE GIVING COMMENT, BUT IT'S UNLIKELY THAT, UM, STAFF WILL NECESSARILY RESPOND JUST AS A HEADS UP. 
          UM, ADDITIONALLY WRITTEN COMMENTS CAN BE SUBMITTED THROUGH OCTOBER 7TH, AND THOSE CAN GO TO GPOWELL@CITYOFPETALUMA.ORG. 
          UM, ONCE AGAIN, YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS, IF YOU RUN OUT OF TIME AND, AND DIDN'T GET THROUGH YOUR WHOLE STATEMENT OR YOU DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SPEAKING IN PERSON, WRITTEN COMMENTS ARE ABSOLUTELY STILL BEING ACCEPTED THROUGH THE SEVENTH. 
          UM, AND FOR FOLKS UP HERE, WE'LL BE DOING OUR JOINT DISCUSSION FOLLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          SO WITH THAT, WE'LL KICK THINGS OFF WITH OUR 13 SPEAKER CARDS, BUT FIRST I'M GONNA ASK THE CLERK  AND NOT FORGET THIS, UH, TO PLEASE SHARE THE NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED BEFORE THE MEETING. 
          WE RECEIVED, UH, AROUND 50 PUBLIC COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING, ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN POSTED ONLINE. 
          UH, AND THEY'RE ALSO IN THE BACK FOR READING. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          LIKE I SAID, WE'VE RECEIVED 13 IN-PERSON SPEAKER CARDS AS SUCH, EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR THEIR PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          AGAIN, PLEASE BE MINDFUL OF YOUR TIME AND AGAIN, WRITTEN COMMENTS ARE WELCOME THROUGH OCTOBER 7TH. 
          SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH ERIC LELAND, FOLLOWED BY JEANIE ZEL. 
          APOLOGIES FOR PRONUNCIATIONS IN ADVANCE. 
          ERIC LELAND, THANK YOU. 
          UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UM, FIRST I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL, UM, FOR ALL THE HARD WORK AND SO MANY OF YOU'RE VOLUNTEERS AND JUST DOING AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF HEAVY LIFTING AND THINKING AROUND THIS PROJECT. 
          SO JUST THANK YOU ALL FOR THAT. 
          ALSO, I KNOW THIS IS A, BEEN ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT HAS ATTRACTED A LOT OF VITRIOL, UM, SOME OF THAT TARGETED AT STAFF, CONTRACTORS, VOLUNTEERS, AND SO I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE KEPT YOUR HEAD ABOVE ALL THAT, UM, AND STUCK WITH THE PROJECT. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          UM, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE EIR, UM, I, I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND HISTORY. 
          UM, THERE'S SOME PARTS OF PETALUMA'S HISTORY THAT ARE BEAUTIFUL THINGS THAT WE WANNA PRESERVE. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE WITH DEIR IS, IS, IS, YOU KNOW, MEASURING THAT AND HAVING THOSE CONSIDERATIONS. 
          THERE'S ALSO HISTORY THAT WE DON'T WANNA PRESERVE, AND I THINK THAT'S A FLAVOR THAT WOULD BE REALLY INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT TO BRING INTO THIS PROCESS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC, HISTORICALLY ZONING'S BEEN USED TO EXCLUDE SOME POPULATIONS FROM ACCESSING WEALTH AND AMENITIES, UM, TO RESERVE THESE FOR MORE PRIVILEGED POP POPULATIONS. 
          THIS IS A NATIONWIDE PROBLEM. 
          IT'S ALSO A PROBLEM HERE IN PETALUMA. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, PROHIBITIONS ON MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS ENFORCED MINIMUM LOT SIZES, MINIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS. 
          THESE ARE THREE OF MANY WAYS THAT, UM, FOLKS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FROM AREAS THAT ARE RICH IN AMENITIES. 
          AREAS LIKE OUR DOWNTOWN. 
          UH, EXCLUSIONARY ZONING IS A HISTORICAL LEGACY THAT PLAYS A ROLE IN PERPETUATING ONGOING DISCRIMINATION TODAY. 
          UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, THAT PIECE AND HAVE US ALL THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE WITH, WITH ZONING, IT'S COMPLICATED. 
          I DON'T THINK THE PROCESS WENT SO WELL FROM THE BEGINNING. 
          I THINK THE COMMUNICATION WAS RATHER POOR. 
          I THINK THE UNFORTUNATE REALITY WITH THIS EIR IS IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT, VERY DIFFICULT, UH, DOCUMENT TO PARSE COMPARED TO OTHER EIRS. 
          UM, AND SO IT'S VERY UNDERSTANDABLE THAT A LOT OF FOLKS HERE AND MYSELF INCLUDED, UM, ARE CONFUSED AND HAVING A HARD TIME, YOU KNOW, BEING ABLE TO GIVE REALLY SENSIBLE INPUT, RIGHT? AND WE'RE ALL FACING THAT. 
          UM, BUT THERE IS A PURPOSE TO THIS ZONING THAT'S MEANT TO DO A SMALL MEASURE OF RELIEF FOR FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY DISENFRANCHISED FROM AREAS OF OUR DOWNTOWN THAT'S NOT JUST RESIDENTS, BUT IT'S ALSO FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING TO START NEW BUSINESSES DOWNTOWN. 
          IT'S INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE HERE IN PETALUMA. 
          IT'S INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE. 
          IT'S INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE TO LIVE, IT'S INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE TO START A BUSINESS. 
          IF YOU ASK ANYONE DOWNTOWN WHO'S RENTING SPACE, UH, PARTICULARLY OUR SMALL BUSINESSES, THEY'LL TELL YOU THIS IS A REALLY EXPENSIVE PLACE TO BE. 
          SO LET'S JUST CONSIDER THAT AS WE'RE THINKING THROUGH, UH, MOVING THIS, UH, 
          [02:05:01]
EIR FORWARD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT UP WE'VE GOT JEANNIE PRETZEL FOLLOWED, FOLLOWED BY WAYNE RA. 
          HI. 
          UM, THANK YOU. 
          UM, I WANNA THANK ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR THEIR REAL THOUGHTFUL QUESTIONS. 
          AND, UM, PERSONALLY, IT, IT'S CONCERNING TO ME THAT GRANTED, THIS IS THE DRAFT EEIR, THAT THE, SOME OF THESE ISSUES WERE NOT ADDRESSED IN REGARDS TO PARKING IN REGARDS TO WHY WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE SITES IN REGARDS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF SOME OF THOSE TOXINS IN THE SOIL. 
          UM, AND, UM, THE ISSUE OF DELIVERIES TO THAT SITE THAT IS A MASSIVE HOTEL AND A MASSIVE RESTAURANT ON A SMALL BUSY STREET WITH NO PARKING. 
          UM, SO IN ADDITION TO ASKING TO LOOK INTO MORE ABOUT PARKING, UM, I, I WANNA KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THOSE DELIVERY TRUCKS THAT WILL BE THERE ON A DAILY BASIS. 
          UNLOADING FOOD, UNLOADING LINENS, UM, THAT'S HUGE. 
          AND THAT'S MASSIVE TRAFFIC JAM. 
          I'D RIDE DRIVE THAT ROAD ALL THE TIME, AND THAT'S GONNA REALLY MESS UP THE DOWNTOWN. 
          UM, ADDITIONALLY, I AM A 25 YEAR RESIDENT OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT IN PETALUMA. 
          I'VE AND MY HUSBAND HAVE RESTORED, REMODELED TWO HISTORIC HOMES AND ADDED A NEW A DU NEW BUILDING INSIDE THAT DISTRICT. 
          I'M REALLY CONCERNED THAT THE WAY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES IN OUR DISTRICT, UM, AND SAYING, I I, I'M PRETTY SURE I READ THAT, THAT THAT WAS, THERE WAS HARMONY WITH THIS NEW PROPOSED BUILDING, UM, WITH BUILDINGS IN THE, IN THE THEATER DISTRICT. 
          THE THEATER DISTRICT IS NOT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          YOU DON'T GET TO SAY, WELL, THIS ONE MATCHES THAT ONE OVER THERE. 
          SO IT'S OKAY. 
          YOU HAVE TO HAVE HARMONY WITHIN THOSE BUILDINGS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE THOSE NEW THEATER DISTRICT BUILDINGS. 
          SO IF YOU REALLY WANNA LOOK AT THAT ASPECT, YOU NEED TO GO BACK UP THE BOULEVARD AND LOOK AT MCNAIR BUILDING AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER BUILDINGS IN THERE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT, IT'S NOT HARMONIOUS TO THE SCALE AND SIZE AND FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          AND, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'VE GOT WAYNE RA FOLLOWED BY TOM GAFFEY. 
          GOOD EVENING ONE AND ALL. 
          UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 
          UM, SOME OF MY CONCERNS HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP TONIGHT. 
          UH, ONE OF THEM WAS, UH, SOIL MITIGATION BECAUSE IT, IT WAS A FORMER, UH, GAS STATION. 
          AND ANOTHER WAS WATER MITIGATION BECAUSE THAT AREA DOWN THERE IS CONTAMINATED. 
          UM, I WORKED ON THE THEATER DISTRICT DOWN THERE AND WE WERE REQUIRED TO WORK IN HAZMAT SUITS BECAUSE THE WATER TABLE THERE IS, UM, REAL CLOSE TO THE RIVER. 
          SO, UM, MY CONCERN WAS, IS HOW WATER MIGRATION IS GONNA BE CONTROLLED FROM THAT AREA. 
          'CAUSE DIGGING A, A, UH, UNDERGROUND PARKING STRUCTURE IS GONNA BE, UM, HARD TO CONTROL THE WATER BECAUSE YOU'RE SO CLOSE TO THE RIVER. 
          SO, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATION ON THAT. 
          BUT MY THREE TAKEAWAYS WITH, UH, A LOT OF THIS, WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE IS THAT THE ER EIR REPORT HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED. 
          UH, SECONDLY, THE ZONING OVERLAY HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED, NOR HAS THE PERMITS BEEN FINALIZED. 
          BUT YET, IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE, THAT LOCATION, UM, AREA A, WHICH THE HOTEL IS, THERE'S ALREADY CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL THERE, AND RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER, UH, FOURTH AND C, THERE'S A CONEX BOX, AND THAT'S ALL FENCED OFF FOR MORE CONSTRUCTION. 
          SO I'M WONDERING HOW THIS HAS BEEN BYPASSED BY THIS, THIS WHOLE, UM, EIR REPORT AND WHY IT'S NOT BEEN FOLLOWED UP BY THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT AND HOW THIS, UH, MATERIAL IS ALREADY BEING ON SITE. 
          BUT I STILL APPRECIATE YOU GUYS' WORK, AND PLEASE CARRY ON. 
          OKAY. 
          NEXT WE HAVE TOM GAFFEY, FOLLOWED BY DALE O'CONNOR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, TOM GAFFEY, AND I'M A CITIZEN OF PETALUMA, I THINK IN THE FIFTH DISTRICT. 
          AND, UM, BOY, I MEAN, WHAT I THOUGHT I WAS GONNA SAY IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. 
          NOW. 
          YOU GUYS HAVE READ THE REPORT. 
          I TRIED TO READ THE REPORT. 
          [02:10:01]
IT WAS LIKE READING CANTERBURY TALES IN ORIGINAL GAELIC. 
          IT PUT ME TO SLEEP MANY TIMES, BUT I CAN STILL SAY ONE THAT RI WITH THE SH SUIT AND A DROUGHT OF MARCHES, PEAS IT TO THE ROOT AND BATHED EVERY VEIN AND SWITCH THE COOL . 
          SO I KNOW HOW TOUGH IT IS FOR YOU GUYS TO GET TO WHERE YOU ARE NOW. 
          UH, BUT YOU'RE HAVING QUESTIONS NOW ABOUT TRAFFIC, ABOUT EMISSIONS, AND I HAVEN'T EVEN HEARD WHAT MY BIGGEST FEAR IS. 
          THE 75 FOOT BUILDING THAT'S GONNA END UP AT THE CORNER OF FOURTH KENTUCKY AND WESTERN STREET. 
          THIS WILL BE A DISASTER FOR OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          WE SAY IT'S NOT A HISTORIC DISTRICT ANYMORE BECAUSE CHASE BANK IS THERE. 
          BUT IF THAT BANK GOES AWAY AND DOESN'T BECOME A DISPENSARY, WHICH BY THE WAY, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR PLACES FOR THE DISPENSARIES, I THINK ALL BANKS WOULD BE THE PERFECT SPOT. 
           GOOD SECURITY. 
          AT ANY RATE, UM, IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT THIS EIR, PLEASE DON'T MOVE IT FORWARD. 
          VOTE NOT TO MOVE IT FORWARD. 
          SEND IT BACK TO WHOEVER IT'S GOTTA GO BACK TO. 
          DO NOT APPROVE THE CIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          NOW WE HAVE DALE O'CONNOR, FOLLOWED BY CHRISTINE WHITE. 
          HELLO. 
          THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME. 
          I CAN'T, I'M NOT IF YOU BEND THE TOP OF IT. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO ME. 
          AND, AND I THINK I'M GONNA GO OVER WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS WERE TALKING ABOUT. 
          AND I HATE TO RUN IT INTO THE GROUND, BUT IT'S PARKING. 
          AND THE STATE SAID, YOU SAID THAT THE STATE TOOK IT AWAY IN 2013. 
          WELL, I FEEL ABOUT PARKING. 
          PUT IT BACK. 
          THIS IS PETALUMA, NOT THE STATE. 
          AND YOU TALK ABOUT THE VE UH, VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED. 
          WELL, WE ARE A COMMUNITY. 
          WE ARE ALSO URBAN AND RURAL. 
          OUR RURAL PEOPLE COME INTO TOWN. 
          THEY DON'T TAKE SMART, THEY DO NOT TAKE A BUS. 
          THEY DRIVE IN AND MOST OFTEN THEY HAVE A TRUCK. 
          SO THEY NEED A PLACE TO PARK. 
          AND IF YOU ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE OF PARKING, THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE NOW AND PUT IT IN YOUR REPORT BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROBLEM NOW AND IT WILL INTENSIFY IN THE FUTURE. 
          IF YOU BUILD THESE SIX PLUS STORY BUILDINGS AND RESIDENTIAL PLACES THAT DON'T SUPPLY PARKING FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING HERE. 
          NOT EVERYBODY RIDES A BICYCLE. 
          YOU TOOK AWAY SOME PARKING ON D STREET BECAUSE OF THE BICYCLE COALITION BY A FEDERAL GOVER, UH, FEDERAL BUILDING. 
          AND IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE AT THE HOTEL, THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER PLACE FOR THEM TO PARK AFTER 6:00 PM SO MY SUGGESTION IS TO LOOK AT THINGS NOW FOR THE FUTURE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE HAVE CHRISTINE WHITE, FOLLOWED BY CHRISTINA MOSLEY. 
          THANKS FOR LOWERING THE MICROPHONE. 
          DALE. 
          UM, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO ADDRESSED QUESTIONS. 
          WE WERE GIGGLING IN THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE YOU VERY CLEARLY HAD SIMILAR QUESTIONS TO US, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UM, IT'S NOT EASY TO WRITE AN EIR REPORT. 
          IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT FOR A LAYMAN TO READ AN EIR REPORT. 
          SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXPERTISE UP HERE. 
          I I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, ON THE OVERLAY, IF THAT GOES THROUGH EVERY OPPORTUNITY THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A, AT LEAST A SIX STORY BUILDING AND IF NOT UP TO NINE STORIES. 
          THAT'S, IS THAT CORRECT? AM I CORRECT IN THAT? IF YOU APPROVE THE OVERLAY, WHAT WILL PETALUMA LOOK LIKE IF WE DO THAT? AND WHAT DOES THAT DO TO OUR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN? THAT IS A DRAW FOR PEOPLE TO COME HERE. 
          SO WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW CAN WE MAKE OUR COMMUNITY, UM, STRONGER? HOW CAN WE BRING BUSINESS TO PETALUMA? AND THE HISTORIC AREA IS ONE THAT BRINGS PEOPLE HERE. 
          THEY COME ANTIQUING, THEY COME TO OUR ANTIQUE FAIR, THAT'S ALL HISTORIC DOWNTOWN. 
          SO PLEASE TAKE ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          YES. 
          DO WE NEED HOUSING? YES, WE NEED HOUSING, BUT WE NEED JOBS SO PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE AND WE NEED TO BRING IN INDUSTRIES TO PETALUMA AND BUSINESSES TO PETALUMA, BUT WILL GROWING OUR BUILDING AND MAKING US LOOK LIKE SAN FRANCISCO DO THAT. 
          I DUNNO. 
          THANK YOU. 
          CHRISTINA MOSLEY, FOLLOWED BY ROBERT BAILEY. 
          [02:15:03]
HELLO, GOOD EVENING. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING MY INPUT. 
          UM, I ACTUALLY ORIGINATED FROM THE EAST BAY. 
          I WAS A NATIVE THERE GROWING UP IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT CITIES. 
          I CAME HERE ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO BECAUSE MY PARENTS ACTUALLY PASSED AWAY FROM CANCER. 
          THEY WERE SUPER COMMUTERS FROM HAYWARD ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SILICON VALLEY. 
          AND I WAS PART OF THAT COMMUTE 'CAUSE I HAD NO OTHER CHAPERONES IN SUPERVISION. 
          SO I SPENT THE MAJORITY OF MY LIFE IN A CAR FOR ABOUT TWO HOURS EVERY NIGHT. 
          I DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO MYSELF AND A LOT OF GREAT, UM, EASE IN THAT LIFESTYLE. 
          AND BEFORE MY DAD PASSED AWAY IN ABOUT, UH, 2018 WHEN I JUST GRADUATED COLLEGE, I WAS COMMUTING WITH HIM JUST ON A WHIM SOMETIMES. 
          AND WE WERE SPENDING ABOUT THREE TO THREE AND A HALF HOURS EVERY SINGLE NIGHT UNTIL HE PASSED AWAY. 
          NOW, I WATCHED MISSION BOULEVARD BE DEVELOPED FROM FREMONT ALL THE WAY TO HAYWARD IN A STRIP. 
          UM, AND I UNDERSTAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS IMPORTANT, BUT LET ME JUST TELL YOU THAT IT WAS ALREADY CROWDED IN THE FREEWAYS AND ON MISSION BOULEVARD IN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          AND YOU CANNOT GET HOME. 
          AND WITH THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ADDED AND BART NOT BEING ENOUGH, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT CONGESTION AND NOT REALLY ACTUALLY INCREASING THE LIVELIHOOD AND HAPPINESS OF OTHER PEOPLE. 
          SO WHILE IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE HOUSING AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THINGS YOU ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER LIKE MYSELF, WHO LIVES IN THE WATERFRONT, MY PARKING, MY EASE, AND WHY I CAME TO THE CITY, WHICH IS THE FACT THAT YOU HAD A HISTORICAL DOWNTOWN THAT I WAS NOT ABLE TO GET. 
          AND EVERYTHING IN THE EAST BAY HAS BEEN OVERDEVELOPED AND NO ONE GIVES A S**T, EXCUSE ME, ABOUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THOSE CITIES. 
          AND I AM SADLY TO SAY THAT I'VE BEEN HEARTBROKEN AND THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT I FELT WAS A SANCTUARY. 
          SO I REALLY HOPE YOU CONSIDER THAT. 
          THIS IS WHY I REALLY WANT YOU TO BE VERY, VERY MINDFUL OF WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN A HOTEL ON THAT STRIP IS JUST GONNA CONGEST IT EVEN MORE. 
          AND I'M NOT CERTAIN IF IT'S REALLY GONNA ADD THE JOBS NEEDED. 
          SO LASTLY ON THAT, I JUST WANNA ALSO POINT OUT THAT YOU NEED TO CONSIDER, UM, THE FACT THAT MY TRANSPORTATION, LIKE TO SMART TRAIN, LIKE JUST FROM SAN RAFAEL, OUR COMMUTE, I HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE SMART TRAIN. 
          THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TRAINS. 
          HOW ARE YOU GONNA GET PEOPLE HERE? AND YOU CAN'T GUARANTEE EVERYBODY WHO WORK, WHO LIVES HERE IS GONNA BE ABLE TO WORK HERE. 
          SO JUST REALLY BE MINDFUL OF THAT. 
          TRANSPORTATION, PARKING, AND ALSO YOUR CULTURAL HERITAGE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ROBERT BAILEY, FOLLOWED BY MAUREEN GACHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'M A 42 YEAR RESIDENT OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE, AND I'VE SEEN A FAIR BIT OF CHANGE AND EVOLUTION HAPPEN. 
          I, I WANT, I DON'T THINK I GOT ANYTHING MUCH NEW, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY THAT PERSONALLY I AM NOT AGAINST A HOTEL. 
          I THINK A FIRST CLASS HOTEL WOULD BE A TERRIFIC ADDITION TO PETALUMA. 
          WHY HERE? THIS IS PROBABLY ABOUT THE WORST PLACE YOU COULD PUT A HOTEL IN THIS TOWN FOR ALL OF THE REASONS YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT REGARD TO THE OVERLAY. 
          ALL I CAN SAY THAT JUST, IT'S JUST CONFUSING THE ISSUE. 
          IT'S LIKE A CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD. 
          IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HOTEL, BLAME THE OVERLAY. 
          IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERLAY, BLAME THE HOTEL. 
          IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          IT'S VERY CONFUSING TO ALL OF US AND IT'S NOT ADDING. 
          SO I'M SAYING, WHAT'S THE HURRY HERE? WHY DO WE NEED TO DO BOTH OF THESE TOGETHER? SEEMS TO ME WE SHOULD BE DOING THE OVERLAY ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FIRST. 
          AND THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT A HOTEL. 
          DOES IT MAKE SENSE AT ANY OF THESE NUMBER OF SITES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO US OR APPEAR TO BE AVAILABLE TO US? WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE OWNERSHIP IS OF THESE SITES. 
          ARE THEY WILLING TO SELL? I THINK THAT QUESTION WAS A VERY IMPORTANT ONE AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT BEING BROUGHT UP. 
          LASTLY, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT PARKING AND TRAFFIC AND ALL OF THE STUFF THAT'S GOING ON AROUND THAT AREA. 
          SERVICE ACCESS WAS NOT MENTIONED EXCEPT BY ONE OF YOUR CITIZENS HERE. 
          IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS. 
          I HAD A 40 FOOT CISCO TRUCK ON WESTERN, OR B, YOU CAN'T GET PAST THAT TRUCK AND THERE'S NOWHERE FOR THEM TO STOP ON THE BOULEVARD TO SERVICE THOSE, THE, THAT FACILITY. 
          AND WE HAVE THE THIRD LANE IN SOME PARTS OF IT NOT THERE. 
          SO I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CAN BE VIABLE WITHOUT GETTING SERVICE ACCESS HERE. 
          NOT TO MENTION THE PARKING ANALYSIS, WHICH SEEMS TO BE COMPLETELY INADEQUATE. 
          SO I, BOTTOM LINE IS I'M MERGING YOU TO BE HARD ON THIS 
          [02:20:01]
GO BACK QUESTION, ANALYZE. 
          AND IF THESE QUESTIONS ARE NOT ANSWERED, YOU CANNOT APPROVE IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MAUREEN GAAL, FOLLOWED BY BEVERLY ALEXANDER. 
          HI. 
          UM, I'VE WRITTEN LIKE SEVEN PAGES OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS AND SO I'M KIND OF WINGING IT. 
          UM, 'CAUSE WHAT I WAS ORIGINALLY GONNA TALK ABOUT, I'M NOT GONNA TALK ABOUT 'CAUSE I REALLY WANNA JUST FOCUS ON THE EIR. 
          UM, AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUES I HAVE WITH THE OVERLAY I'LL ADDRESS LATER. 
          BUT, AND I WANNA ALSO SAY THANK YOU. 
          I AS, UM, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WORK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE. 
          I WENT ON SATURDAY AND I WENT THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND REALLY TRIED TO UNDERSTAND IT. 
          I MET PEOPLE THERE WHO WERE REALLY HELPFUL, UM, AND GIVING ME A GREAT EXPLANATIONS. 
          SO EVEN THOUGH I'M GONNA HAVE SOME COMMENTS HERE, I WANTED TO PUT IN THE CONTEXT OF THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BETTER YOU THAN ME BECAUSE THAT'S, THERE'S, IT'S A LOT OF, IT'S A LOT OF DETAILS AND A LOT OF REGULATIONS. 
          SO, BUT THE THINGS THAT KIND OF REALLY STRUCK ME IS THAT, UM, A 40 FOOT, UH, ABOVE OVER 45 FEET DOES HAVE AN ADVER ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN. 
          AND THE FAR THE 2.5 TO SIX RATIO IS NOT INSIGNIFICANT. 
          THAT'S ALMOST TRIPLE. 
          AND I'M NOT SURE HOW AND WHAT THAT BASELINE IS FOR THE EIR TO DEFINE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT MY EXPERTISE, SO I'M NOT QUESTIONING THAT THAT'S WHAT IT IS, BUT I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT LANGUAGE, UM, THAT LANGUAGE. 
          UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. 
          UM, IF THE CITY IS CONSIDERING HIGH DENSITY BUILDING, WHY IS THAT NOT INCLUDED IN THE EIR? WHY ARE WE NOT INSTRUCTING, UM, THE CITY TO INCLUDE THAT? BECAUSE WHEN WE WANNA HAVE THAT BE ALL INCLUSIVE, WHEN IT COMES TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE A DECISION, UH, AND THEN EVERYONE'S FAVORITE TOPIC, PARKING , UM, WHAT EVERYONE HAS SAID IT BEFORE ME, UM, HAS REALLY, UH, I LIVE OFF OF D STREET OR I LIVE ON D STREET, MY PARKING HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY. 
          AND THEN NOW THIS SECTION ZONING A IS BUMPING UP TO D STREET. 
          IT FEELS LIKE TO ME THAT NOBODY IS LOOKING AT IT FROM AN OVERALL BIG PICTURE. 
          AND ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS JUST REALLY SQUEEZE EVERYTHING INTO REALLY, REALLY SMALL SPACE. 
          AND THAT'S REALLY GONNA IMPACT THE RESIDENTS AND THE USERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          AND I HAVE 10, NINE SECONDS, SO I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, BEVERLY ALEXANDER, FOLLOWED BY JANE HAMILTON. 
          HELLO. 
          UM, THIS IS ALWAYS A BIT NERVE WRACKING. 
          UM, ONE QUESTION THAT CAME TO MY MIND IS I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IS. 
          AND SO WE HAVE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE FROM THE PUBLIC LOOKING AT THE EIR TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT, LOOKING AT THE CURRENT SITUATION IN PETALUMA, LOOKING AT WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT, AND THEN COMING, COMING HERE OR WRITING LETTERS. 
          AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE DOING THAT. 
          LIKE, I WOULD COOK A MEAL AND THROW IT IN THE GARBAGE. 
          YOU KNOW, I EXPECT SOMETHING TO HAPPEN. 
          I EXPECT TO BE LISTENED TO. 
          I THINK EVERYONE WHO BOTHERED EXPECTS A POSITIVE RESULT. 
          AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. 
          I READ THE COMMENTS, THE LETTERS THAT WERE SENT, AND EXCEPT FOR MAYBE ONE OR TWO, ALL OF THEM DID NOT LIKE THIS PROJECT. 
          THEY DID NOT LIKE THE HOTEL, AND THEY DID NOT LIKE THE OVERLAYS. 
          SO WHY ARE PEOPLE SPENDING ALL THEIR TIME WRITING LETTERS 
          [02:25:01]
AND COMING TO THESE MEETINGS IF IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE? AND THEY SPEAK AS IF THEY THINK THAT HAVING A GOOD ARGUMENT WILL CHANGE THINGS. 
          AND I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING. 
          I HAVE NEVER SEEN IT HAPPEN. 
          SO, UM, THE, WHAT THE MOST RADICAL THING THAT YOU GUYS COULD DO IS ACTUALLY LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC AND TO MAKE PUBLIC HEARINGS BE MEANINGFUL. 
          AS FAR AS THE DOWNTOWN GOES, IT REMINDS ME OF, OH, HENRY'S STORY. 
          UM, THE GIFT OF THE MAGI MAGI, I DON'T KNOW. 
          ANYWAY, THESE TWO PEOPLE LOVE EACH OTHER. 
          THEY'RE POOR, AND ONE OF THEM KNOWS THAT THE OTHER ONE HAS A WATCH THAT HE GOT FROM HIS GRANDFATHER, BUT NO CHAIN FOR IT. 
          AND THE, THAT'S THE, AND THE, THE MAN KNOWS HIS WIFE HAS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL HAIR, BUT SHE HAS NO COMBS TO PUT IT UP WITH. 
          AND SO FOR CHRISTMAS, HE SELLS HIS WATCH TO BUY HIS WIFE COMBS. 
          AND SHE SELLS HER, CUTS HER HAIR TO BUY A CHAIN FOR HIS WATCH. 
          LET US NOT SELL OUR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN. 
          THIS BUILDING CRAZINESS IN AN INAPPROPRIATE PLACE BY THE RIVER WILL CHOKE PETALUMA, UH, JANE HAMILTON, FOLLOWED BY TOM LEWIS. 
          HEY, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR, THE DISCUSSION REALLY APPRECIATED THE QUESTIONS AND THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE HERE TONIGHT. 
          UM, I FOUND THE CONTENT OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, BY AND LARGE, TO BE A REPEAT OF THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WAS IN THE I-S-M-N-D. 
          THERE WERE NOT MANY SIGNIFICANT, UM, AREAS THAT WERE STUDIED IN DEPTH. 
          AND SO I FIND THAT DISAPPOINTING. 
          THE IMPACTS OF PARKING AND CIRCULATION FOR BOTH THE HOTEL AND THE OVERLAY ZONES NEEDS TO BE WAY MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED. 
          UM, AN ANTICIPATED A THOUSAND CARS A DAY, ADDITIONAL A THOUSAND CARS A DAY WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, AND THAT NEEDS TO BE MUCH MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED. 
          I HAVE ALL THIS IN WRITING, BUT I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THE HIGH POINTS AND, UM, THEN I, THERE'S MORE DETAILS UNDER EACH SECTION, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT GONNA MAKE YOU LISTEN TO ME. 
          . 
          UM, THE IMPACT ON AESTHETICS, IT'S HUGE. 
          THE D-I-D-E-I-R STATES, THESE CONCERNS WILL BE MITIGATED IN THE FUTURE BY LEAVING THESE DECISIONS TO DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESSING, UH, FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE HISTORIC AND CULTURAL COMMITTEE, AND THE HAR, THIS FAVORS THE DEVELOPERS AND PUTS THE PUBLIC AT A DISADVANTAGE. 
          THE PUBLIC MUST BE ABLE TO READ THROUGH WHAT, 414 PAGES OF, UH, AN EIR AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL BE RIGHT WHERE WE ARE WITH THE HOTEL RIGHT NOW, WITH MANY OTHER PROJECTS IN THE FUTURE. 
          SO I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT'S AN ACCEPTABLE MITIGATION. 
          UM, MAKING THE HEIGHT LIMIT APPROVALS, THE RESULT OF A SERIES OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE MITIGATION THAT, UM, THAT ALSO JUST KICKS THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. 
          AND WE'RE NOT REALLY STUDYING THE ACTUAL IMPACTS OF THE OVERLAY, BUT WE'RE JUST SAYING IN THE FUTURE, YOU CAN JUST GO AND INTERACT WITH THESE PROPOSAL, EACH PROPOSAL, ONE AT A TIME, PIECEMEAL. 
          IT'S LIKE PIECEMEAL, UM, ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT HAVE TO BE EXPLORED. 
          AND THEY'RE NOT IN THIS EIR. 
          SO I THINK THAT THAT'S SERIOUSLY LACKING. 
          THE, UH, ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS, NOT ALTERNATIVE HEIGHTS. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, USED AND THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT IS NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED, THE HOTEL PARCEL SITS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE NATIONAL REGISTRY OF THE, FOR THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, IT'S THE GATEWAY TO PET DOWNTOWN PETALUMA. 
          UM, ANY BUILDING ERECTED THERE SHOULD BE COMPLIMENTARY AND NOT DETRIMENTAL. 
          UM, THE, THE WHOLE THING ABOUT THE FAR, I'M, I ONLY HAVE EIGHT SECONDS, DARN IT. 
          , UH, I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO THAT BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY BROUGHT UP HERE. 
          IT'S NOT CLEAR. 
          UM, THAT'S MY TIME. 
          TOO BAD. 
          I HAVE MORE TO SAY. 
          OKAY. 
          TOM LEWIS, FOLLOWED BY LYDIA ASLAN. 
          ONE 
          [02:30:06]
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          I WISH I COULD HAVE GIVEN JANE MORE TIME. 
          UM, I DON'T HAVE AS MUCH TO SAY, UM, AND I WASN'T GONNA SPEAK TONIGHT, BUT, UH, I'M COMPELLED TO. 
          I, UM, I'M IN SAN FRANCISCO A LOT RESTORING HISTORIC BUILDINGS THERE, AS YOU KNOW. 
          AND WHEN I GO OUT TO LUNCH, I TALK TO THE RESTAURATEURS AND PEOPLE I'M SITTING NEXT TO AND THEY SAY, WHERE ARE YOU FROM? I SAYS, I'M FROM PETALUMA. 
          HE SAYS, OH YEAH, PETALUMA, ISN'T PETALUMA CONSIDERING SOME RADICAL CHANGES TO DOWNTOWN? ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE SIX STORY BUILDINGS IN A GIANT HOTEL IN A SMALL LOT? AND I SAID, YEAH. 
          AND THEY, AND THEY LOOK AT ME AND THEY SAY, PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. 
          PLEASE. 
          WE LOVE PETALUMA. 
          WE COME TO PETALUMA ON THE WEEKENDS. 
          WE BRING OUR FAMILIES TO VISIT, ENJOY THE RESTAURANTS AND THE DOWNTOWN ATMOSPHERE. 
          HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY CONSIDER CHANGING IT? AND THAT'S WHY I MOVED HERE 43 YEARS AGO. 
          SO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY TONIGHT REALLY SPEAKS TO, SPECIFICALLY TO THE CULTURAL HISTORIC ASPECTS OF PETALUMA. 
          AND IN THE REPORT, THE PRESERVATION ARCHITECT IS REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          THERE THE REPORT IS WORKING HARD TO ELIMINATE THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE THAT IS CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT AND HAS BEEN CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT SINCE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS FOUNDED. 
          BUT THERE WAS A FIRE. 
          AND UNFORTUNATELY THE FIRE NOW DISQUALIFIES THAT BUILDING FROM BEING SIGNIFICANT. 
          WELL, I HAVE TO SAY I DISAGREE WITH THAT. 
          I RESTORE BUILDINGS IN SAN FRANCISCO WITH MATERIALS THAT ARE NOT HEART REDWOOD. 
          IT'S NOT TERRACOTTA. 
          WE USE GFRC. 
          WE USE SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS IN HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT DO NOT LOSE THEIR SIGNIFICANCE TO THE NATIONAL HISTORIC REGISTER AND THE PARK. 
          I'VE WORKED ON SAN FRANCISCO CITY HALL, I'VE WORKED ON HIGH RISES, I'VE WORKED ON VICTORIANS. 
          WE CAN'T FIND HAR REDWOOD. 
          EVERY TIME WE WANNA RESTORE A BUILDING. 
          SOMETIMES WE GOTTA USE HARDY BACKER BOARD. 
          AND IN PRESERVATION BRIEF 16 IN THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THE SEC SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION ALLOWS FOR SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS. 
          IN FACT, AND IN THE BRIEF, I LOVE THIS PARAGRAPH, THROUGH A TRADITION OF USING AFFORDABLE AND COMMON MATERIALS AND IMITATION OF MORE EXPENSIVE AND LESS AVAILABLE MATERIALS IS A LONG ONE. 
          MOUNT VERNON, FOR EXAMPLE, GEORGE WASHINGTON USED WOOD PAINTED WITH SAND IMPREGNATED PAINT TO IMITATE RUSTIC LOCATED STONE. 
          NOW IF HE CAN DO THAT, WE CAN RESTORE PETALUMA AND WE CAN RESTORE OUR HERITAGE. 
          LET'S WORK ON THAT . 
          OKAY, LYDIA ASLAN, FOLLOWED BY PATRICIA TUTTLE BROWN. 
          GOOD EVENING AND THANK YOU ONE AND ALL FOR YOUR VERY DETAILED QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS TONIGHT. 
          UM, UH, LIKE A FEW OTHER PEOPLE SAID, MY STUFF IS OUT THE WINDOW BECAUSE YOU, YOU GOT ALL MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED. 
          UM, BUT I JUST WANNA PLUG THE ONE, THE ONE THING I REALLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT WAS USING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS AS A MITIGATION MEASURE. 
          I WAS JUST KIND OF CONFOUNDED BY THAT, UH, WHEN I, WHEN I WAS DEEP IN THE WEEDS. 
          UM, AND, AND I, I FEEL THAT THE, USING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS IS A CE A MITIGATION MEASURE IS IS CIRCULAR THINKING. 
          YOU KNOW, OSTENSIBLY, EKN IS GONNA COME IN TO SUBMIT A HOTEL PROJECT THAT THEY FEEL IS ABLE TO MEET ALL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE ITEMS, BUT THEY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TURN AROUND AND CLAIM THOSE SAME ITEMS AND THOSE SAME ELEMENTS WILL MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF THE BUILDING'S ADDED HEIGHT AND BULK. 
          SO IT FEELS LIKE A MAGICAL THINKING, LITTLE CIRCULAR ARGUMENT. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THOUGH, UM, SINCE THE CONDITIONAL USE LANGUAGE HASN'T BEEN NAILED DOWN, UM, IS THERE LEEWAY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THOSE OF THOSE PARTICULAR, WHAT I WOULD CALL THE MENU, THE SALAD BAR, RIGHT? PICK, PICK ONE FROM, PICK ONE OF THESE FROM THE FIRST THREE ITEMS, 
          [02:35:01]
PICK TWO FROM THE SECOND ITEM. 
          UM, IS THERE, IS THERE LEEWAY? SHOULD THERE BE DIFFERENT, UM, SHOULD THERE BE ADDITIONAL CATEGORIES? SHOULD THERE BE, UM, UH, OTHER ADDITIONAL PUBLIC BENEFITS ADDED TO THAT MENU THAT ARE NOT, THAT ARE NOT THERE? THE CONDITIONAL USE LANGUAGE, TO ME PERSONALLY, IT FEELS TAILORED TO THE HOTEL DESIGN. 
          UM, SOME OF THOSE CATEGORIES EVEN SEEM TO BE SETTING UP A KIND OF A LOW BAR TO CLEAR. 
          UM, SO, UM, LET'S SEE, HOW MUCH TIME HAVE I GOT LEFT? I, FOR EXAMPLE, THE ROOFTOP PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, WHICH IN SAN FRANCISCO THEY CALL POPO. 
          UM, THERE ARE VERY STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT TO BE CONSIDERED A TRADE-OFF. 
          UM, AND IN THE CURRENT CUP LANGUAGE, EIGHT HOURS A DAY FOR 120 DAYS A YEAR. 
          SO THAT'S A THIRD OF THE YEAR. 
          AND SO IS THAT AT THE DISCRETION OF THE HOTEL? IS THAT LIKE ON MONDAYS AND TUESDAYS, TYPICALLY A A PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC SPACE ESPECIALLY UP OFF THE, UP OFF THE OFF OF GROUND LEVEL HAS SIGNAGE RIGHT AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AS YOU ENTER THAT SAYS, THESE ARE, I'M SORRY, YOUR TIME'S UP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, PATRICIA TUTTLE BROWN. 
          HAS IT STARTED? NO, I GET TO WALK. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS THAT AS FAR AS ALTERNATIVE SITES GO, THIS HOTEL SHOULD BE BUILT ON THE SMART PROPERTY. 
          AND WHEN I WAS, I MET THE, THE HOTEL GUY, HE'S VERY NICE, GOOD LOOKING GUY. 
          NICE. 
          AND I SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY BE KISSING YOUR FEET. 
          IF YOU WERE PUTTING THIS HOTEL ON THE SMART PROPERTY, THAT'S WHERE IT BELONGS. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE'VE PLANNED IT. 
          ALL OF THESE ISSUES WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING. 
          IT COULD SHOULD BE LARGE. 
          WE WANT IT LARGE. 
          AND HE LAUGHED AND HE SAID, THAT'LL BE MY SECOND HOTEL. 
          I FELT LIKE CRYING. 
          OKAY. 
          WHAT I WANNA SAY ABOUT THE OVERLAY IS THAT NUMBER ONE, I WENT TO TWO, UH, GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS THIS WEEK. 
          AND, UM, THE OVERLAY IS ALREADY IN THEM. 
          I MEAN, AND THEY'RE ALREADY GOING EIGHT STORIES, MINIMUM SIX, SIX STORIES, MINIMUM FOUR. 
          IT WAS LIKE WATCHING BRITAIN DIVIDE UP PALESTINE. 
          I WAS LIKE, WOW, ARE THEY REALLY PAYING ATTENTION? I MEAN, THIS IS, THEY'RE HURRYING 'CAUSE IT'S AT THE END IT WAS FRIGHTENING. 
          AND I MEAN, THAT LEADS TO ME, TO MY LAST POINT, EVEN THOUGH I'M NOT DONE, WHICH IS THAT, UM, WHAT DO WE WANT OUR TOWN TO LOOK LIKE? WE ARE FORGETTING THAT. 
          AND I THINK, WELL, IT'S OKAY, YOU KNOW, WHEN ALL MY LIGHT I LIVE IN, IN THIS AREA AND WORK, OH, AND ALL THE LIGHT IS GONE AND MY FIG TREE SORT OF DYING, I CAN JUST BUY A ONE ACRE PARCEL. 
          YOU KNOW, MAYBE THREE ACRES. 
          NO, WHAT AM I TALKING ABOUT? THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY'S MOVING HERE THAT WANTS, THEY WANNA DO THAT. 
          I DON'T, I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE. 
          I'M STAYING IN MY HOUSE FOREVER. 
          SO THIS IS GOING TO AFFECT ME FOREVER AND MANY, MANY OTHER PEOPLE. 
          WHAT I WANNA SAY ABOUT PASSING THIS ON TO THE, TO THE COUNCIL IS THAT YOU SHOULD SAY NO BECAUSE THE, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ET CETERA, IS NOT OVER TILL APRIL OR WHEN, NOT APRIL. 
          WHEN WAS THAT DATE? NOT APRIL. 
          OCTOBER. 
          OCTOBER. 
          I FORGET THE MONTH. 
          SO, UM, YOU CAN'T, YOU, YOU NEED TO WAIT. 
          IT SHOULDN'T MOVE ON. 
          AND YOU HAVE SO MANY BEAUTIFUL QUESTIONS YOU ASKED. 
          I WAS REALLY IMPRESSED WITH YOU GUYS. 
          UM, SO THE LAST COMMENT I WANNA MAKE IS THAT SAYING, OH, WELL WHEN PEOPLE WANNA MAKE CHANGES, THEY CAN GO TO SPAR. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, SPAR NEEDS TO BE BACK TO BEING SPARK. 
          WE NEED SPARK, WHICH WAS A COMMITTEE THAT WAS PUBLIC. 
          AND WHEN YOUR NEIGHBORS WANNA BUILD A GIANT BUILDING AND THEY'RE ONLY TALKING TO STAFF, YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE. 
          SPARK SHOULD BE BROUGHT BACK. 
          AND ALL THOSE STAFF MEMBERS AND ALL HISTORIC SPARK HISTORIC GUYS USED TO CONDUCT MANY OF THE SPARK MEETINGS TOO. 
          THAT NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC PROCESS, NOT IN THE BOWELS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, WHERE UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY DOWNTOWN ANYMORE. 
          SO I DON'T GET ANY INFO. 
          SO, SO HAVE COURAGE GUYS. 
          IT DOES NOT NEED TO GO ON TO CANCEL. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR SPEAKER CARDS. 
          UM, JUST 'CAUSE IT'S FRESH, SPAR ABSOLUTELY WILL BE PUBLIC. 
          H BAR WOULD BE PUBLIC. 
          [02:40:01]
THEY WOULD HAPPEN HERE IN CHAMBERS AND BE APPROPRIATELY NOTICED. 
          JUST TO QUICKLY RESPOND TO THAT ONE. 
          UM, SO WITH THE END OF PUBLIC COMMENT, THAT WILL, UM, ALSO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE US INTO, WELL ACTUALLY FIRST LET ME SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. 
          AND ONCE AGAIN, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD REVIEW IS STILL VERY MUCH ACTIVE. 
          UH, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THE DRAFT, EIR CAN STILL BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND ALL APPLICABLE COMMENTS WILL BE ANSWERED IN THE FINAL EIR. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS CAN BE SENT TO STAFF AT GPOWELL@CITYOFPETALUMA.ORG. 
          AND CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HANDLING THIS DRAFT EIR ON OCTOBER 7TH AS WELL. 
          SO YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER CHANCE TO COME HANG OUT IN CHAMBERS ON YOUR MONDAY NIGHT. 
          UM, SO WE'RE MAKING PRETTY GOOD TIME, SO I THINK WE DON'T NEED A RECESS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO LET'S BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO THE, UH, COMMISSIONERS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO MOVE ON TO OUR DISCUSSION PERIOD. 
          I'VE GOT ONE MORE SLIDE FOR YOU AND MUCH LIKE QUESTIONS, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH OUR TOPIC AREAS IN ORDER, AGAIN, APPRECIATE ANY, UM, SPECIFICATION FOLKS CAN GIVE ON WHETHER IT IS A OVERLAY COMMENT, DISCUSSION POINT OR A HOTEL. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY THEY'LL BLEED TOGETHER, BUT THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO HAVE A DELIBERATIVE DISCUSSION AS A JOINT BODY ALONG WITH STAFF. 
          UM, AND WE WILL CONCLUDE OR PROCEED THROUGH THESE FIVE SECTIONS AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO HCPC TO MAKE THEIR MOTION ON THEIR RECOMMENDATION. 
          SO LET'S KICK THINGS OFF WITH DISCUSSION ON AESTHETICS. 
          ANY DISCUSSION POINTS ON AESTHETIC COMMISSIONER HOOPER? YEAH, SO I'M GONNA TRY AND PULL THIS OUT 'CAUSE OF COURSE MOST OF MY COMMENTS ARE IN ONE GIANT SOUP. 
          BUT, UM, WHEN IT CAME TO AESTHETICS, I, I HAD A LOT OF LIMITED QUESTIONS IN PART BECAUSE OF HOW EMPTY THAT SECTION WAS FOR THE DRAFT EIR UH, ONE ISSUE I'VE HAD THROUGH A LOT OF THIS PROCESS, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE DON'T HAVE DESIGN REVIEW ANYMORE THAT I THINK THAT THEY GOT RID OF THAT AGES AGO. 
          SO THE, SOME OF THE CONCERNS I'VE HAD GOING INTO THIS HAVE BEEN, ON ONE HAND YOU CAN BUILD A FAIRLY UGLY THING AT FOUR STORIES, BUT THEN YOU ALSO DON'T WANT TO BUILD A FAIRLY UGLY THING AT FIVE OR SIX STORIES EITHER. 
          SO PART OF THE QUESTION I DO HAVE FOR STAFF AND YEAH, I'M GOING TO MIX WITH QUESTIONS AS WELL, IF THAT'S OKAY. 
          'CAUSE I, YEAH, I GOT SOME FOLLOW-UPS. 
          UM, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE ABLE TO START TALKING ABOUT ADDING CONDITIONS TO THE CONDITIONAL USE? SO I MEAN, I THINK SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT CAME UP ABOUT ADDING TO THAT MENU ARE, ARE DEFINITELY WORTHWHILE SINCE WE ALREADY DON'T HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES. 
          HOW CAN WE ADD THAT IN? IS THAT A QUESTION OF PUTTING IT IN THE EARLY DRAFT EIR OR THE FINAL EIR? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COMES LATER AFTER THE EIR PROCESS? UH, SO I THINK IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, UM, MITIGATION MEASURE COAL ONE E, UM, NOW IS ABSOLUTELY THE TIME TO RAISE THOSE SUGGESTIONS ON HOW THAT MIGHT BE ENHANCED IF I UNDERSTOOD YOUR COMMENT AND QUESTION. 
          RIGHT, BECAUSE I, OKAY, THAT'S GREAT BECAUSE WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN, ESPECIALLY WITH CONDITIONAL USE BEING USED AS A MITIGATION, UH, WE NEED MORE DETAILED LAYOUT OF WHAT THE KIND OF HISTORIC STANDARDS ARE GOING TO BE, WHAT WE'RE REFLECTING ON WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, I THINK THE QUOTE WAS ARCHITECTURAL EXCELLENCE OR DESIGN EXCELLENCE IN THE DRAFT. 
          I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE THAT TO BE TARGETED AND WOULD LIKE CLEAR EXAMPLES. 
          I KNOW WE CAN'T PUT A WHOLE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS INTO THIS. 
          I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT NECESSARILY, BUT WE SHOULD BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THESE BUILDINGS SHOULD REFLECT. 
          UH, A LOT OF COMMENTS THAT HAVE COME UP, BOTH WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE IN PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT ALSO TODAY HAVE TO DO WITH CONCERNS OF, HEY, YOU'RE GONNA BUILD SOMETHING GIGANTIC, RIGHT, RIGHT. 
          NEXT TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES. 
          AND WHAT IS THAT GONNA LOOK LIKE? I SPENT A FAIR BIT MORE TIME WITH BILL REINHARDT TRYING TO LEARN MORE JUST BECAUSE I HAVE TO BE HONEST, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS, I DIDN'T KNOW AS MUCH AS I WISH I HAD ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND GUIDELINES. 
          AND ONE THING HE NOTED WAS JUST, THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS TO DESIGN THESE STRUCTURES. 
          AND SO HAVING CLEAR GUIDELINES FOR YOU'RE GETTING TO FIVE STORIES, YOU'RE GETTING TO SIX STORIES, HOW MUCH INSET DO YOU NEED? WHAT KIND OF LOOK DO YOU NEED AT THE FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH FLOOR? HOW ARE YOU AVOIDING SHADOWS? BECAUSE I, I DON'T THINK IT'S A QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID MITIGATIONS. 
          I THINK IT'S A QUESTION OF MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE CLEAR PROCESS 
          [02:45:01]
FOR MAKING SURE THAT THE HEIGHT DOESN'T REALLY IMPACT THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES. 
          AND ONE THING I'LL JUST SAY, I DON'T WANT THIS TO GET KICKED BACK TO US. 
          IF WE, IF WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WE IMPLEMENT THESE GUIDELINES AND THEN AT THE END OF IT WE HAVE A HOTEL OR WE HAVE ANOTHER PROJECT THAT COMES FORWARD AND WE'RE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR FIGURING OUT HISTORIC, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC OR DESIGN EXCELLENCE, WE'RE NOT REALLY A DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. 
          SO HAVING CLEAR GUIDELINES THERE, I THINK IS GONNA BE CRITICAL. 
          AND HAVING THAT SPELLED OUT, OR AT LEAST THE PROCESS FOR THAT SPELLED OUT AND THE DRAFT, I THINK IS GONNA BE VERY IMPORTANT JUST SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO CLEARLY DEFINE FOR THE PUBLIC AND CLEARLY DEFINE FOR OURSELVES WHAT THAT SHOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          UM, LET'S SEE. 
          AND THEN JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOTHING ELSE FROM AESTHETICS. 
          YEAH, THIS IS THE MAIN THING ON AESTHETICS. 
          THE REST IS OTHER THINGS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OTHER DISCUSSION POINTS ON AESTHETICS? COUNCILMAN PETER? I JUST WANNA MAKE A COMMENT. 
          WE HAVE A HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, OLD, BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS WHEN YOU'RE RECREATING OR YOU DON'T REALLY RECREATE THOSE BUILDINGS. 
          I MEAN, THOSE BUILDINGS ARE OF THE PAST AND THAT IS OUR HISTORY. 
          AND TO RECREATE A NEW HISTORY IS WHAT I'M SEEING. 
          AND WHAT I SEE ARE A LOT OF CHAIN LINK FENCES DOWNTOWN ON WASHINGTON STREET. 
          AND THE, AND, AND THESE ARE THE GATEWAYS INTO OUR CITY, WASHINGTON STREET AND PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH. 
          YOU COME INTO TOWN, YOU SEE CHAIN LINK FENCES. 
          SO WHEN EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT OUR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, WE LOVE OUR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, WE WANNA REPURPOSE THE BUILDINGS INSTEAD OF WHAT HAPPENED TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA, WHICH THE BUILDINGS WERE JUST ALL TORN DOWN. 
          SO THE HISTORY OF THE CHINESE THAT LIVED THERE, WELL THAT'S GONE BECAUSE THEY WERE TORN DOWN. 
          BUT THANK GOODNESS OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS NOT TORN DOWN. 
          BUT TO RECREATE THE SAME TYPE OF BUILDINGS TO MATCH A HISTORIC AREA JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOW RECREATING KIND OF A NEW HISTORY AND IN 50 YEARS YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT THAT KIND OF LIKE WE LOOK AT OUR DOWNTOWN. 
          I MEAN, I MEAN, PEOPLE NOT MAY NOT AGREE WITH THAT AND THAT'S FINE, BUT YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE CREATING THESE BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS AND HOMES ON D STREET OR ANYWHERE ELSE THAT WERE, YOU JUST DON'T RECREATE THOSE. 
          AND SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS AS A BLANK SLATE OF AN AREA THAT IS CONNECTED TO OUR HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN TO RECREATE. 
          AND SO I LOOK AT THIS VERY DIFFERENTLY AND, AND, UM, AND I JUST THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE AESTHETICS, I AGREE. 
          I MEAN, I WANNA SEE GOOD DESIGN GUIDELINES, ABSOLUTELY. 
          BUT TO SAY THAT PEOPLE COME FROM OTHER AREAS AND THEY DON'T WANNA SEE OUR TOWN CHANGE. 
          WELL, WHO ARE WE GONNA TELL NOT TO MOVE HERE? THE PERSON THAT MOVED HERE TODAY, OR THE PERSON THAT MOVED HERE 10 YEARS AGO, OR THE PERSON THAT'S BEEN THERE HERE THEIR WHOLE LIFE, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, NOBODY SHOULD EVEN THINK OF NOT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO COME TO OUR TOWN OR MOVE INTO OUR TOWN. 
          UM, WE HAVE THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES. 
          THE PURPOSE OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES IS, SO BETWEEN PETALUMA NOVATO, WE SEE GREENERY. 
          AND IN BETWEEN PETALUMA AND TATI WE SEE GREENER GREENERY. 
          AND THE PURPOSE OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES IS FOR INFILL. 
          AND IF WE DON'T DO THE INFILL, WE'RE GONNA SPRAWL OUT. 
          AND THE REASON WE CAN'T FIX, UM, MAINTAIN ROADS, UM, WATER SEWER IS BECAUSE YOU SPREAD SO FAR OUT, THE CITY HAS TO MAINTAIN THE ENTIRE UNDERGROUND THAT IS IN THIS TOWN. 
          I MEAN, THERE'S A WHOLE CITY BELOW AND THOSE PIPES AND, YOU KNOW, SEWER PIPES, WATER PIPES AND EVERYTHING ELSE UNDER THERE, THAT IS A LOT OF MAINTENANCE. 
          AND SO BY INFILL, WE'RE ACTUALLY KIND OF PRESERVING OUR OPEN SPACE. 
          AND I THINK THERE IS A CONCERN WITH, UM, OUR DOWNTOWN, THERE, THERE WERE BUILDINGS IN A LOT OF THESE LOTS. 
          I MEAN, THE CONTINENTAL HOTEL ON, IS IT B ACROSS FROM AMY'S, THAT WAS A HUGE BUILDING AND IT BURNT DOWN IN 1969. 
          SO PETALUMA HAS HAD LARGE BUILDINGS. 
          THE PHOENIX THEATER IS 73 FEET HIGH. 
          THE BUILDING KITTY CORNER FROM, UM, AMY'S IS 64 AND A QUARTER. 
          I MEAN, THOSE ARE TALL BUILDINGS. 
          AND YET WE'RE, I MEAN, I'M SEEING PEOPLE IN 
          [02:50:01]
THE AUDIENCE SHAKING THEIR HEADS AND SAYING, NO, BUT THEY ARE THE SAME HEIGHT AS THIS HOTEL. 
          AND YOU'RE SAY SAYING, NO, BUT THE NUMBERS ARE TRUE. 
          AND SO I I JUST THINK THAT I, I THINK THAT CHAIN LINK FENCES ARE NOT ECONOMIC FOR A COMMUNITY. 
          UM, EVERYBODY WANTS THE TRESTLE DONE. 
          WELL, HOW DO YOU PAY FOR A $14 MILLION PROJECT? HOW DO YOU PAY FOR 5 MILLION FOR THE RETROFIT OF THE MUSEUM, WHICH IS NOT RETROFITTED AND NEEDS TO BE, AND, AND A GOOD ECONOMY IN OUR DOWNTOWN MAKES THAT HAPPEN. 
          AND WHEN I LOOK AT OUR DOWNTOWN, I SEE, WHICH IS THE OLD PETALUMA HOTEL, WHICH IS NOW A HILTON TAPESTRY BY THE WAY, UM, IS AT ONE END THE NORTH END. 
          AND WE HAVE BLANK AREAS DOWN AT THE SOUTH END OF TOWN WHEN YOU JUST PASS WALNUT PARK AND COME INTO TOWN. 
          WE HAVE A SEVEN 11 CHAIN LINK, FENCES CHAIN, LINK FENCES, AND IT'S THE SAME IN WASHINGTON STREET. 
          AND YOU HAVE TO, YOU CAN'T JUST CLOSE YOUR EYES AND SAY NO TO EVERYTHING. 
          AND WHEN I'M HEARING PEOPLE TALK ABOUT DESIGN, NOBODY CAME UP WITH ANY DESIGNS EARLIER DURING THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. 
          AND I WOULD'VE REALLY LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THE PUBLIC COME UP WITH SOME DESIGNS THAT THEY WOULD'VE WANTED TO SEE IN BUILDINGS. 
          BUT NOBODY WAS DOING THAT BECAUSE IT WAS JUST, NO, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT DOING THIS AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE, UM, DETAILS, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL. 
          AND SO I LOOK AT THIS VERY DIFFERENTLY. 
          UM, I ALSO LOOK AT IT FOR A YOUNGER GENERATION. 
          I TALK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS TOWN AND THEY SAY A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAN PEOPLE IN THE ROOM ARE SAYING THEY ACTUALLY WANT THAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          THEY WANNA COME DOWN TO DOWNTOWN. 
          BUT SOMETIMES WHEN YOU LIVE ON EAST SIDE, WE'RE NOT SURE IF WE'RE ACTUALLY WELCOMED IN OUR DOWNTOWN. 
          AND THAT IS NOT A GOOD FEELING. 
          I, I'M, I, YOU KNOW, LET'S, THIS IS MY TIME, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT, WELL, I'LL JUST STOP RIGHT HERE AND THEN I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND WE'LL WAIT FOR THE VOTE IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. 
          BUT I DO FEEL AS THOUGH I HAVE SOME COMMENTS AND I, AND IF YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE EIR, FINE, LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND GO WITH THAT. 
          BUT THERE ARE OTHER POINTS TO THIS. 
          IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THE EIR, THERE'S EMOTIONAL STUFF THAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS. 
          SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO GO INTO THE FUTURE, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT FOR ME, IT REALLY IS ABOUT THE FUTURE. 
          IT'S ABOUT MY KIDS, MY GRANDKIDS, AND WHAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE IN THIS TOWN ALSO. 
          AND IT'S ABOUT THE FUTURE FOR US. 
          JANICE, COME ON. 
          AND TOM, YOU AND I WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL TOGETHER AND YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T WANNA GO BACK TO 1970. 
          HEY GUYS, LET'S, LET'S CUT THE BACK AND FORTH AND JUST OKAY. 
          FURTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENT ON THE AESTHETIC SECTION OF THE DRAFT. 
          DIR DARREN. 
          YEAH, THANK YOU. 
          I JUST WANNA GET MY COMMENTS OUT. 
          I WROTE 19 PAGES OF NOTES, SO I'M NOT GONNA WRITE, READ EVERYTHING, BUT I WILL SUBMIT IT AS PART OF THE SQL PROCESS. 
          BUT ONE ELEMENT I WAS WRESTLING WITH THAT I'VE HEARD REFERENCED A COUPLE TIMES WROTE FROM THE PUBLIC AND FOLKS ON THE DAAS IS MITIGATION OVERLAY CL ONE E. 
          AND EVER SINCE WE REVIEWED THIS AT THE MND STAGE, I HAD AN ISSUE WITH DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          AND I THINK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, I FIGURED OUT MAYBE WHAT'S OCCURRING HERE OR MAYBE SOMETHING TO, TO QUANTIFY THIS. 
          UH, SO I'LL JUST READ FROM PARTS OF THIS, BUT C DISCOURAGES THE DEFERRAL OF MITIGATION MEASURES TO FUTURE ACTIONS UNLESS THOSE FUTURE ACTIONS MEET CERTAIN STRICT CONDITIONS. 
          SPECIFICALLY MITIGATION MEASURES SHOULD NOT BE DEFERRED UNLESS THE AGENCY COMMITS TO SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT WILL MITIGATE THE IMPACTS. 
          THE AGENCY PROVIDES A CLEAR PLAN OR CRITERIA FOR HOW THE MITIGATION WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT A LATER TIME. 
          SO IN MY MIND, THIS IS NOT MEET SECRETS REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC ENFORCEABLE MITIGATION AND INSTEAD REQUIRES A DEFERRED MITIGATION WHICH FAILS TO ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE AESTHETIC AND CULTURAL IMPACTS. 
          SO IT REQUIRES THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENTS EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT AND 80% OF LOT REQUIREMENTS. 
          HOWEVER, IT DEFERS CRITICAL DECISIONS REGARDING DESIGN, COMPATIBILITY, HEIGHT IMPACTS, AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS TO FUTURE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, RATHER THAN PROVIDING SPECIFIC ENFORCEABLE MITIGATION ACTIONS AT THE TIME OF PROJECT APPROVAL. 
          SO EACH OF THESE SECTIONS HAS NOTES ON IT, BUT RELIANCE ON FUTURE STUDIES, SUBJECTIVITY AND LACK OF SPECIFICITY, DEFERRED DECISION MAKING AND UNCERTAIN EFFECTIVENESS. 
          AND THIS NEXT ONE I'LL READ THOUGH, BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT AN OVERLAY THAT IS A PROGRAMMATIC EIR. 
          SO THIS NEXT SECTION I WROTE WAS CALLED DIRECT MITIGATIONS. 
          AT THE PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, 
          [02:55:01]
CE QA ALLOWS FOR TIERING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS FROM A PROGRAMMATIC EIR TO SUBSEQUENT PROJECT LEVEL EIRS OR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS. 
          IT STILL REQUIRES THAT A PROGRAMMATIC EIR CONTAINS SPECIFIC ENFORCEABLE MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          WHEN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ARE IDENTIFIED, THERE ARE FEASIBLE NON DEFERRED MITIGATION MEMBERS THAT COULD HAVE NON DEFERRED MITIGATION MEASURES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN CUL ONE E AT THE PROGRAMMATIC STAGE. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY COULD HAVE SET A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IN PARTICULAR, PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE AREAS REQUIRED MORE SPECIFIC AND ROBUST DESIGN COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS BASED ON THE EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER OF THE RELEVANT AREA, OR IMPOSE STRICTER PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS FOR HISTORICAL BUILDINGS AND VIEW SHEDS. 
          THESE MEASURES COULD HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED DIRECTLY INTO THE OVERLAY ZONING REGULATIONS OR THE EIR ITSELF RATHER THAN DEFERRING THE MITIGATION TO FUTURE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          UH, AND THEN TO WRAP THIS UP, I DID FIND LEGAL PRECEDENT FOR THIS, I BELIEVE I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT, UH, THE CASES I FOUND WERE COMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT VERSUS THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY VERSUS THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA. 
          AND IN THESE CASES IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT DEFERRED MITIGATION IS ONLY PERMISSIBLE WHEN SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ARE INCLUDED TO ENSURE FUTURE MITIGATION EFFECTIVENESS. 
          SO I THINK THIS IS PART OF IT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THIS GOES INTO THE REVIEW, UM, TO THE FINAL EIR. 
          FOR ME, THIS IS A LINCHPIN OF A LOT OF MITIGATIONS, AND IF THIS IS A DEFERRED MITIGATION, WE ARE KICKING THIS DOWN THE ROAD IN A WAY THAT MAY BE UNACCEPTABLE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT BEING DEFINITIVE ENOUGH IN MITIGATING THIS IMPACT UPFRONT. 
          UM, THEN I THINK THAT PRESENTS A, A CHALLENGE, UM, TO THE DRAFT EIR. 
          SO AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO READ THAT BECAUSE I THINK, I THINK IT'S RELEVANT AND I'M HEARING IT REFERENCED. 
          SO I'LL ADD THAT TO THE DISCUSSION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, IF I MIGHT INTERJECT WITH SOMETHING THAT RELATES TO A COUPLE OF OF COMMENTS WE'VE HAD SO FAR, AS WELL AS PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          UM, I'M WONDERING IF STAFF COULD PLEASE PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY ON POTENTIALLY, UM, MODIFYING THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE AND THEN SORT OF WHAT THAT MODIFICATION MIGHT IMPLY FOR THE EIR, JUST SORT OF IN THE CONTEXT OF WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS. 
          SURE. 
          UM, SO, UH, AS WE TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT, THERE HAS BEEN, UM, NO USE PERMIT, UM, AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED OR OTHERWISE GRANTED. 
          SO IT IS, UM, ABSOLUTELY, UM, UP FOR COUNCIL'S, UM, ADOPTION AT A FUTURE DATE FOLLOWING CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR. 
          UM, SO THE QUESTION COMES UP OFTEN AS WE'RE DOING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW BECAUSE THAT HAS TO HAPPEN FIRST. 
          WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMETHING CHANGES? UM, AND SO, UH, THE ANSWER IS THAT SQA HAS A PROCESS FOR THAT, AND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS WE HAVE TO REEVALUATE IT AT THE TIME THAT DISCRETIONARY ACTION IS MADE. 
          SO, UM, AT THE TIME THAT COUNCIL'S TAKING ACTION, UM, TO ADOPT THAT LEGISLATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER IF THE EIR ADEQUATELY COVERED THAT OR NOT. 
          AND SIMILARLY, WHEN IT COMES BACK FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND HCPC ON THE, UH, HISTORIC SPAR AND ON THE USE PERMIT, THE SAME THING MAY HAPPEN. 
          THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, MODIFICATIONS OR CONDITIONS OR DESIGN CHANGES. 
          AND AGAIN, THAT'S A DISCRETIONARY ACTION. 
          AND SO WE ARE PROMPTED UNDER CE QA, WE'RE MANDATED TO RE-LOOK AT IF THOSE CHANGES ARE CAPTURED WITHIN THE EIR AND IF THEY WERE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED. 
          AND IF THEY ARE, THEN CE QA IS DONE AND IF THEY, UH, MAY NOT OR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE NEEDED, UH, IN ORDER TO CLOSE THAT INFORMATION GAP FROM A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE. 
          I THINK IF, YOU KNOW, WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT SPECIFIC THINGS THOSE MIGHT BE, BUT WE'LL HAVE, WE'LL HAVE TO EVALUATE IT AT THE TIME. 
          UM, SQUA HAS A PROCESS AND SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF PROCESSES. 
          ONE IS WHAT'S CALLED AN ADDENDUM TO THE EIR TO KIND OF, UH, PATCH SOME MINOR CLARIFICATION. 
          THE OTHER IS A SUPPLEMENTAL, AND THEN THERE'S A SUBSEQUENT, UM, EIR. 
          SO THOSE ARE DIFFERENT PATHWAYS ONCE YOU HAVE AN EIR CERTIFIED. 
          UM, SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. 
          YEAH. 
          JUST TO READ IT BACK TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE, IF SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO IMPACT THE EIR WOULD GET A SORT OF PATCH TO, TO COVER THAT ADDITIONAL NEED IN THE EIR. 
          BUT, BUT IF WE HAVE NOTES ON THE OVERLAY AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, CUP AND ALL THESE SORT OF THINGS, WE COULD STILL HAVE THE DRAFT EIR PROCEED TO FINAL EIR. 
          AND THEN ONCE THE ORDINANCE IS ACTUALLY FULLY IN PLACE, IF AND WHEN, THEN WE WOULD SORT OF DO A QUICK GLANCE BACK TO MAKE SURE THE EIR STILL HOLDS. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          THE SE QA PROCESS IS SET UP FOR THAT E EXACT, UH, EVENTUALITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, FURTHER AESTHETIC, SORRY FOR THAT TANGENT. 
          GUESS AESTHETIC. 
          OH, UH, COMMISSIONER FRY, GO AHEAD. 
          UM, IT JUST CAME UP TO ME WHEN THIS DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT HISTORICAL 
          [03:00:01]
BUILDINGS AND, AND THE LOOK AND FEEL OF A NEW BUILDING. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS ACTUALLY ASKING US TO SAY WE SHOULD CREATE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS HISTORICAL. 
          WHAT IS BEING ASKED IS SOMETHING THAT FITS IN SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T DISTRACT SOMETHING THAT COMPLIMENTS WHAT'S HERE, NOT SOMETHING THAT RECREATES THE PAST. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING, WHERE WE COULD GO WITH THIS, IS IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HISTORICAL BUILDING. 
          WE HAVE THEM AND WE KNOW HOW WONDERFUL THEY ARE AND WE KNOW WHAT THEY FULFILL IN US. 
          AND THERE CAN BE A NEW BUILDING THAT ALSO FULFILLS THE SAME THING IN US IF IT'S ARCHITECTURALLY AND DESIGNED WELL. 
          AND THIS BIG BLOCK IS NOT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IF, UM, I MIGHT, SINCE WE'RE IN DISCUSSION, DISCUSS, UH,  THAT I THINK THAT, UM, IS A, IS A THOUGHT I HAVE SHARED THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN HAS DEFINITELY LEFT THE COMMUNITY WANTING, AND I AM ENCOURAGED BY THE FACT THAT WE STILL HAVE THE SPAR REVIEW H BAR IN THIS CASE. 
          THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE DESIGN, ABOUT WHAT IS, YOU KNOW, A, A NON SORT OF EIR LEVEL  DESIGN CHANGE, IF IT'S COLOR OR WINDOW DESIGN OR MATERIALS THAT THAT IS LIKE WHOLLY APPROPRIATE TO BE PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO AND, AND CONDITIONAL, UH, APPROVAL FOR, UH, AN H BAR. 
          BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE H BAR ONLY GOES TO THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE, DOESN'T COME TO US TO DO, BECAUSE GIVEN THAT IT'S IN THE CONTEXT FOR THAT SPECIFIC PARCEL, H HCPCS CONSIDERED THE, THE MORE EXPERT AUTHORITY ON REVIEWING. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO AT THIS POINT, OUR ONLY INPUT IS NOW AS PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UM, FOR THIS PARTICULARLY PARCEL. 
          YES, THOUGH WE COULD HAVE AL WE CAN ALWAYS GO TO AN HCPC MEETING AND GIVE COMMENT AS INDIVIDUALS CHAIR. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ADD A NUANCE TO THAT FOR THE RECORD. 
          SO THE, THE PROJECT DISCRETIONARY ENTITLEMENTS SHOULD THE, SHOULD THE OVERLAY BE ADOPTED, THE PROJECT WOULD REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND HISTORIC SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEWED BY PLANNING COMMISSION H SPA REVIEW BY HCPC. 
          WE WOULD BRING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST BECAUSE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW COULD ESTABLISH THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. 
          SO YOU DO WANT TO HAVE A PROJECT GO FORWARD TO HCPC KNOWING THAT THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD BE ALLOWED. 
          CERTAINLY THE WAY THAT WE'VE, WE'VE DEMONSTRATED FLEXIBILITY AND ACCOMMODATION AND, AND RECOGNIZED THE, THE INPUT OF ALL OF OUR REVIEW AUTHORITIES. 
          WE WOULD ALSO, I WOULD ANTICIPATE FIND A PATHWAY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS OR PROVIDE COMMENTS TO HCPC GIVEN THEIR REVIEW OF THE PROJECT THROUGH THE CUP PROCESS. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT REMINDER ABOUT THE CUP NICOLETTE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          THANK YOU, MR. TRIL. 
          THAT I KNEW, AND WE DON'T, I DON'T ALWAYS KNOW HOW EVERYTHING WORKS, SO I APPRECIATE THAT INPUT INTO WHERE WE WILL BE ABLE TO COMMENT AND QUESTION THINGS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OF COURSE. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD TO THE CP FINDINGS THAT WOULD COME TO, TO PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          THEY INCLUDE SOME AESTHETIC QUALITIES. 
          UH, I'M JUST READING THE FINDINGS, UH, THAT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT MIGHT, UM, THAT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT MAKES A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE OVERALL CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND THAT IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDINGS, UH, THAT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OR OTHER FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY. 
          SO I DO THINK YOU, LIKE, UH, ANDREW SAID, HAVE THE ABILITY TO WEIGH IN ON THE DESIGN AND AESTHETICS OF THE PROPERTY. 
          COMMISSIONER ERLING, THANK YOU FOR WAITING PAGE LINK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AESTHETICS, RIGHT. 
          SO, UH, I THINK EVERYBODY, UH, APPRECIATES WHAT PETALUMA IS IN TERMS OF A HISTORIC TOWN AND A BEAUTIFUL TOWN. 
          ALL, ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS EX IS EXPAND IT, WHAT IT IS, NOT BUILD MORE HISTORIC, NOT CHANGE IT, BUT JUST STAY IN CONTEXT AND STAY IN, IN APPRECIATION AND REFERENCE TO WHAT'S HERE AND MAKE IT BETTER. 
          UM, PENDULUM WAS BUILT IN A DIFFERENT ERA. 
          WE'RE 
          [03:05:01]
NOT GONNA BUILD THAT EVER AGAIN AND WE CAN'T AFFORD TO, BUT THERE'S INGREDIENTS THAT WE HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT WE CAN MAKE IT MORE COPACETIC AND MORE COHESIVE AND MORE FLAT MO MUTUALLY FLATTERING. 
          I'M CONCERNED THAT THE CUP PROCESS AS STATED IN THIS DRAFT, EIR IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DO THAT. 
          IT, IT BASICALLY SAYS, UM, ON PAGE SIX, UM, , WHERE IS IT? UH, ANY, ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING OR ONE, ANY TWO OF THE FOLLOWING. 
          IF YOU DO THAT, YOU GET A CFP APPROVAL, IT THAT, THAT'S COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE AND IT GIVES NO DIRECTION TO THE DEVELOPER. 
          UM, ON ON PAGE SEVEN IT SAYS ANY, IF ANY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING FOR A PROJECT THAT'S NOT ADEQUATE TO, TO DETERMINE WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE, WHAT IT FEELS LIKE, AND IT'S COMING IN MY MIND, MUCH TOO LATE. 
          'CAUSE THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO KNOW GOING IN THAT WE HAVE EXPECTATIONS. 
          AND SPAR, THE SPAR PROCESS IN MY SENSE IS WAY TOO LATE 'CAUSE IT'S AFTER A TENTATIVE MAPS APPROVED. 
          SO YOU HAVE VERY LITTLE LEVERAGE TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN THAT PROJECT IN TERMS OF MOVING BUILDINGS OR SIDEWALKS OR STREETS MUCH TOO LATE TO HAVE AESTHETIC IMPACT. 
          SO IT REALLY, I THINK I, I AGREE WITH THE GUIDELINE DISCUSSION. 
          I EVEN WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE GUIDELINES GO MORE TO A MASTER PLAN THAT ACTUALLY APPLIES DESIGN GUIDELINES. 
          HERE'S WHAT WE WANT IN THE PLAN, HERE'S WHAT WE ALL AGREE ON, THAT WE, YOU KNOW, HERE'S, HERE'S THE RESULTS OF THE PLAN AND THE PROCESS. 
          IF YOU DO THIS, YOU, YOU'LL SUCCEED. 
          BUT IF YOU DON'T DO THIS, FORGET IT RIGHT NOW, IT'S LIKE, KEEP GOING AND WE'LL GIVE YOU A-C-C-U-P PROCESS AND WE'LL GET A LITTLE BIT OUT WHAT WE WANT, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE AMOUNT OF DIRECTION AND CONTROL A INVESTOR DEVELOPER NEEDS, I THINK, TO SUCCEED. 
          UM, SO I, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS GUIDELINE AND, AND, AND THE GUIDELINE PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH FOR THE PREVIOUS OVERLAY PROCESS TO ME WAS TOTALLY INADEQUATE, TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE, AND TOTALLY, UH, DOESN'T WORK. 
          SO I, I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN GOING THROUGH THAT. 
          AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE OF A MASTER PLAN GUIDELINE FOR WHATEVER WE WANT THE DOWNTOWN TO BE. 
          JUST SET, LET SET THE, THE OBJECTIVES, THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND THE, AND THE PRINCIPLES IN A PLAN. 
          AND THEN THAT THAT'S WHAT WE PROTECT. 
          UM, UM, YEAH, SO THAT, I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THE CUP AS AS DEFINED IN HERE IS INADEQUATE AND INEFFECTIVE, AND WE NEED MUCH MORE THAN THAT. 
          AND I'LL JUST CLARIFY TOO, ROGER, UH, THOSE COMMENTS ARE NOTED. 
          I'M SAW OLIVIA TAKING NOTES ON THAT AND, UH, ABOUT BLAKE'S AND THE DESIRE GUIDELINES. 
          BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO THE CEP PROCESS AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED, AND I THINK WE ALL SAID THAT IT'S, UH, UH, THE ABILITY TO AMEND RIGHT NOW IS TO GO FROM 45 TO 60 FEET. 
          IT REQUIRES, AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S FIVE FINDINGS. 
          I JUST LISTED A COUPLE OF THEM PREVIOUSLY. 
          BUT ONCE YOU GET, UH, IF YOU'RE SEEKING AN ADDITIONAL, UH, 15 FEET TO GO UP TO 60 TO 75 FEET, YOU NEED ALL THOSE ADDITIONAL FI FIVE FINDINGS AND THEN TWO OF THE NEW ONES. 
          SO IT'S NOT JUST A PICK AND CHOOSE ONE OR TWO. 
          YOU FIRST NEED THOSE FIR FIRST FIVE TO GET UP TO 60 FEET, AND THEN, UH, ADDITIONAL TWO FINDINGS. 
          UH, I, I DON'T, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE PROCESS. 
          ALL I'M SAYING IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T CREATE A GOOD LOOKING PROJECT. 
          WELL, IF, JUST TO, JUST TO COMMENT ON THAT, IF, IF WE WERE TO WRITE REGULATIONS TO CREATE THE PROJECT WE WANT, THEY WOULD BE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS, THEY WOULDN'T BE DISCRETIONARY. 
          AND SO THE, THE FINDINGS SEEK TO INCORPORATE DISCRETION SO THAT YOU CAN ACHIEVE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT. 
          I, I THINK PERHAPS WE MIGHT RISK IF WE GOT OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE WITH THE FINDINGS OR WITH THE REQUIREMENTS, WE MIGHT RISK LOSING THE ABILITY TO SHAPE A PROJECT MORE SPECIFICALLY HOW WE WANT IT. 
          I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD SUSPECT THAT YOU ASK ANY DEVELOPER ABOUT WHAT IT TAKES TO DESIGN AND DEVELOP IN PETALUMA, AND THEY, THEY HAVE A PRETTY CLEAR IDEA OF THE CHALLENGES AND EXPECTATIONS. 
          SO I, AND I THINK THAT WE, WE ARE DEVELOPING A GOOD PROCESS FOR WORKING IN PRE-APPLICATION IN THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STAGE TO INFORM DESIGN DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME COMMENTS I WOULD OFFER IN RESPONSE THAT SOMETIMES WE WANNA BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW SPECIFIC WE GET BECAUSE WE MIGHT END UP OVERREGULATING AND THEN NOT GETTING WHAT WE WANT IN THE END. 
          [03:10:01]
WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I THINK WE COULD DE DEVELOP THE MASTER PLAN WITH THAT IN MIND. 
          IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DOWN TO THE DETAIL. 
          AND THE, THE OTHER QUESTION I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT, WHAT HAVE WE DONE IN THE PAST THAT'S WORKED? I MEAN, THE THEATER DISTRICT IS NOT THE GREATEST ARCHITECTURE IN THE WORLD, BUT IT, IT'S, IT, IT'S A DECENT HEIGHT AND IT'S A DECENT PROPORTION. 
          UM, COLORS AND MATERIALS COULD BE IMPROVED, BUT I, I'M, I THINK IT'S PRETTY REASONABLE RESULT. 
          UH, SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A MASTER PLAN OF SOME SORT, A SPECIFIC PLAN OR CODE-BASED, UH, FORM PLAN. 
          WHAT, WHAT HAVE WE DONE THAT'S WORKED AND, AND WHAT'S NOT WORKING? I MEAN, JUST SITTING HERE DOING NOTHING IS NOT WORKING, BUT SOME MORE DIRECTION TO A DEVELOPER. 
          SO WE, SO I MEAN, THE, THE BIG PROBLEM WITH DEVELOPER SAY, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GETTING INTO AND IT COSTS US $40,000 A WEEK JUST TO PULL, PLAY THE GAME. 
          BUT IF WE CAN SAY, HERE'S HERE'S THE GAME PLAN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GUESS AT IT, AND HERE'S WHAT WE WANT YOU TO GO THROUGH AND HERE'S WHAT WE EXPECT. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD SAVE HIM MONEY AND TIME AND HE WOULD BE MORE THAN INTERESTED IN PLAYING THE GAME. 
          RIGHT NOW. 
          IT'S LIKE IN, IN THE GUIDELINES WE PUT TOGETHER BEFORE IT WAS LIKE, OH, WELL, WE DON'T WANT TO BE TOLD THIS, OR WE, THIS COSTS US SO MUCH MONEY, WE WON'T DO IT. 
          AND I MEAN, ALL THESE COMPLAINTS BY DEVELOPERS OF WHAT'S HOLDING THEM BACK FROM WANTING, YOU KNOW, TO PARTICIPATE. 
          I, I'D LIKE TO ELIMINATE THAT AND MAKE IT MORE FRIENDLY AND, BUT MORE EFFECTIVE. 
          SHERIFF, I MIGHT, I ALSO WANTED TO, TO COMMENT ON THE, THE WHAT, WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS ACTUALLY DOING. 
          SO IT'S NOT JUST ALLOWING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WHEN YOU GO UP, WHEN, WHEN YOU GO UP WITHOUT GOING OUT, YOU INCREASE THE INTENSITY OF THE USE OF THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PARCEL. 
          SO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY REASON OF THE, THE MIDDLE TERM USE IS LOOKING AT THE USE AND IS THINKING ABOUT THE INTENSITY OF THAT USE AND HOW IS, ARE THOSE PERHAPS ADVERSE IMPACTS OF THE INTENSITY OF THAT USE BEING MITIGATED, UH, THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE REQUIREMENTS OR THROUGH THE DISCRETIONARY PROCESS. 
          SO IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE WAY IT'S ESTABLISHED IN THE OVERLAY, IT PULLS OVER THE FINDINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR EVERY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE CITY. 
          THEN IT STARTS LAYERING ON ADDITIONAL FINDINGS. 
          SO I THINK WE GET TO THE NUMBER OF FINDINGS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PROJECT TO GO FROM 45 TO 60 OR 45 TO 75 FEET IS AN EXTRAORDINARY NUMBER OF FINDINGS. 
          WE'RE ALMOST TRIPLING THE NUMBER OF FINDINGS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE. 
          SO, UH, AND, AND WHEN WE LOOK AT IT, WE HAVE A, A FINDING REGARDING THE SIDING OF THE BUILDING AND THE USE REGARDING TRAFFIC, CIRCULATION AND PARKING, THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND USE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. 
          UM, AND YOU WOULD BE ASKED TO MAKE THAT CQA FINDING AS WELL, IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THESE FINDINGS ABOUT THE SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT, YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO FIND THAT ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT ARE BEING MITIGATED. 
          SO THOSE FINDINGS IN THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS ARE QUITE ROBUST AT, AT, EVEN AT THE LEVEL AT WHICH WE HAVE THEM FOR A STANDARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          BUT WHEN WE START ADDING FINDINGS ON FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, IT BECOMES EVEN MORE ROBUST IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY OF THE COMMISSION TO SHAPE THAT PROJECT. 
          THEN ON TOP OF THAT, WE REQUIRE HISTORIC SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. 
          SO THE, THE, UH, TECHNICAL EXPERTS ON HCPC ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT PROJECT UNIQUELY THROUGH THAT LENS FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF COMPATIBILITY WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          SO I, I DO, I DO, I THINK I SAY ALL OF THAT TOO. 
          UM, PERHAPS LAY OUT WHAT, WHAT WILL REALLY HAPPEN IN THOSE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND HAR PROCESSES, THE, THE LEVEL OF DETAIL, BUT ALSO THE AMOUNT OF CONTROL AND AUTHORITY THAT BOTH PLANNING COMMISSION AND HCPC WOULD HAVE DURING A DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS. 
          I APPRECIATE UNDERSCORING THAT, UH, SORT OF STANDARD CUP HURDLES AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL THAT WE LAYER ON HERE FOR THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I, I'LL JUST SPEAK FOR MYSELF THAT THAT'S BEEN, I THINK, A REALLY IMPORTANT PIECE AS WE CONSIDER THE OVERLAY AND ITS IMPACTS DOWNTOWN. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE COMMENTER WHO, WHO ASSERTED THIS HAS LEFT, BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT MANDATE SIX STORIES, DOES NOT GUARANTEE SIX STORIES. 
          IT IS GIVING THE OPTION TO GO UP SIX, AND A DEVELOPER MAY WELL COME IN AND SAY, I'D JUST LIKE TO KEEP IT TWO OR THREE, PLEASE. 
          AND THAT'S 
          [03:15:01]
ALL WELL AND GOOD. 
          WE'RE JUST ALLOWING FOR A MECHANISM, ALLOWING FOR, AND, AND DETAILING THE, UH, EXTENSIVE REVIEW PROCESS THAT COULD ALLOW FOR SOMETHING TO GO HIGHER OR TO GO DENSER. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT THING FOR FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND ACROSS THE BOARD THAT THIS IS NOT GUARANTEEING A BUNCH OF, YOU KNOW, OVER 45 FEET BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN. 
          IT'S JUST AS ZONING LAWS DO, GIVING THE SORT OF BOX WITHIN WHICH YOU CAN DEVELOP, UM, NOT MANDATING THAT YOU FILL THAT BOX. 
          I, UH, COMMISSIONER HOOPER, THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND I, I PROMISE THIS IS AESTHETIC AND IT'S, IT'S NOT JUST A REHASH OF WHAT I SAID EARLIER, BUT IT'S KIND OF IN TAKING WHAT'S BEEN SAID, UH, THE LITTLE BACK AND FORTH THAT WE SAW BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO I THINK USED TO BE FRIENDS AT SOME POINT, UM, WHICH I'VE BEEN SEEING HAPPEN A LOT OVER THIS. 
          A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO I USED TO THINK WERE THE LONG, BEST FRIENDS WOULDN'T SAY A NEGATIVE WORD ABOUT EACH OTHER, NOW STARTED THROWING EACH OTHER UNDER THE BUS RIGHT AND LEFT. 
          UH, AND PART OF THE THING THAT'S BAFFLED ME ABOUT ALL OF THIS IS IT SEEMS TO BE, I SEE TWO ARGUMENTS PRETTY CONSISTENTLY. 
          ONE IS, UM, WE CAN'T RECREATE THE PAST. 
          WE GOTTA MOVE FORWARD, MOVE FORWARD, MOVE FORWARD. 
          AND THEN THE OTHER IS, HEY, I LOVE, I LOVE OUR HISTORY. 
          DON'T LEAVE ME BEHIND. 
          DON'T SAY THAT WHAT I LOVE IS NO LONGER RELEVANT. 
          THIS IS THE TOWN I GREW UP IN. 
          TO ME, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR THIS TO BE, HOW DO WE ALL LOOK TO THE FUTURE AND BRING FOLKS ALONG? HOW DO WE PROTECT WHAT THE, THE PAST THAT WE'VE HAD, THAT WE KEEP THE CULTURE THAT WE HAVE AND STILL HAVE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO ADD, BUT NOT WHOLLY REDESIGN OR REDEVELOP OR PIVOT OUR WONDERFUL DOWNTOWN? THAT'S WHY, UH, WHEN I BROUGHT UP HAVING STRONGER CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS, I RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY SEVEN, AND I RECOGNIZE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT ANDREW REALLY KIND OF LAID OUT THAT THIS GIVES US. 
          THE THING IS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S SO MANY CONDITIONS TO GET TO SIX STORIES, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE HAVE, WHICH IS NONE OF US ARE ARCHITECTS ON THIS BODY. 
          AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMETHING GETS THROUGH ALL THOSE CONDITIONS AND STILL, FRANKLY, LOOKS LIKE THE RENDERING WE'VE SEEN LATELY. 
          I, I THINK I, FOR ONE, HAD A LOT MORE FAITH UNTIL I SAW THAT RENDERING. 
          SO IT BECOMES A QUESTION OF HOW DO WE HAVE A MIDDLE GROUND? WE'VE GOT A PROCESS HERE. 
          I WOULD PREFER A MASTER PLAN, BUT THAT'S NOT THE PROCESS WE'RE IN BECAUSE THE APPLICANT BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          SO WHAT IS, HOW DO WE MAKE THIS SOMETHING IF WE'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH IT? SOMETHING THAT REALLY BRINGS IN, BRINGS BACK THE DESIGN STANDARDS WE DON'T HAVE FOR THE DOWNTOWN RIGHT NOW, AND SOME KIND OF MEASURE OF DESIGN REVIEW. 
          IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE PAINT BY NUMBERS. 
          I WAS NOT SUGGESTING THAT, BUT IT ALSO CAN BE A LOT MORE DETAIL THAN WHAT WE HAVE. 
          AND I SAY THIS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THROUGH MULTIPLE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESSES, AND I, I KNOW WHAT HAPPENS. 
          THERE'S SOME KIND OF ISSUE OR SOME KIND OF CONSIDERATION THAT KIND OF RESTRICTS WHERE WE'RE GOING. 
          AND NONE OF US HERE ARE ARCHITECTS. 
          A LOT OF US HAVE LAND USE BACKGROUNDS AND OTHER EXPERTISE, BUT I FRANKLY DON'T WANT TO BE CALLED ON TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PERFECT BLEND BETWEEN HISTORIC AND, AND MODERN MIGHT LOOK LIKE. 
          I WANT GUIDELINES THAT WE CAN EASILY FOLLOW TO THEN BE ABLE TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT THIS WORKS OR DOESN'T. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE HARD TO PRODUCE. 
          I'M NOT SAYING IT'S EASY. 
          I'M NOT SAYING IT WON'T IMPACT THIS TIMELINE. 
          I I GET ALL OF THAT PRACTICALLY. 
          BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT I THINK PEOPLE RIGHT, RIGHTFULLY HAVE OF WHAT ENDS UP GETTING PRODUCED AND HOW DOES THIS PROCESS WORK AND HOW ARE WE ENGAGED, AND AT THE SAME TIME PRODUCE BUILDINGS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO LOOK LIKE THEY DID 50, 80, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. 
          THEY CAN BE A BLEND. 
          THERE'S CITIES THAT DO THIS. 
          THERE'S NUMEROUS BUILDINGS THAT HAVE GORGEOUS FRONTAGES AND STILL HAVE MODERN TOUCHES. 
          WE CAN REQUIRE THAT, BUT LET'S TAKE THE TIME TO FIGURE THAT OUT. 
          AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE GOING BACK TO THE EIR IS HAVING REFERENCE TO THAT BEING SOMEHOW EVENTUALLY REQUIRED. 
          SO WE'RE NOT JUST SAYING IT'S GONNA COME LATER, BUT IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THE THING WE'RE VOTING ON, SO WE CAN MAKE IT A CONTINGENT REQUIREMENT AT THE END. 
          NOW, I MAY BE OUTTA LINE ASKING FOR THAT, BUT I'M ALSO UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD VOTE FOR AN EIR EXPECTING SOME OF THESE CHANGES TO COME LATER AND NOT HAVE SOME KIND OF PROVISION IN THERE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GONNA DO THIS WORK TO GET THIS DONE. 
          I THINK IT'S REASONABLE, AND I, I THINK WE CAN REALLY LOOK TOWARDS THE FUTURE WHILE 
          [03:20:01]
BRINGING THE CITY ALONG WITH US. 
          UH, I DON'T THINK THIS HAS TO BE AN EITHER OR ARGUMENT, WHICH IS WHAT I'VE SEEN ONLINE IN PERSON IN THIS MEETING SO FAR. 
          I I THINK WE CAN SINCERELY HAVE A PROCESS TO LOOK AT WHAT IS THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT GOING TO BE AND REALLY DIG INTO THAT. 
          SO I WILL GET OFF MY SOAPBOX BEFORE YOU GET OFF THAT SOAPBOX. 
          UM, JUST MAKE SOME NOTES FOR WHEN WE GET TO THE AMENDMENTS PORTION, PLEASE. 
          DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO NO. 
          OKAY. 
          OTHER AESTHETIC DISCUSSION POINTS? I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. 
          SURE. 
          JUST, UM, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT LIKE THE MASONIC BUILDING, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT GOES, SAY THAT GOES UP 45, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS, BUT I'M JUST GONNA SAY THAT GOES UP TO THE 45 AND THEN YOU WANNA HAVE A CLOCK ON TOP. 
          SO HOW DO YOU ADD THAT NUMBER ON? SO IS THAT NUMBER ACTUALLY PART OF THE BUILDING, OR WHAT WOULD THE CLOCK AS THE EXAMPLE? UM, SINCE THAT GOES OVER THE 45 FEET? UH, ACTUALLY ONE FOR ME. 
          UH, THANK YOU. 
          OH, UM, IF THE QUESTION IS ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND OTHER THINGS YOU MIGHT SEE IN TOWN, WHAT DOES THE OVERLAY DO WITH THOSE? AND THE HEIGHT LIMIT IS ABSOLUTE IN THE OVERLAY. 
          SO ALL OF THE BUILDING NEEDS TO MEET THE 60 FOOT OR THE 75 FOOT, AND THERE'S NO ALLOWANCES. 
          AND IN FACT, THE, THE, THE DRAFT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION LAST YEAR SAID THAT CHAPTER 12 PROVISIONS FOR ALLOWANCES ABOVE THE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMITS WERE OFF THE TABLE OR EXCLUDED FROM. 
          SO I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. 
          IF NOT, WE CAN. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF IT DOES OR NOT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I, SO IF THE, IF WE GO TO THE 45, SO THE BUILDING IS 45 FEET, BUT THEN YOU PUT A CLOCK ON TOP THAT BRINGS IT UP HIGHER, SO IT'S PAST THE 45, WHAT IS THE PROCESS IT WOULD NEED THE OVERLAY USE PERMITS, AND IT WOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO THAT PROHIBITION, IF YOU WILL, OF HAVING THINGS ABOVE THE, THE HEIGHT LIMITS ALLOWED BY THE OVERLAY. 
          SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHAPTER 12 PROVISIONS THAT ALLOW BUILDINGS TO HAVE THINGS STICK UP ABOVE A HEIGHT LIMIT WOULD APPLY BECAUSE THE BUILDING WOULD MEET THE 45 FOOT HIGH LIMIT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          THANKS. 
          THANKS FOR ASKING IT AGAIN. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYTHING ELSE ON AESTHETICS? OKAY. 
          I'M JUST GONNA TAKE A QUICK PAUSE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE FOR A SOFTBALL THAT I JUST WANNA HAVE IN THE RECORD. 
          IF WE COULD GET A THREE SENTENCE DEFINITION OF FAR, UM, SINCE THE THE FLOOR AREA RATIO CAN, UM, BE A FOREIGN CONCEPT OF FOLKS, I'D JUST LOVE TO HAVE THAT IN THERE SO WE'VE GOT IT CLEARLY DEFINED FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. 
          WELL, FORTUNATELY, THE ZONING ORDINANCE HAS THAT IN IT, AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S ALL OF THE FLOOR AREA WITHIN THE BOX. 
          AND UNLIKE MANY CITIES, PETALUMA COUNTS SORT OF THE FULL EXTENT AND DOESN'T EXCLUDE CIRCULATION. 
          SO ELEVATORS, CORRIDORS, STAIRCASES THAT GO SPAN MULTIPLE FLOORS, THEY'RE ALL INCLUDED. 
          AND IT ALSO INCLUDES ALL AREAS BELOW GRADE. 
          SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE HOTEL IS A FAR OF SIX. 
          IT INCLUDES FLURY ABOVE GROUND AND THE ENTIRE GARAGE IS ALSO COUNTED WITHIN THAT 6.0 FAR LIMIT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WITH THAT, SHALL WE HEAD INTO CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES DISCUSSION TO CHAIR WHITLEY? OKAY, SO MY COMMENTS ARE ALL KIND OF JUMBLED TOGETHER AS WELL, SO I'M KIND OF JUMPING BACK AND FORTH. 
          BUT, UM, I WANTED TO COMMENT ON, UM, THE CULTURAL RESOURCES. 
          UM, SO IN GENERAL, I FIND THAT THE CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORTS, UM, ARE MOSTLY THOROUGH. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY SERIOUS TRIBAL OR ARCHEOLOGICAL ISSUES THAT CAN'T BE RESOLVED THROUGH THE MITIGATION STRATEGIES THAT ARE SUGGESTED. 
          BUT THERE'S ONE GLARING ISSUE THAT IS NOT FULLY ADDRESSED IN EITHER OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REPORTS AND THEREFORE IS ABSENT FROM THE EIR. 
          AND THAT'S THE DIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE SETTING AND THE INTEGRITY OF FEELING FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT BY BOTH THE PROPOSED OVERLAY AND THE PROPOSED HOTEL. 
          THE PRIMARY PUBLIC CONCERN FROM WRITTEN AND PRESENTED COMMENTS HAS REPEATEDLY BEEN THE DIRECT AND CUMULATIVE VISUAL EFFECTS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT AND OTHER HISTORIC BUILDINGS. 
          THE ORIGINAL CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT, UH, PAINTER 2023, UM, FAILED TO ADDRESS THE INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA OF INTEGRITY, WHICH ARE LOCATION, SETTING, DESIGN MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP FEELING, AND ASSOCIATION. 
          THESE ARE LAID OUT IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER, UM, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION, UM, FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT BY EITHER THE OVERLAY OF THE HOTEL. 
          YET IT INDICATED THAT THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT RETAINS A 
          [03:25:01]
HIGH DEGREE OF ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY AND MAINTAINS ITS ASSOCIATIONS TO THE HISTORIC PERIOD. 
          IT ALSO SUGGESTS THAT THE SOUTH END OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS SEEN SOME LOSS OF INTEGRITY IN THE LAST 10 TO 20 YEARS WITHOUT FURTHER EXPLANATION. 
          UM, THE ADDITIONAL CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT, WHICH IS QUARTER 2024, CLARIFIES THIS TO SOME DEGREE FOR THE HOTEL BY STATING THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT AND ASSOCIATED NEW CONSTRUCTION IN AND ADJACENT TO THE PETALUMA THEATER DISTRICT TO THE NORTHEAST AND WEST EAST OF THE PROJECT SITE. 
          NOT SURE WHAT THEY MEAN BY WEST EAST, BUT THE THEATER DISTRICT IS ENTIRELY NORTHEAST OF THE PROPOSED HOTEL SITE. 
          AND THE FIGURE SHOWN IN THE REPORT IS NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF C STREET, NOT B STREET, UM, HAVE INTRODUCED NEW ARCHITECTURAL MATERIALS OR STYLES, MATERIALS AND PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCES. 
          THIS REDEVELOPMENT HAS COMPROMISED THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THIS PORTION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          NOTE, THIS IS THE THEATER DISTRICT. 
          THIS IS NOT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          UM, THUS THERE IS NO POTENTIAL FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT TO IMPACT THE EXISTING HISTORIC SETTING OR CONTEXT OF THE DISTRICT. 
          ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT THE EASTERNMOST EDGE OF THE DISTRICT. 
          SO THE MAJORITY OF THE DISTRICT TO THE WEST WOULD RETAIN ITS ABILITY TO CONVEY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AFTER THE PROJECT'S CONSTRUCTION. 
          SO I WOULD POINT OUT THAT INTEGRITY IS NOT, UM, AN ALL OR NOTHING PROPOSITION. 
          YES, THE THEATER DISTRICT HAS INTRODUCED NO NEW ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, MATERIALS AND PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCES TO THE NORTHEAST, BUT THE PROPOSED HOTEL INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL VISUAL OBSTRUCTIONS AND VIEW SHED ALTERATIONS. 
          IT WILL ALTER BOTH VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IN CENTER PARK IN WAYS THAT THE THEATER DISTRICT DOES NOT. 
          IT'S ALSO SITUATED BETWEEN THE ALREADY DEVELOPED THEATER DISTRICT AND THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT. 
          THE PREVIOUSLY AFFECTED AREAS ARE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION FROM THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT, FROM THE HOTEL. 
          UM, THESE, SO THESE ADVERSE EFFECTS ARE IN ADDITION TO THE ONES THAT ALREADY EXIST OR OCCURRED IN THE PAST, WRITING THEM OFF AS NOT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME ALTERATION IN NEARBY AREAS, IS ABSOLUTELY NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE GENERAL PLAN'S OBJECTIVE TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC AREA INTEGRITY, HISTORIC ERA INTEGRITY OF THE NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT. 
          AND AGAIN, THE WORD INTEGRITY IS SHORTHAND FOR SEVEN DIFFERENT CRITERIA THAT NEED TO BE EVALUATED INDIVIDUALLY FOR THE IMPACTS FROM BOTH THE HOTEL AND THE OVERLAY. 
          THIS ISN'T ROCKET SCIENCE AND OBVIOUSLY THERE CAN BE DISAGREEMENT AMONG EXPERTS ON THIS, BUT THESE POTENTIAL EFFECTS AREN'T SERIOUSLY ADDRESSED, MUCH LESS JUSTIFIED IN THE REPORTS OR THE EIR. 
          YES, I AGREE THAT THE HISTORIC H BUILDINGS IN AREA A AND ADJACENT TO IT ARE NOT NECESSARILY ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTERS, BUT THE HOTEL WILL BE VISIBLE FROM MANY PORTIONS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, INCLUDING THE CLEARLY ELIGIBLE AND CONTRIBUTING 1903 GOSSA O'NEILL BUILDING, THE 1911 MCNAIR BUILDING, THE 1886 MCNAIR BUILDING, THE 1911 LANDMARK BUILDING, AND THE 1882 MASONIC BUILDING, AS WELL AS THE INDIVIDUALLY ELIGIBLE 1906 CARNEGIE LIBRARY BUILDING. 
          THE PROPOSED HOTEL WILL CLEARLY CHANGE THE VIEW SHEDS TO AND FROM THESE LOCATIONS TO SOME DEGREE. 
          LIKEWISE, THE PROPOSED OVERLAY, UH, WILL HAVE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ACROSS AN EVEN BROADER AREA. 
          I DON'T EXPECT THE APPLICANT'S EXPERTS TO NECESSARILY AGREE WITH MY OPINION ON THESE ISSUES OR WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC'S OPINION, BUT I DO EXPECT AN EIR TO FULLY CONSIDER THEM AND FOR THE EXPERTS NOT TO PHONE IT IN, SO TO SPEAK. 
          IN MY OPINION, THE EIR AND ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT IN THIS REGARD. 
          ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES OR DISCUSSION POINTS STEMMING FROM OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBER OR COMMISSIONER COMMENTS? UH, YEAH, I JUST HAVE A, A FEW COMMENTS, AND THIS GETS BACK TO MY QUESTION EARLIER. 
          UM, UM, SHOULD I, I'LL BREAK THIS UP. 
          I, I THINK ONE THING THAT WE ARE, ARE MAYBE MISSING 'CAUSE EVERYONE'S SORT OF HYPERFOCUSED ON THE HOTEL PORTION OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE, IS THAT WITH THE OVERLAY, I THINK WE ARE CREATING SOME ADDITIONAL HISTORIC PROTECTION THAT WASN'T THERE EARLIER, RIGHT? BY HAVING PART OF THE CUP PROCESS BE IN HERE WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT, UM, PROTECTION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AND MAKING SURE WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT AS WE GO THROUGH. 
          I THINK THERE'S SOME CHANGES THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF THOSE MITIGATION MEASURES TO ACTUALLY MAKE THEM HAVE A LITTLE MORE TEETH AND BE A LITTLE BIT MORE EFFECTIVE. 
          [03:30:01]
UM, BUT THE, THE FIRST THING THAT I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT IS, IS GETTING BACK TO THIS QUESTION, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT MAP, THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION IN IN SUB AREA. 
          I THINK IT'S, THAT'S ALL PURPLE THAT NO ONE'S LOOKED AT AT ANY POINT. 
          AND I THINK THIS IS A PERFECT TIME FOR US TO BE, AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS EIR PROCESS TO TAKE A CHANCE TO DO THE SURVEY ON THIS AREA AND SEE IF THERE ARE HISTORIC RESOURCES THERE THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT FURTHER, RIGHT? SO THAT WE HAVE AN IDEA IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DEVELOP IN THIS AREA, RIGHT, WHAT THEY'RE COMING UP AGAINST AND WHAT THEY'RE, WHAT THEY'RE GONNA BE SEEING THERE AND HOW THEY CAN PROTECT IT FURTHER, RIGHT? AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE DOING THAT, AND THIS IS SORT OF THE PERFECT, I THINK, OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT. 
          I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ON HCPC FOR AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN ON IT, UH, THREE YEARS NOW, THAT WE ARE SEVERELY LACKING AND, AND YOU KNOW, THIS RECONNAISSANCE LEVEL SURVEY, UH, JUST TO HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS CITY, RIGHT? BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT HERE. 
          UM, AND, AND WE'RE NOT, WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DO IT. 
          AND THIS, I THINK, PRESENTS A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT IN AN AREA THAT I, I THINK EVERYONE PROBABLY AGREES IS, IS RICH WITH HISTORICAL, UH, AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE. 
          UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A DEVELOPER IN TOW HERE THAT, YOU KNOW, COULD PAY FOR THIS BUT COULD DO THIS. 
          AND THIS IS IT. 
          IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS IS THE PERFECT TIME TO DO THAT AND REQUIRE IT EITHER AS A MITIGATION MEASURE OR THAT WE HAVE IT AS PART OF, UH, THIS FINAL EIR THAT A SURVEY'S DONE, THAT WE LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT AREA AND SEE, AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS YOU SPEAKS TO, UM, YOU KNOW, TOM'S, UM, SORRY, UH, MR. WHITLEY'S COMMENTS EARLIER THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THE INTEGRITY OF THE WHOLE AREA RIGHT HERE. 
          NOW, I JUST LOST MY NOTES. 
          UM, WHICH BRINGS ME SORT OF BACK TO THE MITIGATION MEASURES AND, AND SORT OF SPECIFIC COMMENTS THAT I HAD ON THERE THAT I THOUGHT WOULD, WOULD HELP, UM, IMPROVE THEM, UH, AND MAKE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE USABLE, PARTICULARLY IN THIS CULTURAL, UM, AND HISTORIC RESOURCES CONTEXT. 
          AND IN WHAT IS CUL ONE A? YOU KNOW, IT SAYS INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WHICH PROPOSE TO ALTER A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE GREATER THAN 45 YEARS OF AGE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO A HISTORIC RESOURCES EVALUATION. 
          SO IN THE WAY THAT THAT READS, THAT LEAVES OUT SOME OF THESE OPPORTUNITIES SITES THAT WE'RE SORT OF THINKING ABOUT AS ONES THAT WOULD AND COULD GET DEVELOPED FIRST, RIGHT? BECAUSE THERE, THERE'S NOT A, THERE'S NOT SOMETHING ON THEM ALREADY, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, THAT LANGUAGE LEAVES THEM OUT. 
          THEY'RE NOT, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ALTERING A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE 'CAUSE IT'S A VACANT LOT. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS HRE, RIGHT? THIS SHOULD BE ANY PROPERTY OR ANY PROJECT THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE OVERLAY NEEDS TO BE, UM, SUBJECT TO HAVING TO DO AN HRE, RIGHT? AND, AND THEY SHOULD KNOW THAT AHEAD OF TIME ANYWAY IF WE'VE DONE THIS SURVEY. 
          'CAUSE WE'LL KNOW WHAT IS AND AROUND IN ALL THOSE AREAS OVER THERE. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND PARTICULARLY, AND I'M MOST CONCERNED ABOUT C RIGHT? YOU, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU SAW ALL THAT PURPLE. 
          WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT ANYTHING OVER THERE. 
          AND SO THAT'S ONE. 
          UM, AND FURTHER TO, TO MR. WHITLEY'S POINT AGAIN ABOUT THE INTEGRITY IN, IN CUL ONE E, UH, THE LANGUAGE IS A LITTLE WONKY THERE, BUT, 'CAUSE I THINK THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A KNOT WHERE IT SAYS THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT IT SHOULD BE NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT, BUT FURTHER DOWN IN THERE, AND THIS IS IN PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THAT'S NOT PART OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WE'RE SORT OF CREATING THIS ADDITIONAL, UH, PROTECTION, I THINK WITH THE CUP PROCESS IN AN AREA THAT'S NOT A DESIGNATED DISTRICT THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY HR ON TO BEGIN WITH, RIGHT? WE WOULD NEVER EVEN BE PART OF THAT PROCESS. 
          AND IF WE'RE CONTINUING TO NOT BE PART OF THAT PROCESS AS HCPC AND PLANNING COMMISSION LOOKING AT THIS, THEY NEED TO BE REALLY CONSIDERING SORT OF ALL THE DIFFERENT FACTORS. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE THAT TALKS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT INTEGRITY, UM, OF THE AREA, RIGHT? SO WE CAN ADD IN HERE WHERE IT SAYS, UM, NO ADVERSELY AFFECTS ITS RELATIONSHIP IN TERMS OF HARMONY AND APPROPRIATENESS WE CAN PUT IN, IN TERMS OF INTEGRITY, HARMONY, AND APPROPRIATENESS TO SORT OF START GETTING TO THAT, UM, IDEA THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THE AREAS NEED TO BE PROTECTED AND 
          [03:35:01]
THE ASSETS THAT ARE THERE SHOULD BE PROTECTED. 
          UM, SO I THINK IT, IT IS SORT OF A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN IN THERE. 
          THERE'S ANOTHER AREA WHERE YOU CAN ADD IN, UM, IT SAYS CHARACTER OR THE HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE OR AESTHETIC INTEREST. 
          AND YOU COULD ADD IN INTEGRITY OR VALUE OF THE DISTRICT AS A WAY TO, UM, SORT OF GIVE THAT EXTRA LAYER OF PROTECTION. 
          CAN I JUST ASK, UH, FOLLOW UP ON YOUR POINT ABOUT THE, THE HRE MM-HMM. 
          , UM, AND HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VACANT LOT. 
          'CAUSE TO MY UNDERSTANDING, A VACANT LOT WOULDN'T BE A HISTORICAL RESOURCE . 
          SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SORT OF THE ADJACENT POTENTIALS. 
          YEAH. 
          YOU WANNA BE, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THAT, YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT WHAT'S AROUND THAT VACANT LOT, RIGHT? TO SEE WHAT SORT OF THE IMPACTS ARE GONNA BE ON THE SURROUNDING AREA. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND AS IT'S DRAFTED RIGHT NOW, IF YOU'RE ON A VACANT LOT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT DOES THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5 0 2 4 0.1 LOOK BEYOND THE PARCEL? OR ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT HISTORIC RESOURCE OF A SPECIFIC BUILDING? UH, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION, IT SAYS . 
          UM, I, I THINK WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THIS HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION, RIGHT, THAT'S REQUIRED AS PART OF THE CUP ISN'T REQUIRED IF YOU'RE GONNA DEVELOP ON A VACANT LOT. 
          RIGHT? RIGHT. 
          YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE TO DO THAT. 
          IS THERE, IS THERE LIKE A BRIEF OVERVIEW WE COULD GET OF WHAT A, THE SCOPE OF AN HRE TYPICALLY LOOKS LIKE IF WE'RE SORT OF BORROWING FROM PREEXISTING? UH OH, YES. 
          GO, GO FOR IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WHAT'S A HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION? IT'S TO TAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE, WHETHER IT'S A VACANT LOT OR LOOKING AT HISTORIC RESOURCES ADJACENT TO THAT PROJECT SITE. 
          SO IT REALLY PROVIDES THE BACKGROUND CONTEXT TO THE LOCATION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT AND ASSESSING ELIGIBILITY OF THAT SITE OR ADJACENT STRUCTURES. 
          UH, WITHIN THIS PROJECT, UH, FOR THE HOTEL, THERE WAS AN ASSESSMENT, UH, PROVIDED, UH, THROUGH THE D THE DRAFT DIR WHERE THE TWO ADJACENT STRUCTURES TO THE HOTEL SITE WERE EVALUATED TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY, UH, IMPACTS TO ELIGIBLE HISTORIC RESOURCES OR TO EXISTING HISTORIC RESOURCES. 
          SO THAT'S ONE SCENARIO WHERE THERE IS A PROJECT BEFORE YOU, UH, WITHIN THE OVERLAY, UH, TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IF THERE IS A, A, A HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION, UH, REQUIRED. 
          UH, SO IT REALLY DEPENDS WHERE THE PROJECT SITE IS COMING IN WITHIN THE OVERLAY. 
          IS IT WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT? IS IT ADJACENT TO, UH, UH, UNC SURVEYED PROPERTIES? UM, AND, AND THIS IS, UH, DOCUMENTATION THAT HELPS ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. 
          UM, AND, AND I HOPE THAT ANSWERS A, A COMMITTEE MEMBER PIT AND GARROS QUESTION AS WELL. 
          IS IT YOUR INTERPRETATION THAT MM, OVERLAY CL ONE A WOULD NOT REQUIRE AN HRE OF A VACANT LOT? OR IT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD? UH, IT, IT DOES REQUIRE, OKAY. 
          FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IT, IT ONLY REQUIRES, I MEAN, THIS IS HAPPENING WITH RESPECT TO THE HOTEL BECAUSE IT'S IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, RIGHT? RIGHT. 
          SO WHETHER THERE'S THE CUP OR NOT, OR OVERLAY OR NOT, THAT WAS GONNA HAVE TO BE DONE ANYHOW. 
          WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE'RE NOT, THERE ARE LARGE SWATHS OF THE SUB AREAS THAT HAVE NO HISTORIC DESIGNATION WHATSOEVER. 
          THERE'S NO, IT'S NOT A ZONE. 
          THERE'S NO RIGHT. 
          IT'S ALL PURPLE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO A VACANT LOT THERE COULD JUST DEVELOP WITHOUT HAVING AN OBLIGATION TO PREPARE AN HRE TO, TO, TO SHOW THAT THERE ARE NO, UH, YOU KNOW, ADVERSE IMPACTS ON A HISTORIC RESOURCE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE NEXT TO IT. 
          I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING IT. 
          'CAUSE IT WAS, I ALSO WAS PERTURBED BY THE PURPLE SUBAR C BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE ANSWER FROM STAFF WAS THAT ONCE THERE IS A LIVE PROJECT ON A SPECIFIC PARCEL, THEN YOU START GOING THROUGH THIS REVIEW PROCESS AND IT, AND IT WOULD GET ATTENTION THAT THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND TO DEFINE, TO ACTUALLY LOOK BACK INTO THE LANGUAGE. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT, UM, THAT WOULD HELP AS FEEDBACK TO UNDERSTAND IF WE'RE LOOKING ATES ALL THE TIME FOR EACH PROJECT OR WHEN IT'S CASE PROJECT SPECIFIC. 
          SO I THINK, UH, LOOKING BACK AT THE LANGUAGE AND HOW IT'S BEING PROPOSED WOULD BE HELPFUL, UH, AS, AS FEEDBACK THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING, UH, FROM, UH, PIT NGARO. 
          AND IF I COULD JUST ADD, UM, THE COMMENTS THAT YOU PROVIDED ARE, ARE CLEAR TO ME AND I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE LANGUAGE 
          [03:40:01]
AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT AND, UM, THAT COMMENT WILL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          AND I WOULD JUST OFFER, UM, THAT THE USE PERMIT REGULATION ALSO REQUIRE FINDINGS ABOUT HISTORIC, UM, COMPLIANCE. 
          AND THROUGH THAT STAFF WOULD BE COMPELLED TO DO AN HRE IF IT, THE HEIGHT EXCEEDED AND IF IT WAS ADJACENT TO A POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE RESOURCE. 
          SO I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU THAT, UM, OFFER THAT AS WELL. 
          SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS, UM, THE INTENT OF THAT MITIGATION MEASURE DOES IS SPECIFIC TO REDEVELOPMENT OR RESTRUCTURING, BUT, UH, IN ADDITION, THE USE PERMIT, UM, WOULD PROMPT US TO LOOK AT THAT WHEN IT COMES UP. 
          BUT WE WILL ABSOLUTELY CONSIDER HOW WE MIGHT, UM, TAILOR THAT MEASURE TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND JUST TO CLARIFY, I'M NOT TRYING TO TALK YOU OUT OF IT. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO CHECK IF THERE'S AN AMENDMENT THAT WE NEED TO PUT INTO OUR RESOLUTION. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR THE YEAH. 
          INPUT FURTHER CULTURAL DISCUSSION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          UM, I HAVE A, AN OVERALL QUESTION FIRST, AND JUST BECAUSE AS WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS IN MY HEAD, I'VE ALSO BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT LIKE AMENDMENTS. 
          BUT FOR THE VOTE THAT WE'RE POTENTIALLY GOING TO DO, UH, I UNDERSTAND IT'S A VOTE TO MOVE A DRAFT FORWARD TO THEN GO TO COUNCIL TO THEN TAKE MORE INPUT TO THEN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS TO THEN DO A FINAL EIR, UM, AND NOT VOTING MOVING FORWARD, IT'S JUST THE WHOLE THING JUST STOPS. 
          OR I GUESS MY, SEE THAT'S THE QUESTION I'M TRYING TO GET TO. 
          IS IT THAT IF WE HAVE THESE AMENDMENTS, ARE WE MAKING THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION IN GOOD FAITH KNOWING THAT'S GONNA GET RECOMMENDED FORWARD TO COUNCIL? OR IS IT, IS IT BETTER TO ESSENTIALLY SAY, HEY, WE'RE NOT GONNA BUDGE TO THE NEXT STEP UNLESS THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. 
          I JUST WANT TO GET A CLEAR PROCESS, UH, ANSWER THERE. 
          UM, PLANNING COMMISSION IS WELCOME TO PROVIDE WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU FEEL APPROPRIATE TO COUNSEL AND STAFF WILL BRING THAT FORWARD, WHETHER IT'S TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FINAL EIR OR NOT, WHETHER IT'S SPECIFIC, UM, AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS ON THE SPECIFIC MITIGATION OR ON ALTERNATIVES. 
          UM, REGARDLESS OF ALL OF THAT, WE WE'RE COLLECTING ALL OF, SO THAT IS, IS PART OF THE PROCESS AND THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT, PRESUMABLY HERE TONIGHT. 
          UM, AND STAFF IS ALSO COLLECTING ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT SPECIFIC THING YOU ADD TO MODIFY THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU, UH, TONIGHT. 
          AND, AND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT I THINK ONE THING, ONE THING I CAN SEE IS THAT WE MAY HAVE TO SORT THROUGH WHAT MIGHT BE A MODIFICATION TO SAY A MITIGATION MEASURE OR AN ADDITION OF A MITIGATION MEASURE THROUGH THE DRAFT EIR PROCESS VERSUS WHAT MIGHT EVENTUALLY BECOME A STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL TO MODIFY THE PROPOSED OVERLAY. 
          SHOULD IT REACH A POINT OF BEING REVIEWED BY COUNSEL AT A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ADOPTION. 
          SO, SO IT MAY BE THAT WE FIND THAT WE HAVE TO SORT OUT SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND FIND HOW THOSE GO TO COUNCIL, WHETHER THEY GO FORWARD TO COUNCIL AS A MODIFICATION TO THE DRAFT EIR OR THEY GO FORWARD TO COUNCIL AS A MODIFICATION TO THE, UH, PROPOSED OVERLAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO THEN, JUST SO I HAVE THIS ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, BECAUSE I KNOW I'VE, I'D ALREADY DURING THE BREAK, GOTTEN A FEW QUESTIONS ON THIS AND I WANNA MAKE SURE I HAVE A FIRM HANDLE ON IT. 
          REGARDLESS OF THE DECISION WE MAKE TODAY, YOU'RE GONNA TAKE ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, ALL OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE, BRING THEM FORWARD TO THE NEXT STEP TO COUNCIL, AND THEN SO ON AND SO FORTH. 
          WELL, WE WOULD, WE WOULD TAKE YOUR COMMENTS FORWARD, BUT WE WOULD ALSO TAKE FORWARD THE, THE RECOMMENDATION IF, IF YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO NOT DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A FINAL EIR, WE WOULD TAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION FORWARD AS WELL. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, GOING BACK TO THE ACTUAL SUBJECT, THANK YOU. 
          I JUST WANTED THE PROCESS CLARIFICATION. 
          GOING, GOING BACK TO THE ACTUAL SUBJECT. 
          ONE THING THAT, UH, OUR HCPC CHAIR BROUGHT UP WAS THE IDEA OF, UH, ACTUALLY, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT YOU INTENDED, BUT IT'S SOMETHING I TOOK DOWN, WHICH WAS THE IDEA OF LIKE HOW WE DEFINE THE IMPACT OF HEIGHT. 
          AND I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A FAIR POINT BECAUSE I, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT COMING FROM A CONCERN THAT WE CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO HEIGHT WELL, BUT THIS IS COMING FROM FAIR IS FAIR, HOW WE ACTUALLY DEFINE THAT WITHIN THE EIR. 
          AND I WAS JUST WONDERING, IS THERE A WAY OF DOING, PUTTING THAT IN WITH CONSIDERATIONS FOR HISTORIC IMPACTS THAT WE CAN SPELL OUT FURTHER, UH, IN TERMS OF AT WHAT LEVEL A HEIGHT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT AND YEAH. 
          [03:45:01]
AND THE MASS AND WHERE IT'S HITTING AND ALL OF THAT? YEAH. 
          UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT SPECULATIVE AND SQUA, WE TALK ABOUT PROGRAMMATIC, UH, WE TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS BECAUSE WE CAN ONLY EVALUATE MM-HMM, , UH, AT DETAIL WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US. 
          UM, YOU, YOU COULD HAVE TWO BUILDINGS THAT ARE THE SAME HEIGHT AND FEEL AND LOOK, UH, VERY DIFFERENT, RIGHT? SO, UM, I THINK THE, UM, YOU KNOW, , THE, UH, THE SPAR AND THE H SPAR PROCESS ARE THE, THE ME THAT'S, THAT WE HAVE, UH, TO DE DECIDE IF SOMETHING IS AESTHETICALLY, UM, ACCEPTABLE OR, UH, COMPATIBLE OR, OR NOT. 
          AND SO THAT'S REALLY AT THE DISCRETION OF THE REVIEW BODIES AND MAKING THAT ULTIMATE FINDING. 
          AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT ROBUST SET OF FINDINGS FOR ALL, UM, SPAR AND H SPAR WITHOUT THE OVERLAY. 
          AND THEN, AS WE'VE EXPLAINED TONIGHT, THEY GET LAYERED AND ADDED ONTO, UM, AND FURTHERED, UM, THROUGH THIS, UH, THIS OVERLAY ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, UM, AESTHETIC PROTECTIONS ARE IN PLACE. 
          AND SO THAT'S REALLY THE, THE ROLE OF THAT, UM, DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. 
          NO, THAT'S FAIR. 
          AND, AND PART OF WHY I'M ASKING IS JUST BEING ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHERE THIS GOES. 
          IT, IT MAKES SENSE IF THAT DOESN'T GO IN AN EIR BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE PROJECTS FOR EVERY SPOT AND THEREFORE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DETERMINE IT. 
          ALTHOUGH I WOULD SAY THAT THEN REALLY DOES UNDERSCORE HAVING MUCH STRONGER COP DESIGN GUIDELINES TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. 
          BUT THANK YOU. 
          UH, ONE FURTHER CLARIFICATION. 
          SO, UM, IF, UM, SO IF WE BELIEVE, OR IF WE THINK THAT THE EIR WAS INSUFFICIENT FOR EITHER THE OVERLAY OR THE HOTEL, UM, AND WE RECOMMEND THAT IT NOT GO FORWARD, UM, IT GOES FORWARD ANYWAY, UM, AND YOU MAKE CHANGES AND, AND YOU KNOW, YOU BRING THAT FORWARD TO COUNCIL, BUT IF WE RECOMMEND THAT IT DOES GO TO A FINAL DRAFT, THEN IT DOESN'T COME BACK TO US. 
          BUT IF WE RECOMMEND THAT IT DOESN'T GO TO A FINAL DRAFT, DOES THAT MEAN IT DOES COME BACK TO US, OR DOES IT NEVER COME BACK TO US ANYWAY? SO I, LET ME JUST CHIME IN THERE, OLIVIA, AND THEN, UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. 
          UH, SO WE STARTED THE PRESENTATION WITH, UH, REFERENCE TO I BELIEVE 1992 GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE, UM, WHERE IT DOES REFERENCE, UM, AND THIS ISN'T, UM, A STATE CQA MANDATE. 
          THIS IS A LOCAL, UM, GUIDANCE THAT WE HAVE ADOPTED. 
          AND I BELIEVE, UH, COMMISSIONER KUSON HAD, UM, FIRST, UM, HIGHLIGHTED THAT EARLIER IN THE EVENING. 
          UM, AND SO THERE IS AN OPTIONAL COMPONENT. 
          SO REGARDLESS OF, UH, WHETHER YOU WANT TO MOVE IT FORWARD, MOVE IT BACKWARDS OR NOT MOVE IT BACKWARDS, BUT JUST CHOOSE NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, UM, YOU DO HAVE THAT OPTION TO, TO SORT OF, UM, HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THE DRAFT TO MAKE A, YOU KNOW, MAKE YOU KNOW, ANOTHER DECISION. 
          UM, WHAT OUR PLANNING MANAGER REFERENCED EARLIER WAS ULTIMATELY IT'S CITY COUNCIL THAT MAKES THE CALL, UM, ON DIRECTING STAFF. 
          YOU KNOW, WE WENT THROUGH THE, UH, DRAFT PROCESS, WE SEE THE FEEDBACK, WE SEE THE DRAFT PRESENTED, WE RE YOU KNOW, UM, STAFF WILL THEN TURN AROUND AFTER THIS MEETING TO PREPARE, UM, A SET OF COMMENTS, UM, AND SUMMARY ON WHAT WAS DISCUSSED HERE, UM, WITH THE INTENT THAT, YOU KNOW, IN, THERE'S A GOOD FAITH EFFORT HERE THAT'S HAPPENING THIS EVENING, UH, TO, UH, FIND WHETHER OR NOT THE REPORT IS ADEQUATE OR NOT, RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S, I'M HOPING WE'RE ALL, UM, DOING A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO SAY, LOOK, UH, WE SEE THE DRAFT, IT'S VERY MUCH A DRAFT. 
          HERE'S WHERE WE DO SEE THAT THERE IS SOME INADEQUACIES AND STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE, UM, ADDRESS THESE, UH, BEFORE COUNCIL, UM, MAKES A CONSIDERATION. 
          UM, AND SO WHATEVER MOTION OR POTENTIAL MOTION THAT HAPPENS TODAY, WE WOULD BE TAKING THAT TO COUNSEL. 
          UH, CURRENTLY IT'S SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 7TH. 
          AGAIN, IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE, THE LEVEL OF, UM, DISCUSSION AND THE RESOLUTION OR POTENTIAL RESOLUTION TONIGHT. 
          UM, AND THEY'LL CONSIDER, THEY'LL TAKE ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE THEY MAKE THE DECISION. 
          HEY STAFF, WE FEEL, UH, THE FINAL 'CAUSE THERE'S GONNA BE ANOTHER PUBLICATION THAT COMES OUT, UM, UH, PRIOR TO THAT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE STAFF REPORT. 
          UM, AND THEY'LL DIRECT US 
          [03:50:01]
WITH ALL OF THIS IN MIND, MOVE FORWARD TO PREPARE THE FINAL EIR FOR US TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, SO YOU DO HAVE OPTIONS TONIGHT. 
          UM, I THINK WE'VE LAID THEM OUT, UH, PRETTY CLEARLY, BUT HAPPY TO ELABORATE MORE. 
          IF I COULD JUST REPHRASE CHAIR WHITLEY'S QUESTION, 'CAUSE NOW I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED TOO. 
          UH, SO I UNDERSTAND HCPC IS RECOMMENDING TO PC AND THEN PC RECOMMENDS TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          IF CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT MOVE THE DRAFT TO A FINAL, WHAT HAPPENS DOES NOT RECOMMEND A STAFF TO MOVE TOWARDS A FINAL? WHAT HAPPENS THAT WOULD UH, WELL YOU CAN'T TAKE ANY, YOU CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS UNTIL YOU HAVE CQA. 
          SO IF THE DIRECTION IS, UM, GO THE EIR IS INADEQUATE AND UH, YOU MUST GO BACK AND REEVALUATE, UH, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. 
          YOU CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH ENTITLEMENTS. 
          SO, UM, FOLKS HERE MAY RECALL THE SCOTT RANCH, THE DAVID ON PROJECT, UM, THAT WAS A 20 YEAR IN THE MAKING, UH, WHERE THAT EXACT SITUATION PLAYED OUT MORE THAN ONCE. 
          UM, AND THAT WOULD, IN THAT WOULD MEAN THAT WE GET ANOTHER CRACK AT THE D AT THE DRAFT. 
          IF THE, IF, IF CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT ELECT TO GO FROM DRAFT TO FINAL, THEN DOES THE DRAFT COME BACK TO ONE OR BOTH BODIES? UH, YES. 
          AT THE POINT THAT THE COUNCIL WERE TO DECIDE THAT THE DRAFT WAS INADEQUATE AND, UH, REQUESTED THAT STAFF GO BACK AND REVISE AND PREPARE A WHAT'S CALLED A REVISED EIR, UH, THEN THAT WOULD BE REPUBLISHED AND RENO AND RECIRCULATED FOR A 45 DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD DURING WHICH TIME WE WOULD GO THROUGH THE CITY'S PROCESS FOR PUBLIC REVIEW ON THAT REVISED EIR. 
          OKAY. 
          DOES THAT, OKAY, WE'RE STILL ON CULTURAL, I THINK  ANY FURTHER. 
          TO ADD A FURTHER POINT ON THERE, WE AS PLANNING COMMISSION CAN REQUEST TO SEE THE, THE FEIR IF COUNSEL DIRECTS TO PER, TO TAKE A RESOLUTION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH AN FEIR. 
          WE CAN REQUEST TO SEE THAT AGAIN RIGHT NOW IN THE PROCESS WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          WE CAN REQUEST, BUT LOCAL C GUIDELINES DON'T REQUIRE IT, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, BUT THAT'S FINE. 
          NO, THAT WOULD BE INCORRECT. 
          THE LOCAL, THE LOCAL GUIDELINES SET UP THE REQUEST TO REVIEW THE FINAL EIR, NOT NOT STATE SQA GUIDELINES. 
          SO IT'S IN OUR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES THAT GIVES PLANNING COMMISSION THE, UH, THE AUTHORITY TO REQUEST TO REVIEW A FINAL EIR TO TO REQUEST. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT IT'S NOT GUARANTEED WE , WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK THROUGH THAT. 
          I MEAN, RIGHT. 
          I THINK TECHNICALLY THE LANGUAGE SAYS IT'S NOT GUARANTEED. 
          OKAY. 
          JUST 'CAUSE IT CAME UP WITH CREEKWOOD TOO, SO I WASN'T SURE WHERE I LANDED. 
          WAIT ON THAT. 
          SORRY. 
          ON THAT NOTE, CAN WE, IN WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION WE GIVE TONIGHT, CAN WE PUT THAT REQUEST IN PROACTIVELY? YEAH. 
          JOT IT DOWN AS AN AMENDMENT AND WE'LL GET THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND YOU'LL RECALL CREEKWOOD WAS A UNIQUE ONE JUST WITH THE HAA HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT AND THE FIVE HEARING LIMITS. 
          SO, GOOD POINT. 
          BUT YES. 
          COOL. 
          THEN YEAH, WE CAN NOTE THAT FOR AN AMENDMENT FOR OUR RESOLUTION. 
          ANYTHING FURTHER ON CULTURAL RESOURCES, TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. 
          OKAY. 
          ONTO LAND USE AND PLANNING DISCUSSION POINTS, LAND USE PLAN. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER ACKERSON. 
          YEAH, I'LL BRING THIS UP HERE 'CAUSE I, I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE. 
          UM, THIS IS KIND OF A BIG OVERARCHING PIECE FOR ME, AND THIS IS ABOUT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. 
          SO THE EIR OBVIOUSLY REVIEWS THE PROJECT IN LIGHT OF OUR CURRENT GENERAL PLAN. 
          THAT'S THE PETALUMA 2025 GENERAL PLAN. 
          UH, SO JUST READING FOR MY NOTES HERE, AGAIN, I'LL BE SUBMITTING ALL THESE TO THE PROCESS, THE OVERLAY IN HOTEL CONFLICT WITH MANY GOALS AND POLICIES IN PETALUMA'S GENERAL PLAN 2025, INCLUDING, AND THEY'RE NOT OBSESSED WITH HEIGHT IN THERE, I WANNA POINT THAT OUT. 
          BUT INCLUDING FOUNDATIONAL GUIDANCE REGARDING FAR LIMITS, WHOSE IMPORTANCE IS CONSISTENTLY REINFORCED IN THE LAND USE AND DOWNTOWN SECTIONS OF THE DOCUMENT. 
          THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES WITH OTHER GOALS AND POLICIES IN GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS ONE, TWO, AND THREE AND I SUMMARIZE THOSE. 
          AND THEN I DO A BREAKDOWN OF TABLE 3.33, WHICH IS THE CONSISTENCY TABLE TO ANALYZE EVERY ITEM PRESENTED IN THE DRAFT EIR. 
          BUT TO PULL OUT ELEMENT ONE FOR LAND USE GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FROM GENERAL PLAN 2025, JUST FAR LIMITS. 
          SO THE PETALUMA LIMITS, UH, PETALUMA GENERAL PLAN LIMITS FAR 
          [03:55:01]
TO 2.5 WITHIN THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USES IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA. 
          SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE SEEKING TO DRAMATICALLY INCREASE FAR WITH THIS PROJECT, BUT IT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CONTEXT IN THE GENERAL PLAN SECTION ON LAND USE. 
          UH, AND THIS IS A QUOTE, FAR IS A BROAD MEASURE OF BUILDING BULK THAT CONTROLS BOTH VISUAL PROMINENCE AND TRAFFIC GENERATION. 
          THE FAR STANDARDS CAN BE CLEARLY TRANSLATED TO A LIMIT ON BUILDING BULK IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND IS INDEPENDENT OF THE TYPE OF USE OCCUPYING THE BUILDING. 
          SO THAT READS TO ME LIKE IT'S DESIGNED INTENTIONALLY TO LIMIT BULK IN THE AREAS DESIGNATED IN THE DOWNTOWN. 
          UM, FURTHER WE HAVE DISCUSSION OF INTENSITY LIMITS. 
          SO THE DENSITY AND INTENSITY STANDARDS, THIS IS AGAIN A QUOTE, DO NOT IMPLY THAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WILL BE APPROVED AT THE MAXIMUM DENSITY OR INTENSITY SPECIFIED FOR EACH USE. 
          DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLAN POLICIES MAY REDUCE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL. 
          AND THEN IN THAT ELEMENT ONE, POLICY ONE P ONE, WHICH IS REFERENCED AS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN IN THE EIRI READ MORE IN THAT SECTION, ESPECIALLY THE ACTIONS UNDER THAT POLICY. 
          AND IT STATES PRETTY CLEARLY MAINTAIN BOTH MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES AS STIPULATED IN THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS. 
          SO FOR ME, THIS IS A PRETTY STRONG STATEMENT THAT, AGAIN, IT'S NOT AN OBSESSION WITH HEIGHT, BUT THIS FAR PIECE IS CONSISTENTLY REFERENCED THESE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES AND THEY ARE SEEN AS A LIMIT THAT SERVES A VERY DEFINITIVE PURPOSE IN OUR GENERAL PLAN. 
          UH, THEN JUST AGAIN, SUMMARIZING COMMUNITY DESIGN AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THOSE ARE ELEMENTS TWO AND THREE. 
          THE DOWNTOWN IS DESCRIBED AS A DESTINATION IN THE CITY AND A HUB OF COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL ACTIVITY. 
          IT IS THE SPECIAL PLACE MOST FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED BY RESIDENTS AND PLANNING WORKSHOPS. 
          THE AREA IS MARKED BY HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND A WALKABLE STREET SCALE. 
          UH, FURTHER WE HAVE ANOTHER QUOTE, UH, IN A SUBSECTION OF THE ELEMENT THAT IT SAYS DOWNTOWN'S UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS, HISTORIC, HISTORIC BUILDINGS, THE RIVER AND PEDESTRIAN SCALE MAKE IT A DESTINATION POINT WITH VISITORS AND RESIDENTS ALIKE. 
          THE GENERAL PLAN ENVISIONS PRESERVING AND ENHANCING THESE FEATURES IN ORDER TO CREATE A VIBRANT MIXED USE CENTER. 
          UH, SO THEN IN POLICY TWO P FIVE, WHICH I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S REFERENCED IN THE TABLE, I'D HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK, BUT I BELIEVE IT IS WHEN IT COMES TO IMPROVING ARTERIAL CORRIDORS. 
          SO UNDER POLICY TWO P FIVE, THAT AGAIN IS REFERENCED AS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THIS PROJECT. 
          THERE'S FURTHER CLARIFICATION SAYING INTENSIFICATION VIA INFILLING ORIENTATION OF FACADES TOWARD THE STREET APPROPRIATE BUILDING HEIGHT AND INTERIOR PARKING LOT CONFIGURATION ON THE PARCEL ARE SPECIFIED. 
          UH, I, I AM NOT GONNA READ THROUGH EVERY QUOTE I HAVE IN HERE, BUT IN READING THAT GENERAL PLAN, THERE IS A DEFINITE ERROR THAT FAR IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. 
          BUILDING MASS ESPECIALLY WAS TAKEN VERY SERIOUSLY IN PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          AND I THINK BY PUTTING FORWARD A PROJECT IN THE OVERLAY THAT BRINGS OUR FAR FROM 2.5 TO SIX, IT'S DIRECTLY CONTRAINDICATED BY SOME OF THE MOST FOUNDATIONAL PARTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, I REVIEWED THE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY TABLE THAT WE HAVE. 
          UM, AND I'VE GOT A LOT OF NOTES ABOUT THAT, ABOUT WHETHER THINGS ARE CONSISTENT, WHETHER THEY'RE APPLICABLE. 
          SO I'M PUTTING THAT IN LAND USE. 
          'CAUSE I THINK SOME OF THE FOUNDATIONAL ISSUES ARE IN LAND USE AND PLANNING, BUT I THINK THIS IS A REALLY BIG ISSUE TO ASSESS WITH THE EIR IS, IS THIS, HAVE WE SUFFICIENTLY DEMONSTRATED THIS PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT GENERAL PLAN, NOT THE ONE WE'RE WORKING ON, BUT THE CURRENT ONE. 
          UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S A BIG QUESTION I WANTED TO RAISE. 
          AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THE PERFECT TIME, BUT I THINK THIS IS A, A GOOD TIME TO RAISE IT. 
          I'LL JUMP IN. 
          UM, SO I THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO RAISE IT AS YOU KNOW AND HAVE BEEN WELL ENGAGED IN, WE ARE GOING THROUGH A, A GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROCESS. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, AS WE ARE GETTING TO THE, UM, AND THIS IS NO DISRESPECT OR JUST NO, UM, MINIMIZING OUR EXISTING GENERAL PLAN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING PLAN ADOPTED IN OH EIGHT, IT'S BEEN A NUMBER OF YEARS AND UH, FOR A LOT OF GOOD REASONS, UM, OUR CITY, OUR COUNCIL HAS MOVED US FORWARD TO UPDATE, UM, AND DO A COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT YES, TO SEE THE CONTEXT OF THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN, BUT ALSO, UM, THE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS, THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT ARE DRIVING THAT ARE THE DRIVING FORCE FOR THE UPDATE. 
          UM, 
          [04:00:01]
WHICH I DO BELIEVE, UM, WE ARE, UM, IN ALIGNMENT WITH. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE IN THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS WHERE, UM, WE ARE WANTING TO DO THE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE. 
          WE HAVE THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN, SO HOW DO WE STRIKE THAT BALANCE AND, UM, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING AND WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED, UM, OVER THIS PAST YEAR, UM, WE BELIEVE DOES STRIKE THAT BALANCE. 
          NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT'S UP FOR DEBATE AND DISCUSSION, BUT UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE CONTEXT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IT COMPREHENSIVELY. 
          UM, AND SO THOSE ARE IMPORTANT COMPONENTS. 
          THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE GUIDING US NOW, BUT IT'S ALSO A BALANCE THAT WE'RE STRIKING WITH, UM, THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD A COUPLE THINGS. 
          YEAH, DARREN TOTALLY, I THINK THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO BRING IT UP. 
          UH, THE, OUR GENERAL PLAN THAT'S AT THE TOP OF OUR LAND USE HIERARCHY, SO WE NEED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ANY AMENDMENTS OR ZONING CODE THINGS THAT WE DO ENTITLEMENTS. 
          UM, THIS IS GOING THROUGH A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, AND THE CASE LAW IS PRETTY CLEAR TOO, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERY SINGLE PLAN AND POLICY IN YOUR GENERAL PLAN. 
          UH, SO WHEN, IF IT COMES BACK, I'M SURE WE WILL BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT IS CONSISTENT AND WHERE IT ISN'T. 
          UM, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S YOUR CALL AND THAT NEEDS TO BE, THEY HAVE CHALLENGED JUST SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, UH, TO MAKE THAT FINDING. 
          AND THEN I WILL ADD, THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE DOES HAVE A SUNSET FOR WHEN THAT NEW GENERAL PLAN ZONING CODE, UH, IS IMPLEMENTED. 
          SO I THINK A LOT THAT WE'VE SEEN RIGHT NOW IN OUR GENERAL PLAN PROCESS, UH, URBANIZATION, ESPECIALLY NEAR THE SMART STATIONS. 
          UH, SO THAT IS KINDA REFLECTED. 
          SO THIS IS SORT OF JUST I THINK A, ALMOST A TRIAL TEST RUN HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY A QUESTION. 
          UM, I'M STILL TROUBLED BY THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT ONE OVERLAY, UM, PLANNING OVERLAY ZONE THAT TALKS ABOUT A MAXIMUM OF 30 UNITS PER ACRE, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UM, AND THE, THE REST OF IT IS OFFICE OR I MEAN SOME OTHER LAND USE AND I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT THAT WOULD BE IN THIS WORLD. 
          SO YOU HAVE THREE STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE OTHER THREE STORIES? I MEAN, SO SOMETHING'S MISSING IN THE LOGIC OF WHAT, WHAT THE OVERLAY'S TRYING TO ACHIEVE IN MY MIND. 
          THEN PARALLEL TO THAT, WE HAVE A LAND UA FRAMEWORK, UH, PROJECT GOING ON. 
          IT WAS TALKED ABOUT 6 60, 50, 60 UNITS PER ACRE, SIX OR SEVEN STORY RESIDENTIAL BEING A CRITICAL SORT, UH, KIND OF RESCUE TO SAVING PETALUMA. 
          SO SOMEHOW I THINK THESE TWO NEED TO BE CLOSER TOGETHER BECAUSE I MEAN, YOU CAN'T, I CAN'T UNDERSTAND FALLING ONE OVERLAY IDEA AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. 
          BUT OVER HERE WE HAVE A WHOLE DIFFERENT OVERLAY IDEA AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL, YOU DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, IT'LL, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL IS NOT, UH, GOING TO SAY WE DON'T NEED PARKING BECAUSE IN ORDER TO RENT A BUILDING, YOU NEED TO PROVIDE A PARKING SPACE. 
          SO SOMEHOW ALL THIS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE DO DOVE UH, DOVETAILED WELL, AND THEN OF COURSE, HOW DO YOU TRANSITION THE LAND USE FRAMEWORK PROCESS THAT'S GOING ON NOW TO THE OVERLAY THING, WHICH HAS, WHICH ARE DIFFERENT PROPOSALS. 
          UM, SO WHY CAN'T WE MAKE 'EM THE SAME PROPOSAL OR WHY DON'T WE MAKE 'EM THE SAME PROPOSAL? ANOTHER GREAT QUESTION. 
          UM, AT SOME POINT WE WOULD WANT TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY. 
          UM, WHAT WE DO HAVE AT THE MOMENT, WE THE LAND USE FRAMEWORK AS, AS YOU KNOW, UM, COMMISSIONER, UM, WE JUST RELEASED THAT, RIGHT? SO WE'RE AT THE, THE START OF THAT PROCESS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE, UH, KICKED, IT KICKED OFF, UH, OPEN HOUSE, UH, PUBLIC DISCUSSION PROCESS OVER THE WEEKEND. 
          WE'VE BEEN HOLDING A NUMBER OF POPUPS, BUT THIS IS GONNA BE ITERATIVE. 
          IT'S GOING TO HAVE A LONGER TAIL. 
          UM, AND YOU ARE CORRECT, THE GENERAL PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE IS GONNA BE MORE COMPREHENSIVE. 
          IT'S GOING TO LOOK AT BROADER CHANGES, UM, THROUGHOUT THE CITY. 
          IT'S GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW PROCESS AND IT WILL HAVE ITS OWN, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING. 
          UM, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MARRY THE TWO AS BEST WE CAN WITH THE IDEA THAT WE'RE GONNA WANT CONSISTENCY, UM, UH, WHEN THE TIME COMES. 
          BUT WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US AT THE MOMENT IS A DISCUSSION ON THE OVERLAY. 
          UM, AND WE'VE BEEN GETTING A LOT OF ROBUST FEEDBACK ON IT. 
          UM, AND I THINK WE'RE MAKING SOME PROGRESS. 
          I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF REALLY GREAT FEEDBACK AND INPUT TODAY ON, UH, THE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS OR, UM, 
          [04:05:01]
PLACES WE CAN STRENGTHEN, UM, THE, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND THE ANALYSIS. 
          AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL THAT, UH, BACK AND, AND MAKE, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'LL MAKE FOR A BETTER PRODUCT. 
          FURTHER QUESTION ON, UH, ON THE LAND USE, THE, UH, I BELIEVE FOR, FOR RESIDENTIAL, THE REQUIREMENT IS, UH, FIVE ACRES PER THOUSAND POPULATION FOR, FOR PARKS, UM, OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF PARKS. 
          BUT FIVE ACRES PER THOUSAND POPULATION IS THE REC IS THE STANDARD. 
          IF YOU LOOK AT THE 12 ACRES AT 30 UNITS PER ACRE, IT'S LIKE 360 UNITS, NOT A, NOT A BIG NUMBER FOR ALL THE WORK WE'RE GOING THROUGH FOR 12 ACRES, BUT THAT'S TWO, THAT'S A COUPLE ACRES OF PARK REQUIREMENTS. 
          NOTHING'S BEEN MENTIONED ABOUT HOW THAT'S ESTABLISHED OR WHERE IT GOES OR WHO'S RESPONSIBLE. 
          UH, IT, TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE BUILT IN WHERE THE DENSITIES ARE IS ACHIEVED. 
          UH, IF WE HAVE, IF WE HAVE ACRES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RIVER, BUT THAT WE HAVE, WE'RE OVER PARKED, THEREFORE THAT COVERS IT. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD BE THE SOLUTION. 
          SO HOW DO WE GET THE PARK REQUIREMENTS LOCATION TO BE PART OF THIS KIND OF OVERLAY REQUIREMENT? BECAUSE IT'S GONNA TAKE SOMEBODY'S LAND AND IT SHOULD BE AN URBAN PARK THAT WORKS FOR THE PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN HIGHER DENSITY PROJECTS THAT BENEFITS DOWNTOWN. 
          SO IT SEEMED LIKE A BIG URBAN DESIGN THING THAT IS MISSING. 
          UM, SO I I, IF I'M HEARING, UM, AND UNDERSTANDING THE COMMENT, COMMISSIONER, UH, HOW DO WE APPLY THE STANDARD, UH, PER, YOU KNOW, PER CAPITA ON OPEN SPACE, UM, THAT MAY BE MORE CITYWIDE AND HAVE IT MORE FOCUSED, UM, WITHIN THE OVERLAY? IS THAT, DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? YOU GET THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS GENERATING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARK, FOR THE PARKS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD WANNA, UH, BUILD IN STANDARDS, RIGHT? I THINK THIS WAS ALSO THIS, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE KIND OF GOING OUTTA BOUNDS HERE, BUT UH, WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION AROUND OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, THIS QUESTION ABOUT, UM, HOW DO WE STANDARDIZE A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE OR PARK SPACE, UH, WITHIN A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, UH, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, AROUND THAT TOPIC. 
          UM, AND SO WHEN YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE LAND IT, WE DID HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, UM, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OBJECT OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          UM, IF THERE ARE, AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CUP JUST GOING BACK TO NOVEMBER, UH, SOME FORM OF THIS, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE, UM, SEATED THIS EVENING, UM, MADE A RECOMMENDATION, UM, ON THOSE FINDINGS AND THE OVERLAY TO, TO MOVE THAT FORWARD TO COUNCIL. 
          UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS CHANGED FROM THEN TO NOW IS WE HAVE A NEW DOCUMENT, UM, THAT GIVES US MORE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION. 
          UM, AND SO I, I DO THINK IT'S REASONABLE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW INFORMATION THAT, UM, WE HAD PUBLISHED IN THE EIR, UH, TO REOPEN THAT CONVERSATION, UM, TO, IN THE CONTEXT OF, UM, HOW DO WE MITIGATE THOSE IMPACTS. 
          YOU KNOW, WE KEEP TALKING TODAY ABOUT THIS EVENING ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE INADEQUACY OF THE CUP, UM, BUT THAT AGAIN WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL. 
          AND THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY, UM, WITH THIS NEW INFORMATION IN HAND, UH, TO MAKE THOSE REVISIONS. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING, UM, TO THIS GROUP. 
          UM, AND YOUR LEADERSHIP, UH, I COULD OFFER A COUPLE OTHER POINTS TO ADDRESS, UH, COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND'S QUESTION ON PARKS IF, UH, THAT, OKAY, SO, UH, FIRST OF ALL, AGAIN, UNDER THE OVERLAY, THE DENSITY IS NOT CHANGING. 
          SO THE GENERAL PLAN HAS COVERED AND ANTICIPATED, UM, THE POPULATION AND THE PARKLAND ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 
          AND I'LL JUST POINT YOU TO, UM, PAGE FOUR DASH 64 OF THE EIR, WHICH STATES THAT THE EXISTING PARKLAND RATIO IN THE CITY IS 9.3 ACRES PER 1000 RESIDENTS, AND THE STANDARD IS FIVE ACRES. 
          SO WE ARE MEETING AND EXCEEDING THAT. 
          AND THEN FURTHERMORE, UM, THE, FOR PROJECTS THAT GO ABOVE THE 60 FEET, UH, REQUIREMENT THAT ADDITIONAL FINDINGS, UM, AND COMMUNITY AMENITIES MUST BE MADE. 
          AND ONE OF THOSE IS TO PROVIDE THAT PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE OPEN SPACE. 
          SO TO GET AT, UM, A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT 
          [04:10:01]
YOU RAISED, I WANTED TO OFFER THOSE ADDITIONAL POINTS OF CONSIDERATION, ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY ON LAND USE AND PLANNING CHAIR WILLY. 
          OKAY, I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK, BUT, UM, I DID WANT TO GO BACK TO, UM, THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS AND UM, UH, I DO THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, PART OF THIS PROBABLY COMES FROM THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO COMBINE THE OVERLAY IN THE HOTEL INTO A SINGLE EIR, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT KIND OF UNDERMINES THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE LOOKED AT. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, NOWHERE IS THERE REALLY A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION MADE FOR CHANGING THE PROPOSED HOTEL LOCATION. 
          AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A SEVERE DEFICIENCY OF THE EIR. 
          I KNOW THAT THE EIR PROCESS DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO LOOK AT ALL ALTERNATIVES, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WAY THAT THE, UM, PROPOSED HOTEL LOCATIONS ARE WRITTEN OFF IS JUST, OH, THEY'RE JUST NOT REASONABLE. 
          IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS REASONABLE IN THIS SITUATION? UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY ZONES IN THE, IN THE A, B, C AREAS. 
          UM, WHY ARE THOSE NOT CONSIDERED POTENTIAL HOTEL LOCATIONS? UM, YOU KNOW, IT, WE ARE, WE'RE WORKING IN THE DARK WITH UNDERSTANDING THE APPLICANT'S FINANCIALS IN THIS SITUATION. 
          UM, YEAH, MAYBE IT'S NOT PROFITABLE FOR THEM TO MOVE, MOVE THAT LOCATION, BUT SAY THAT IN THE EIR THERE HAS TO BE SOME UNDERSTANDING FOR, UM, WHY AN ALTERNATE LOCATION HASN'T BEEN, UM, LOOKED AT. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I I REALLY DON'T THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE THE EIR IF IT DOESN'T LOOK AT ALTERNATE LOCATIONS BECAUSE I'M NOT AGAINST THE HOTEL. 
          I LIKE THE HOTEL GENERALLY, I JUST DON'T LIKE IT IN THAT LOCATION. 
          IT DOESN'T WORK THERE. 
          IT'S TOO, THE SCALE IS TOO LARGE. 
          SO, UM, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S CLEAR IF A REAL EVALUATION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS DONE RATHER THAN LOOK AT THE HOTEL AS IF, OH, YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE IMMEDIATE, UM, RESOURCES IN THAT AREA, A LOOK AT THE DISTRICT AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF THIS BIG HOTEL ON THE DISTRICT? AND THAT ISN'T DONE. 
          SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, INSUFFICIENT AS WELL. 
          UM, BUT, UM, I, YEAH, ANYWAY, YOU KNOW THIS, THERE'S SOME DEFICIENCIES IN THE CIR WITH REGARD TO THAT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS AS WELL, AND THAT TIES INTO THE WHOLE, UH, LAND USE AND PLANNING PORTION OF IT. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THE ERR IS NOT MAKING AN ARGUMENT FOR THE BENEFITS OF, OF CHOOSING EITHER THE, EITHER THE OVERLAY OR THE HOTEL, BUT, UM, TO LOOK AT THOSE, UM, ADVERSE IMPACTS OR THE POTENTIALLY MITIGATED ADVERSE IMPACTS, UM, IN AN ISOLATED CONTEXT AND, AND, UM, MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT, UM, ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ARE GOING TO EVOLVE THERE JUST BECAUSE THERE'S AN OVER OVERLAY. 
          I MEAN, THE REAL QUESTION IS THESE, IF WE PUT THIS OVERLAY IN, IN THE HOTEL IN, IN THIS LOCATION, IS THAT GOING TO GET RID OF THE CHAIN LINK FENCES? I DON'T THINK SO. 
          YOU KNOW, , THAT'S NOT, UH, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE CAUSES OF THOSE CHAIN LINK FENCES BEING THERE IS AND CHANGING THE FAR AND THE, AND THE, UM, HEIGHT REGULATIONS. 
          I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THAT'S WHAT'S PREVENTING THESE, UH, VACANT LOTS FROM BEING DEVELOPED. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE EIR ISN'T MAKING A GOOD CASE FOR THAT. 
          THE APPLICANT'S NOT MAKING A GOOD CASE FOR THAT. 
          I DON'T SEE ANY REASON FOR THE, UM, OVERLAY OTHER THAN TO ALLOW THE HOTEL TO EXIST AND TO CALL IT AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. 
          UM, ZONE IS, IS IN MY MIND, IT'S LIKE, IT'S, IT'S A NON-SEQUITUR. 
          IT DOESN'T EQUATE, I JUST DON'T SEE WHAT THE EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT IS FOR THESE ASSUMED BENEFITS. 
          SO I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE I, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S, UM, A LOT OF DEFICIENCIES IN THIS EIR THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AND, UM, THAT RE RELATES TO THE LAND USE AND PLANNING ISSUES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, JUST, I'M GONNA BUILD OFF OF THIS REALLY QUICK. 
          WELL, NO, YOU GO AHEAD BLAKE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UM, TO THAT POINT AND AN ACTUAL ALTERNATIVES, WHICH I HAVE TO SAY I WAS ALSO A BIT TAKEN ABACK THAT THERE WASN'T, THAT IT'S BEEN IN EVERY OTHER DRAFT WE'VE LOOKED AT FOR OTHER PROJECTS, UH, THE CHANGE TO THE THE FAR IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO GRAPPLE WITH AT TIMES. 
          IT IS EASIER TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS A TEST TO SEE WHAT IS VIABLE FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD, OR FOR HOWEVER LONG UNTIL THE, THE NEW GENERAL PLAN COMES FORWARD, 
          [04:15:01]
IT'S EASIER TO GO ALONG WITH THAT IF THERE'S A SERIOUS ALTERNATIVES REVIEW, BECAUSE PART BECAUSE YOU'RE SHOWING THE GOOD FAITH OF SAYING, HEY, UM, WE ARE TRYING SOMETHING NEW AND WE SHOULD, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT GUIDELINES AND OTHER THINGS. 
          WE SHOULD HAVE SERIOUS PROCESS FOR WHAT THAT DESIGN LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT, HOW THAT'S APPROVED AND ALL OF THAT. 
          BUT THEN AGAIN, GOING TO THE FAIRNESS OF IT, WE'RE ALSO DOING A SERIOUS LOOK AT WHAT THOSE ALTERNATIVE SITES ARE. 
          AND, AND TO THAT DEGREE ALSO, WHAT DESIGNS ARE WAY, ARE FRANKLY LESS DIFFICULT TO PRODUCE IN SOME OF THOSE SITES. 
          SO I THINK IF WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH THIS IDEA OF FAR OF AMENDING THE FAR STRUGGLING WITH THIS IDEA OF HOW DO WE GO IN GOOD FAITH WITH, UH, REALLY A TEST, WELL THEN IT'S ONLY FAIR THAT WE HAVE A SERIOUS ALTERNATIVE USE, UH, APPLIED IN THE EIR. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, JUST BUILDING OFF THE COMMENTARY WE'VE HAD AROUND THE ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS, I'D APPRECIATE SOME COMMENTARY FROM STAFF JUST FOR THE RECORD, ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS AND SORT OF HOW WE DEAL WITH THOSE, UM, IN OUR PLANNING AND IN CQA AS WELL AS, UM, ANY COMMENTARY YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER ON THE DUE PROCESS REQUIRED FOR APPLICANTS THAT MAY HAVE, UH, INFLUENCED THE REVIEW PROCESS, THE COMBINING OF THE OVERLAY, AND, UH, SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, I THINK, UH, SINCE DUE PROCESS SORT OF STEMS OR, OR IS PROCEDURALLY RELATED TO PROPERTY RIGHTS? I'LL START WITH WITH PROPERTY RIGHTS. 
          SO YOU'D, WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE BUNDLE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT THE ARE AFFORDED TO PROPERTY OWNERS THROUGH THE DERIVED FROM THE US CONSTITUTION, WE THINK ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THAT BUNDLE OF RIGHTS ALLOWS A PROPERTY OWNER TO DO, OR LIMITS WHAT A PROPERTY OWNER CAN DO. 
          SO IT ALLOWS THEM TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY FOR ECONOMIC GAIN. 
          IT ALLOWS THEM TO SELL THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, TRANSACT AND SO FORTH. 
          SO, SO THOSE RIGHTS ARE SHAPED BY THE REGULATIONS THAT WE APPLY TO IT LOCALLY. 
          AND WHEN WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT COMES BEFORE YOU FOR SPAR OR FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, WE'RE LOOKING AT EXPANDING THOSE PROPERTY RIGHTS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT LOCAL REGULATIONS WILL ALLOW YOU TO DECIDE TO DO THROUGH THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS. 
          PERHAPS SIMILARLY, WE ACTUALLY CONTRACTED THE PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE CASE OF, UH, ROARING DONKEY BY TAKING AWAY THE, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RIGHTS. 
          SO RATHER THAN TYPICALLY WE'RE EXPANDING IN THAT CASE, WE WERE RETRACTING OR, OR SHRINKING THOSE RIGHTS. 
          BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT THAT BUNDLE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THINK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING, WE'RE WE'RE TYPICALLY RESPONDING WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO MODIFY IN SOME WAY THE RIGHTS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THEIR, WITH THEIR PROPERTY. 
          SO, AND, AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE TALKED, AND I, AND, AND WE'VE SHARED THIS WITH ALL OF EVERYONE NOW ON THE, THE COMMISSION AND, AND HCPC THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN ESTABLISHED PROCESS AS QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS FOR LOOKING AT THAT EXPANSION OR CONTRACTION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS. 
          WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE WITH THE OVER, WELL, WE'RE DOING BOTH THOUGH, BUT WITH THE OVERLAY, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE ESTABLISHING THOSE BOUNDARIES. 
          WE'RE ESTABLISHING THAT PATHWAY FOR THE EXPANSION, THE POTENTIAL EXPANSION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS. 
          WE'RE CREATING AN APPROACH OR THE PARAMETERS THROUGH WHICH THROUGH A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, WE'RE CREATING THE APPROACH OR PARAMETERS THROUGH WHICH IN A SUBSEQUENT PROCESS, QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS, YOU CAN THEN ACTUALLY EXPAND OR CONTRACT THOSE PROPERTY RIGHTS. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE OVERLAY PROCESS, IN, IN REVIEW OF THE OVERLAY, WHICH IS A LEGISLATIVE ACTION, WHICH CREATES THE FRAMEWORK, THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK UNDER WHICH YOU MAY COME BACK LATER ON THROUGH A QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS AND ACTUALLY MAKE A DECISION TO EXPAND A PERSON'S RIGHT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY THE WAY THEY CHOOSE. 
          SO THAT'S IN, IN THE NUTSHELL WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH PROPERTY RIGHTS AS IT RELATES TO BOTH THE OVERLAY AND THE, UM, THE EKN APPALACHIAN HOTEL PROJECT. 
          SO THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DYLAN TO TALK ABOUT DUE PROCESS AND HOW WE DO THAT THEN PROCEDURALLY THROUGH SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. 
          YEAH, JUST REAL QUICK. 
          SO DUE PROCESS THERE, IT'S BOTH SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS AND PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. 
          SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS IS REALLY WHEN THE CITY'S WORKING IN THEIR LEGISLATIVE CAPACITY AND THEY'RE CREATING ZONING REGULATIONS, 
          [04:20:01]
AND I REALLY, UNLESS WE ARE INFRINGING ON FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, UH, FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS, THEN WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE A RATIONAL BASIS FOR THOSE LEGISLATIONS. 
          SO, UH, RATIONAL BASIS THAT IT IS IN THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY AND THE POPULATION'S HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE. 
          SO THAT'S A VERY, VERY LOW BAR. 
          THAT'S SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS. 
          PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS IS WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER APPLIES FOR A PERMIT OR A ZONING CHANGE, UH, AND JUST PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. 
          IT'S REALLY THREE THINGS. 
          ONE IS NOTICE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE DAYS TO PREPARE. 
          TWO IS THAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF YOU AND JUST LAY OUT THEIR CASE. 
          AND THIRD IS THAT IT'S A NEUTRAL, UH, UNBIASED, UH, ARBITRATOR. 
          SO THAT'S PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO KNOW, CHAIR, OR THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          I APPRECIATE IT. 
          UM, I, I KNOW WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS HAS UNFOLDED AND THE ADDITIONAL PROCESS TO COME, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAKE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THIS IS THE, NOT GONNA BE THE LAST TIME YOU HEAR ABOUT THIS . 
          UM, THERE'S, THERE'S STILL PROCESS TO GO, UM, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THAT DUE PROCESS FOR THE APPLICANT AS WE DO FOR ALL OF OUR PROJECTS THAT COME FORWARD AND OUGHT TO, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANNA BE DISCRIMINATING ON PROJECTS THAT COME ACROSS OUR DESK. 
          UM, ANY OTHER LAND USE PLANNING COMMENTARY. 
          OKAY. 
          INTO QUESTIONS ON ADDITIONAL EFFECTS, EVALUATED OR, SORRY, COMMENTS ON ADDITIONAL EFFECTS EVALUATED IN THE, UM, INITIAL STUDY, OTHER OTHER SE TOPIC AREAS. 
          YOU WANNA, IF WE MIGHT TAKE A PAUSE AND DO THE VOTE TO GO PAST 11? OH, SURE. 
          WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. 
          LET'S DO, THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL DO THAT QUICKLY. 
          UM, COULD I GET A MOTION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING PASSED. 
          11, PLEASE. 
          SO MOVED. 
          AND A SECOND. 
          UH, LET'S DO A VOTE, PLEASE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRY? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER MACALLAN? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER NEWELL. 
          ABSENT. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CATER THOMPSON? YES. 
          CHAIR MOSES. 
          YES. 
          AND THEN I'LL ALSO DO, UH, THAT VOTE AS WELL WITH HCPC, UM, COMMITTEE MEMBER BARCLAY SAXON. 
          YES. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER LOPEZ. 
          ABSENT CO COMMITTEE MEMBER PENGA? YES. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER JENSEN? YES. 
          CHAIR WHITLEY, IF WE HAVE TO. 
          YES, IT IS APPROVED. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          NOW, INTO ADDITIONAL EFFECTS EVALUATED IN THE INITIAL STUDY, WHICH I EXPECT YOU'D LIKE TO KICK IT OFF, COMMISSIONER FRE FINISH. 
          UM, WHEN I LEFT OFF, UM, WE HAD, I HAD SAID THAT MY GUESS WOULD BE THE TOTAL VEHICLES WOULD EXCEED 150, MIGHT GO TO 200 DAILY ON FRIDAYS AND, AND OR SATURDAYS. 
          AND THEN I WANTED TO START LOOKING AT WHERE ARE THESE VEHICLES GOING TO PARK. 
          UM, THEY HAVE SUGGESTED AN UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE, VERY EXPENSIVE TO BUILD, UM, BUT IT QUALIFIES THEM FOR HIRE STORIES AND BUILDING HIKES. 
          AND THE GARAGE IS PROJECTED TO HOLD 58 VEHICLES, BUT IT'S NOT 58 VEHICLES THAT ARE VISITORS TO OUR TOWN. 
          IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE PART OF THE STAFF. 
          UM, I CAN'T SEE THE EXECUTIVE CHEF OR THE RESTAURANT MANAGER, OR THE HOTEL MANAGER OR SEVERAL OTHER, UM, STAFF MEMBERS WHO ARE GONNA LOOK FOR PARKING SPOTS OUT ON THE STREET SOMEWHERE. 
          SO MY GUESS IS THAT ABOUT 18 OF THOSE PARKING SPOTS WILL BE USED UP, UH, ALSO FOR THE HOTEL VANS, AND THAT WILL LEAVE US ABOUT 40 PARKING SPOTS. 
          THE OTHER PARKING AREA THAT THEY HAVE WORKED OUT IS A, UH, USE OF 20 PARKING SPOTS IN THE THEATER PARKING GARAGE, WHICH ARE SCHEDULED TO BE MARKED HOTEL PARKING ONLY. 
          UM, SO THAT GIVES US ANOTHER 20 PARKING SPOTS. 
          THAT'S 60 PARKING SPOTS FOR 150 TO 200 POSSIBLE VEHICLES. 
          SO WHERE ELSE IN THE CITY CAN WE USE THE, A STREET PARKING GARAGE? WELL, THAT WAS BUILT IN 19, OR PARKING LOT WAS PUT TOGETHER IN 1949, AND IT'S ALREADY HAS A NUMBER OF RESTRICTED NAMED INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE PARKING SPOTS THERE. 
          AND IT DOES PROVIDE A GENERAL DOWNTOWN PARKING AREA. 
          THERE'S 
          [04:25:01]
THE EMPTY BANK PARKING LOT NEXT TO THE HOTEL. 
          THERE'S CITY STREETS. 
          KEEP IN MIND THAT THE MILL AREA PARKING AND THE SUGO AREA PARKING ARE BOTH PRIVATE LOTS AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC THERE, FOR THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE THERE TO FURTHER COMPLICATE VEHICLE TRAFFIC AND PARKING. 
          THEY HAVE STATED THAT THEY WILL REMOVE CARS, UM, THAT ARE NOT, THAT ARE ILLEGALLY PARKED IN THOSE AREAS. 
          UM, THE HOTEL HAS SAID THAT THEY WILL HAVE VALET PARKING AT THE, THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE HOTEL, AND THEY HAVE STATED THAT THERE WILL FOUR OR FIVE VALETS AVAILABLE AT BUSY TIMES, BUT THERE'S NO ACTUAL PLAN TO WHERE OR HOW SAFE IT IS TO MOVE ALL THESE MULTIPLE GUESTS AND PATRON CARS ON A BUSY PETALUMA BOULEVARD AND A VERY NARROW B STREET. 
          THERE'S ALSO ONE VALET DESIGNATED PARKING SPOT FOR DISABILITY. 
          I THINK IT'S TOO LITTLE OF THAT, BUT THAT'S MY USUAL COMPLAINT TO FINALIZE MY QUESTION REGARDING VEHICLES, TRAFFICS AND PARKING. 
          THERE'S THE PROBLEM OF ADDITIONAL QUESTION REGARDING THE VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC AND PARKING, WHICH INVOLVES THE CONSTRUCTION. 
          THIS CONSTRUCTION IS SLATED TO BE 19 MONTHS. 
          THE PROJECTED PARKING PROBLEM DURING THAT CONSTRUCTION TIME IS WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THESE CONSTRUCTION SITE EMPLOYEES? THE CONTRACTORS GENERALLY HAVE WORK TRUCKS, UM, AND THEY WILL BE AROUND FOR THOSE 19 MONTHS. 
          IF YOU'RE DIGGING, DIGGING A BIG HOLE IN THE GROUND, YOU CAN'T REALLY PARK THE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS' VEHICLES ON THE EMPTY LOT THAT YOU'RE NOW DIGGING, DIGGING A BIG HOLE IN THE GROUND. 
          SO THEY DO HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE. 
          UM, THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO WORK FROM 9:00 AM TO 10:00 PM ON WEEKDAYS AND 9:00 AM TO 10:00 PM ON WEEKENDS. 
          IT SEEMS TO ME THAT'S TWO SHIFTS MORE TRUCKS. 
          THE A THE D UH, DRAFT, EIR DOES NOT CONTAIN A PLAN ON HOW THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES WILL BE ACCOMMODATED. 
          THE LAST TRANSIT TRANSPORTATION ISSUE IS, THAT IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE DRAFT. 
          EIR LEADS TO MY LAST QUESTION. 
          WHAT PLAN DO THEY HAVE AND WHAT MITIGATIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES? DELIVERIES TO THE HOTEL, RESTAURANT, BAR, AND EVENT AREA VEHICLES WILL BE ADDED, UM, TO THIS ISSUE OF PARKING PROBLEMS BECAUSE THEY ARE DELIVERING POSSIBLY TO THE UNDERGROUND GARAGE OR MAYBE OUT ON B STREET. 
          THEY MAY EVEN BE DELIVERING ON PETALUMA BOULEVARD. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF NEEDED SUPPLIES, FOOD AND BEVERAGES THAT THE RESTAURANTS AND THE BARS WILL BE USING ON A DAILY BASIS. 
          UM, AND ALSO THERE'S JUST THE DELIVERIES TO THE HOTEL ITSELF. 
          UM, AND THAT WILL, UH, INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND THE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED. 
          NOT TO MENTION THE CONGESTION CAUSED BY ADDING THESE NUMBER OF DELIVERY VEHICLES THAT HAVE TO STOP AND UNLOAD. 
          THE LAST THING IS GARBAGE PICKUP. 
          GARBAGE PICKUP IS SCHEDULED TO BE ON B STREET. 
          THERE ARE THREE, THREE TYPES OF GARBAGE PICKUP THAT WE HAVE IN THIS CITY. 
          TRASH RECYCLE AND THE GREEN WASTE. 
          AND IT IS AGREED TO IN THE EIR THAT THEY WILL BE DOING THAT KIND OF PICKUP. 
          THE FREQUENCY OF THE PICKUP WILL BE DEPENDENT ON THE AMOUNT OF TRASH THAT IS GENERATED EVERY WEEK. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT THE THREE TRUCKS THAT COME BY MY HOUSE EVERY MOR MONDAY ARE LOUD OBNOXIOUSLY NOISY. 
          UM, AND THIS IS ALL GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE STREET ON B STREET. 
          UM, AND THEN THE LAST PART OF THIS IS THE GREASE OFFLOADING. 
          GREASE OFFLOADING HAPPENS FROM RESTAURANTS. 
          THEY MUST PROVIDE, UH, FOR DISPOSAL OF USED COOKING OIL TO COMPLY WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. 
          ONE COMMON METHOD IS TO COLLECT THE OIL AND DESIGNATED CONTAINERS, WHICH, UM, ARE CURRENTLY DESIGNED TO BE LOCATED IN THE UNDERGROUND, UNDERGROUND GARAGE. 
          AND IT HAS TO BE PICKED UP BY A LICENSED GREASE RECYCLING COMPANY. 
          THEY RECYCLE IT INTO OIL BYPRODUCTS, BIOFUELS, AND ANIMAL FEED. 
          THE FREQUENCY OF PEAK PICKUP IS DEPENDENT UPON THE TOTAL DEPTH OF THE FLOATING FATS, OILS, AND GREASE. 
          THIS IS CALLED THE FOG LAYER. 
          AND THE SLUDGE THAT LAYS BELOW THAT, USUALLY THAT IS ABOUT 25% OF FILL IN THE TANK BEFORE THEY CALL THE TRUCK TO COME AND PICK IT UP. 
          THE PICKUP IS DONE BY A HOSE ATTACHED TO THE TANK AND SUCKING THE FOG OUT. 
          THE WAY IT LOOKS TO ME ON THE, ON THE DRAFT PROPOSALS IS THAT THAT 
          [04:30:01]
GREASE TRUCK IS OUTSIDE AND THE HOSE IS CONNECTED THROUGH THE GARAGE WALL TO THE TANK, WHICH IS LIKE IN RIGHT INSIDE THE WALL. 
          IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN A GREASE TRUCK, THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE MOST PLEASANT TRUCKS THAT YOU'VE EVER SEEN. 
          UM, BUT THE REASON THEY HAVE TO DO THIS IS BECAUSE IF WE WOULD ALLOW THAT FOG TO GO INTO THE SEWER SYSTEM, IT WOULD BUILD ON THE WALLS OF OUR SEWER LINES, ACCUMULATE IN THE PUMP STATIONS, AND THE WET WELLS CREATES ODOR AND IT CLOGS THE PUMPING AND THE SENSING EQUIPMENT IN THE, UM, COMPLETE SEWER SYSTEM. 
          UM, IT COULD SHUT DOWN OUR SEWER SYSTEM IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT. 
          SO WE WANT THEM TO HAVE THIS TANK, BUT IT'S NOT A PLEASANT THING TO HAVE HAPPEN OUT ON A STREET THAT IS USED BY THE, UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR TOWN. 
          SO THAT FINISHES UP MY REPORT ON, OR MY QUESTIONS ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE AIR QUALITY, THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND TRANSPORTATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          FURTHER COMMENTARY ON ADDIT COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          UM, I ALSO WANTED TO GO BACK TO HAZARDOUS WASTE CONCERNS. 
          UM, SO I, I UNDERSTAND THAT IN THE FINAL, FINAL EIR, THE, THE IDEAS THAT THERE'S GONNA BE MORE INFORMATION FROM THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TEAM, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          UM, BUT I REALLY WANNA SPELL OUT SOME THINGS THAT I THINK REALLY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IF WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR THESE, UH, BENZENE CONCERNS. 
          ONE IS, IF YOU ARE, IT'S OBVIOUSLY THE WAIT STAFF THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE, THE, THE KITCHEN STAFF, BUT ALSO YOU'VE GOT WATER, SEWAGE, EVERYTHING RUNNING THROUGH THE BASEMENT OF THE BUILDING. 
          SO HOW IS THAT PROTECTED FOR THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE MULTIPLE STORIES OR WHO ARE RENTING MUL? THEY'RE NOT RENTERS, BUT YOU GET WHAT I MEAN, WHO ARE, WHO ARE HABITATING MULTIPLE STORIES UP. 
          HOW IS THAT PROTECTED? I'M SURE THERE'S A METHOD OF DOING IT, BUT I I THINK IT SINCERELY NEEDS TO BE SPELLED OUT. 
          UM, HOW LONG IS TOO LONG FOR EXPOSURE FOR PATRONS AS WELL. 
          WHAT ABOUT FOLKS WHO ARE GREETERS? UH, WHAT ABOUT THE VALET? I KNOW IT REFERENCES HAVING A VALET, VALET FOR SOME OF THE PARKING. 
          SO ARE, ARE THEY AT RISK FOR THAT EXPOSURE AS WELL? IF THERE'S ANY CONCERN NOW I GET THERE MIGHT, IT MIGHT BE THAT THEY DRILL DOWN THERE AND THERE'S NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, BUT I JUST, I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT IF IT'S BEEN STATED IN THE COVENANT THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE RESIDENTIAL OR SCHOOLS OR DAYCARES THAT THESE THINGS REALLY GET LAID OUT IN THE A IR. 
          UM, I ALSO HAD A QUESTION ABOUT HOW WE ADD MORE, AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS IT'S BEEN, YOU'VE MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT PARKING, BECAUSE OF STATE LAW PARKING IS NO LONGER A THING THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE DISCUSSED. 
          I THINK COMMISSIONER FRY HAS BROUGHT UP IN DETAIL WHY PARKING NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AT, ON SOME LEVEL AT THIS. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR ADDING BACK THESE THINGS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE ADDRESSED OR POTENTIALLY WANT TO SEE ADDRESSED AS A CITY? I GET THAT PLANNING COMMISSION DOES NOT GET TO DECIDE THIS, THE COUNCIL WILL, BUT IS THERE A PROCESS FOR ADDING THAT BACK IN? OR IS THIS JUST A SEPARATE THING WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN A DIFFERENT PART OF THE PROCESS? UH, YEAH. 
          SO I WOULD, UM, WELL, UH, YOU KNOW,  HAVE TO DEBRIEF AND PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER, BUT, UH, TOP OF MIND, UM, THE LAND USE, UH, DISCUSSION IS THE PLACE TO THINK ABOUT SOME OF THESE ITEMS THAT, UM, MAY BE CONSISTENT OR INCONSISTENT OR POTENTIALLY, UM, NOT APPLICABLE. 
          UH, AND SO WE HAVE SOME ROOM WITHIN THE LAND USE, UH, DISCUSSION TO RAISE, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, POLICIES ABOUT AND RELATING TO PARKING. 
          UM, BUT REACHING A CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT MIGHT NOT, THAT'S NOT WHERE WE WOULD LAND. 
          WE WOULD SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE INCONSISTENT OR IT IS CONSISTENT. 
          SO THAT'S ONE PLACE THAT IMMEDIATELY COMES TO MIND TO THINK ABOUT HOW PARKING MIGHT BE, UM, FURTHER EXPLORED OR ADDRESSED. 
          UM, AND THEN OF COURSE, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE MECHANISM OF A, OF THE STAFF REPORT IF IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE APPROPRIATE OR FIT CLEARLY WITHIN A, UM, A DISCUSSION IN THE FINAL EIR AND I I TAKE IT THE SAME WOULD BE TRUE FOR TALKING ABOUT TRASH PICKUP AND CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS AND, AND THE LIKE. 
          THAT WAS ALSO BROUGHT UP. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THESE THINGS WOULD ACTUALLY BE INSERTED. 
          UH, YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          SO PART OF OUR, UM, NEXT TASK AT HAND WITH THE FINAL IS TO SORT THROUGH COMMENTS THAT ARE STRICTLY ABOUT THE MERITS, WHETHER THEY'RE FOR OR AGAINST IT, THOSE COMMENTS THAT ARE, UH, GERMANE TO THE EIR AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND THOSE THAT ARE, UH, MORE RELATED TO THE, UM, THE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AND SO WE HAVE, UM, ALL OF THOSE TOOLS IN FRONT OF US. 
          THE, UM, FINAL EIR TO ADDRESS IT, 
          [04:35:01]
THE STAFF REPORT, UH, OFTENTIMES STAFF WILL PREPARE ADDITIONAL MEMOS, UH, AND WHATNOT. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR INTENT IS ALWAYS TO BRING FORWARD, UM, ENOUGH INFORMATION IN ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT PLATFORMS TO, TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          FURTHER COMMENTARY ON ADDITIONAL EFFECTS. 
          EVALUATED NONE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ANY GENERAL TOPICS NOT YET COVERED? I'VE GOT ONE . 
          UH, I WOULD JUST LIKE THE STAFF TO COMMENT IF THEY COULD, ON THE CURRENT SITE STATUS, AS WAS BROUGHT UP IN A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE. 
          OH, THE CURRENT SITE STATUS. 
          CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT? I CAN, I CAN JUMP IN. 
          UM, SO I THINK THIS WAS THE PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT IS SOMETHING MOVING FORWARD. 
          UM, ANSWER IS NO. 
          UM, WE HAVE A PROPERTY OWNER, UM, THAT HAS A PROJECT, UM, JUST UP THE STREET, UM, ADOBE WINERY. 
          AND SO THAT IS TEMPORARY, UM, STOCKPILING OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL, UH, TO BE REMOVED, UM, IN OCTOBER. 
          SO THAT WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, A BIT OF AN OVERSIGHT. 
          IT'S BEEN ADDRESSED, UH, WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          UM, IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HOTEL. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          ANY OTHER GENERAL QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER KUSON? YEAH, I'LL JUST THROW IN, I THINK ENOUGH BEEN SAID ABOUT PARKING, BUT, UM, I THINK LIKE'S BEEN SAID IT SPIRALS INTO VMT AND GHG IMPACTS TRAFFIC SAFETY AND POTENTIALLY PEDESTRIAN IMPACTS. 
          THE OTHER THING I WAS THINKING OF IS HOW MANY RIDESHARE SERVICES I SEE AT YOUR AVERAGE HOTEL, REASONABLY FORESEEABLE, UH, IMPACTS ON CIRCULATION THERE. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO CALL OUT THAT THERE IS DEFINITELY CASE LAW ABOUT THIS, THAT WHILE PARKING ITSELF MAY NOT BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE ISSUE, THE SECONDARY EFFECTS OF PARKING SHORTAGES SUCH AS INCREASED TRAFFIC AND EMISSIONS MUST BE ANALYZED UNDER CQA. 
          I THINK THE ONE I FOUND WAS VERSUS THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO ELEVATE THAT AS A MAJOR ONE AND THEN ALSO CALL OUT IN MY NOTES. 
          I TALK ABOUT, UH, ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, UH, NOT ONLY IN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION, BUT ALSO I THINK WE ALREADY DO A REDUCED HEIGHT ALTERNATIVE. 
          I THINK IT MIGHT BE WORTH EXPLORING A REDUCED HEIGHT AND FAR ALTERNATIVE. 
          YOU WOULDN'T NEED THE OVERLAY, YOU WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN IN SOME MAJOR WAYS THAT I OUTLINE HERE. 
          UM, SO WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S WORTHY, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THAT READS THE THRESHOLD OF NEEDING TO BE ANALYZED, UH, I LEAVE TO STAFF, BUT I THINK THERE'S SOME OTHER ANALYSES THAT WE COULD OFFER HERE. 
          SO, YEAH, THAT'S JUST MY WRAP UP OF, UH, OTHER ELEMENTS THAT DIDN'T FIT ANYWHERE ELSE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LAST CALL FOR COMMENTARY. 
          GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. 
          OKAY. 
          THEN I WILL TURN THINGS OVER HERE TO HCPC FOR THEM TO MAKE THEIR MOTION ON RECOMMENDATION. 
          ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE IS CONSIDERING RECOMMENDING BY MOTION THAT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE FINAL EIR, BIT OF A DAISY CHAIN, BUT HOPEFULLY EVERYONE'S SQUARE. 
          SO TAKE IT AWAY. 
          CHAIR WAITLEY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, UH, CAN WE KEEP, KEEP THAT SLIDE UP SO I CAN SEE THAT RECOMMENDATION ? UM, DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTARY FROM ANY OF THE HCPC COMMITTEE ON THIS RECOMMENDATION? NOPE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, I'D LIKE TO SUM UP, UM, I HAD, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE ARE MAKING A MOTION TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE FINAL EIR, EITHER YES OR NO. 
          AND, UM, SO THIS WOULD GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          SO OUR ONLY POTENTIAL OPTION OF SEEING THE EIR AGAIN WOULD BE IF THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS, UH, REVISION OF THE DRAFT EIR. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          I CAN ANSWER THAT. 
          YES, I BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          . 
          SO, UM, I WOULD SAY FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY UP HERE, UM, AND YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE HAVE, HAVE POINTED OUT A NUMBER OF, UM, ISSUES WHERE WE THINK THAT THE EIR IS INSUFFICIENT. 
          SO, UM, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE, 
          [04:40:01]
UH, UM, RECOMMEND OR SAY, UH, VOTE NO ON RECOMMENDING THE PREPARATION OF THE FINAL ER, BUT THAT'S MY OPINION ON IT. 
          SO, UM, CAN I ASK FOR A MOTION TO, UM, RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH PREPARATION OF THE FINAL EIR? CAN I GET A MOTION ON THAT CHAIR? CHAIR IF I MIGHT? YOU, YOU COULD HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AUGMENTATION OF THE DRAFT EIR. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND YOU CAN MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE CAN, WE CAN CARRY THOSE FORWARD. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. 
          SO, SO YOU DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO SAY, YES, SIR. 
          YOU KNOW, WE DON'T, THE, THE DRAFT DIR IS NOT SUFFICIENT IN IT OR ADEQUATE, WE WOULD SE WOULD USE THE TERM ADEQUATE IS NOT ADEQUATE IN ITS CURRENT FORM, THEREFORE, WE, WE HAVE TO VOTE. 
          NO, WHAT YOU CAN DO IS MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO US FOR HOW TO IMPROVE IT, AND THEN THAT COULD ALLOW YOU TO GET TO A YES VOTE THEN. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, CAN I ASK THEN FOR ANY MEMBERS OF THE HCPC TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS AN AUGMENTATION OR CHANGE TO THE EIR? I'D LIKE TO REITERATE WHAT YOU SAW, UM, ELOQUENTLY PUT EARLIER. 
          I, I'M PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN THOSE SEVEN COMPONENTS OF INTEGRITY. 
          I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE CULTURAL AND THE AESTHETIC, UM, INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT DOWNTOWN IS, IT APPLIES TO THE MASS AND THE HEIGHT AND THE MATERIALS. 
          I KNOW THE MATERIALS COME TO US IN H BAR, BUT PER A POINT THAT, UM, ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN DOWN THERE WITH THE EXCELLENT SHIRT SAID THAT, THAT, UM, , IDEALLY WE DON'T DEPEND ON WAS IT THE MITIGATIONS THAT WE WOULD HANDLE AFTERWARD. 
          WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE THINGS ADDRESSED BEFOREHAND. 
          I'M A LITTLE, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH MAKING AESTHETIC JUDGMENTS BASED ON THE VISUALS WE WERE GIVEN. 
          I DON'T SEE HOW CHANGING THE MATERIAL IS GOING TO MAKE THAT MASSIVE STRUCTURE CONTRIBUTE TO THE INTEGRITY AND HARMONY AND CHARACTER OF DOWNTOWN. 
          I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, YEAH, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THESE THINGS, RIGHT? WE, IN, IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THERE'S A MORE FULSOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES. 
          RIGHT. 
          WHAT'S AVAILABLE THERE? UM, IF THERE ARE OTHER SITES THAT ARE FEASIBLE, UH, FOR THE PROJECT, UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT, RIGHT. 
          WE, WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT THE APPLICANT CAN OR CAN'T BUY, RIGHT? UH, THERE'S A LOT OF MARKET CONDITIONS THAT ARE GONNA, YOU KNOW, COME INTO PLAY THERE. 
          BUT WE HAVE OPPORTUNITY SITES IN THERE, AS MR. RIDLEY HAS POINTED OUT. 
          MAYBE THERE'S, UH, A, A DIFFERENT SITE, UH, THAT THAT COULD WORK. 
          SO A MORE FULSOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES, UH, UH, A BIGGER DISCUSSION WITHIN THE, I THINK THE PAINTER REPORT OR, UM, I'M FORGETTING THE CONSULTANT'S NAME THAT DID THE HOTEL PORTION OF IT. 
          OKAY. 
          PROBABLY THROUGH THEIR REPORT, UM, ABOUT THIS QUESTION OF INTEGRITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE, UM, DISTRICT AND HOW IT'S IMPACTED RATHER THAN JUST THE ADJACENT SITES. 
          UM, AND THEN I, I KEEP COMING BACK TO THIS. 
          I, I THINK A SURVEY NEEDS TO BE DONE OF, OF, UM, THE SUB AREAS. 
          UM, THIS IS THE PERFECT TIME TO DO IT. 
          UM, THIS WILL GIVE US A REAL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT, UM, HISTORIC RESOURCES MAY OR MAY NOT BE AFFECTED BY THIS, UM, OVERLAY, RIGHT? IF WE, UM, ARE ULTIMATELY ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. 
          SO I THINK THOSE THREE THINGS, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IF WE COULD GET ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK ON THOSE, I WOULD BE, UM, INCLINED TO RECOMMEND THAT WE PUSH THIS TO PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, TO MAKE THOSE FURTHER REVIEWS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO, TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? I WOULD JUST AGREE WITH THE, UH, NECESSITY FOR ALTERNATIVE SITES. 
          UH, IF EVEN JUST FOR, UH, DOING A FULL DUE DILIGENCE AND HAVING THE FULL PICTURE OF WHAT THE USE OF THE CURRENT SITE WOULD MEAN, AS WELL AS, UH, AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT HOW THIS IS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO GET EVALUATION OF SITES OF POTENTIAL FUTURE SITES. 
          UH, IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THIS IS KIND OF A TRANSITION FOR US. 
          IF THE, UM, OVERLAY IS APPROVED, THAT COULD SIGNAL A SHIFT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUTURE THERE. 
          SO GETTING 
          [04:45:01]
THAT WORK DONE TO SURVEY THOSE POTENTIAL SITES WOULD SET US UP FOR, YOU KNOW, HAVING ALL THE DETAILS FOR THAT FUTURE IF THE OVERLAY IS APPROVED. 
          OKAY. 
          SO TO SUMMARIZE THEN, UM, THE HCPC RECOMMENDS THAT, UM, THE EIR DOES NOT GO FORWARD, UM, AS IT IS, BUT, UM, UH, INCORPORATES THESE REVISIONS AND WE RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, THAT THEY MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          UM, ARE WE, DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THAT? DO I JUST SAY I MOTION, I GUESS I GIVE THE MOTION FOR THAT. 
          YOU SECOND? YEAH, I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN WE HAVE A VOTE? MAYBE WE JUST WANNA BE CLEAR ON WHAT MOTION IS THE MOTION? YEAH, GO FOR PAUL. 
          I, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, I, I THINK THE MOTION IS THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE THE, UM, THE DRAFT EIR TO PLANNING COMMISSION WITH, UM, UM, WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS RELATED TO, UM, UM, STUDYING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, INTEGRITY WITHIN AND THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DISTRICT. 
          AND, UM, A SURVEY OF THE SUB AREAS. 
          COOL. 
          THAT'S A, I THINK WE ALL GOT, OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THAT'S A YES TO THAT . 
          YEAH. 
          THAT'S A YES. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO MOVE IT FORWARD. 
          YES. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO CAN WE GET A VOTE ON THAT WITH THOSE RECORDS COMMITTEE MEMBER BARCLAY SAXON? YES. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER LOPEZ. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER TONGA. 
          YES. 
          COMMITTEE MEMBER JENSEN? YES. 
          CHAIR WHITLEY? YES. 
          IT'S APPROVED. 
          UM, THANK YOU. 
          SO, UM, THE, UH, THAT LEAVES ALL OF THE DUTIES FOR THE HCPC, SO WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON. 
          YEAH, I THINK, UH, HCPC, THANK YOU FOR SPENDING YOUR TUESDAY NIGHT WITH US . 
          AND WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS TO LET FOLKS SCOOT OUT IF THEY WISH. 
          ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S BRING OURSELVES BACK HERE. 
          ACTUAL, IF ANYONE WANTS TO MOVE OVER, THEY CAN . 
          ALL MY STUFF IS SET UP HERE. 
          I'LL ALLOW IT. 
          FINE. 
          JUST STAY THERE, . 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          COMING BACK HERE AT 1104. 
          UM, LET'S MOVE ON INTO OUR PLANNING COMMISSION, FURTHER DISCUSSION AND FINAL FEEDBACK AND AMENDMENTS, WHICH WE GOT A NICE HEAD START FROM OUR PALS AT HCPC. 
          UM, BUT LET ME JUST GIVE US A QUICK SLIDE 'CAUSE IT'S HERE. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          UM, YEP. 
          SO HERE WE'LL BE DOING OUR DELIBERATIVE DISCUSSION AS A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY. 
          WE'LL DISCUSS THE PROJECT RECORD, OBVIOUSLY THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE JUST GOT FROM HCPC, OUR THOUGHTS AND FEEDBACK, ET CETERA. 
          WE'LL BE HONING IN ON OUR PRIORITIES AND SUGGESTED ADJUSTMENTS AND THEN DRAFTING AMENDMENTS. 
          SO FOR THOSE WHO RECALL OUR PROCESS ON THIS, UH, FOR CREEKWOOD A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, I THINK IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE, UM, STAFF SHARE THE TEXT ON THE SCREEN AS WE GOT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO IDENTIFYING OUR SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS. 
          SO, WITH THAT, UM, ARE THERE ANY QUICK ON THE GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER HOOP. 
          SO, ASIDE FROM, OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE SHOULD INCORPORATE ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM, FROM HCPC, UH, I KIND OF STARTED WRITING DOWN A LIST OF THINGS. 
          UH, I I WASN'T SURE IF ANYONE WAS, SO I JUST KIND OF, WHILE I WAS LISTENING, UM, FIRST ONE WAS, UH, AND I THINK, OH, FIRST ONE WAS INCLUDING REQUESTS, UH, FOR THE FINAL EIR DRAFT TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO INCLUDE THAT IN OUR REQUEST, EVEN IF THAT'S NOT GUARANTEED. 
          UH, THEN, UH, GOING OFF OF ROGER'S COMMENTS, UH, BUILDING IN, AND I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS LOOKS, BUT BUILDING IN STANDARDS TO REQUIRE THAT THE PARK SPACE GENERATED BY THE, UH, BY THE RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS ACTUALLY HAPPENS WITHIN THOSE SPACES. 
          AND NOT OFF TO THE SIDE, BUT ACTUALLY WITHIN THE PROPOSED AREA IN THE OVERLAY. 
          UH, DID I GET THAT RIGHT, ROGER? OKAY. 
          UH, ADD, NEED TO ADD, LET'S SEE. 
          OH, THE 
          [04:50:01]
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE HCPC HANDLED THAT. 
          SO I THINK WE'RE GOOD THERE. 
          UM, HAVE ADDING TO THE LAND USE SECTION, HOPEFULLY, UH, COMMENTARY ON HOW TRASH PICKUPS GONNA WORK, CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND ITS IMPACTS OR, UH, AND THEN PROVISIONS WITH REGARDS TO STAFF AND CUSTOMER PARKING, UH, THE GREASE TRUCK. 
          AND, UM, ALSO HOW WE BETTER HANDLE, UH, THE HAZARDOUS WASTE MITIGATION, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MITIGATION. 
          AND THEN, UH, FINALLY AMENDMENTS TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS TO HAVE A MORE DETAILED SET OF DESIGN STANDARDS IN PLACE THAT MORE SPECIFICALLY CAN, UH, MORE SPECIFICALLY MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE FUTURE TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS HISTORIC CONCERNS AND GIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION REAL GUIDELINES IN THAT DIRECTION. 
          IF I MIGHT PITCH, UH, YEAH, I'M JUST RAMBLING TO, TO YOUR LAST ONE. 
          'CAUSE I ALSO HAD RI UH, WRITTEN DOWN THANK YOU ABOUT THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE. 
          I THINK, UM, MY, WHAT I WAS HEARING IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE AN AMENDMENT THAT PLANNING COMMISSION GETS INPUT AND PERHAPS, AND ANDREW, I LOOK TO YOU MAYBE WE JUST AGENDIZE IT IN THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS HERE. 
          UM, AN OVERLAY ORDINANCE REVIEW AND CUP STRUCTURE WORKSHOP SO THAT WE CAN, AS PLANNING COMMISSION GIVE FEEDBACK ON THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE AND WHAT WOULD EVENTUALLY BE PLANNING COMMISSION'S, UH, REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. 
          I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO HAVE INPUT BEFORE THAT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. 
          UM, 'CAUSE I, I HEARD ACROSS THE BOARD A LOT OF DESIRES TO, TO TWEAK, UM, SOME OF THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LANGUAGE. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING THAT OUGHT TO BE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS OR AN AGENDIZED ITEM SOON? HOW CAN WE TALK ABOUT, I I THINK I WOULD LIKE, I MEAN CERTAINLY WE'VE, WE'VE, WE HAVE THAT REQUEST DOCUMENTED AND, AND I THINK I'D LIKE TO CONFER WITH, UM, THE DIRECTOR AND STAFF TO SEE IF WE'RE, WHAT WE SHOULD DO AS A NEXT STEP ON THAT, UM, FAIR GAME TO INCLUDE AS AN AMENDMENT, OR NOT NECESSARILY, BUT IF YOU INCLUDE IT AS AN AMENDMENT, THEN, THEN IT'S, IT, I I WOULD IN INCLUDE IT AS AN AMENDMENT, BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO WORKSHOP IT WITH PLANNING COMMISSION PERHAPS. 
          UM, W WORKSHOP IS MAYBE NOT THE RIGHT WORD. 
          I WANT PLANNING COMMISSION TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE BEFORE IT GETS PASSED. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THEN I, BEFORE IT JUST TAKE INTO CITY COUNCIL, THAT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE IS THAT REALLY, IS, IS THAT REALLY A REQUEST THAT GOES ON THE, THAT'S REALLY A, A PROJECT REQUEST AS OPPOSED TO THE EIR REQUEST? BUT LET'S, LET'S PUT IT IN THERE. 
          SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WHAT, UM, CHAIR YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS, UM, WHAT WE DO HAVE IS A RECOMMENDATION ON THE OVERLAY FROM NOVEMBER. 
          UM, AND SO WHAT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE EXPRESSING IS, UM, WHAT, BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE SEEN, UH, TO DATE IN THE DRAFT, EAR, UH, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS THAT WE MAY WANT TO EXPLORE, UM, UH, AS A PLANNING COMMISSION BODY. 
          UM, AND SO I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THAT. 
          AND, AND TO ANDREW'S POINT, I WOULD, I THINK I'D WANNA, UM, NOW THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE REQUEST, UM, MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE BEST THING TO TRY TO SOLVE AND FIGURE OUT THE SOLUTION NOW OUTSIDE OF JUST SAYING, HEY, THIS IS THE AMENDMENT, AND THEN WE CAN, UM, WE CAN CIRCLE BACK AND PROVIDE SOME OPTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          IS THAT, BUT WE SHOULD WORDSMITH LANGUAGE ABOUT, I THINK, I THINK IT'S FAIR. 
          I MEAN, WE, I HAVE DOWN HERE JUST, UM, UH, SORT OF, UH, CLARIFYING, LOOKING AT THE ADEQUACY OF MITIGATION MEASURES WITH RESPECT TO THE CUP AND DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAPTURES IT, BUT, UM, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, RE RECOGNIZING THAT SEPARATE REQUEST IS, IS A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION, BUT NEEDING TO HAVE AN AMENDMENT FOR THE MOTION, UH, I DO WANT IT TO BE A BIT STRONGER THAN JUST SEE CONSIDERATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL, UH, ADDITIONAL FINDINGS FOR THE CUP. 
          SO IT CAN BE SOMETHING MORE AKIN TO, UH, ADDING MORE, MORE THOROUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES TO BETTER PROTECT OUR HISTORIC, UH, HISTORIC DOWNTOWN OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT, ESSENTIALLY STRONGER AND THICKER 
          [04:55:01]
REVIEW IN THAT RESPECT. 
          I'VE RUN OUT OF WORDS, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO YOU GOT 'EM. 
           RUN OUTTA COMMISSIONER RICK. 
          QUICK CLARIFICATION. 
          UM, BRIAN, SO IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE OBVIOUSLY HAD NOVEMBER, 2023, HAD THE MND AND THEN THE ZONING AMENDMENT TO ADD THE OVERLAY. 
          THE MND CAME BACK, WERE AN EIR. 
          WAS THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ZONING AMENDMENT STILL LIVE? THAT'S C THAT CARRIES THROUGH. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, SO WE'VE HAD A FEW HERE, BUT I, I THINK WE CAN DO A QUICK STRAW POLL ACROSS COMMISSION REGARDING, UH, WORDSMITHING OUR HCPC COLLEAGUES' RECOMMENDATION OF DIGGING INTO THE SEVEN COMPONENTS OF INTEGRITY, THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, AND THE DEEPER ANALYSIS OF PARCELS ACROSS SUB AREAS. 
          SO IF WE COULD DO A STRAW POLL OF YES, WE WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THOSE IN OUR RESOLUTION. 
          MAKE SENSE? HANDS UP FOR YES. 
          INCLUDING HCPCS RECOMMENDATIONS TO US IN OUR RESOLUTION TO CITY COUNCIL. 
          1, 2, 3, 4. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE DEFINITELY WANT THOSE THREE. 
          AND THEN WE, LET'S DO A STRAW POLL ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION GETTING, UH, THE FINAL EIR WHO HANDS UP FOR PLANNING COMMISSION RECEIVING THE FINAL EIR HAS A MAJORITY, SO LET'S PLEASE HAVE AN AMENDMENT ON OUR RESOLUTION FOR THAT AS WELL. 
          WHAT ELSE? BLAKE? , WHAT WERE YOUR OTHERS? WELL, OH, THE PARKS, SORRY. 
          YEAH, HANDWRITING. 
          UM, HANDS UP FOR WORDSMITHING. 
          AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE, UH, PARK RATIO TO HOLD ACROSS THE OVERLAY ZONE. 
          IS THAT CLOSE? OKAY. 
          PARKS HANDS UP. 
          ROGER. 
          WAS THAT A ONE FOR ROGER? 2, 3, 4. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          PARKS AS WELL. 
          AND THEN WE'VE TALKED THROUGH THE INPUT ON THE OVERLAY ORDINANCE AND STRONGER DETAILS ON CUP. 
          SO I THINK THAT TAKES US TO 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 AMENDMENTS. 
          OTHERS, WHO ARE YOU POINTING TO? WHAT? GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY. 
          OH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THE, UM, THE ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONER FRY BROUGHT UP BEING INCLUDED IN THE, UH OH, YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, THE ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AROUND GREENHOUSE GAS, PARKING, TRAFFIC, ET CETERA, TO, TO MY MIND, I'LL JUST SAY THAT FELT LIKE A STRONG COMMENT TO GO INTO THE FINAL. 
          DO YOU WANT IT TO BE, OR SHOULD WE VOTE ON IT TO BE A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT TO OUR RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL? NO  THOUGHTS FROM STAFF ON HOW WE OUGHT TO ADDRESS THE DETAILED COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONER FRY? WELL, PERSONALLY, I THINK ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS ARE GONNA BE RESPONDED TO IN THE FBIR. 
          SO COMMISSIONER PRY THAT WHERE I THINK YOUR COMMENTS ARE. 
          UM, AND I THINK PROBABLY THAT WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION AS OPPOSED TO A MITIGATION MEASURE OR STRENGTHENING IT. 
          JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT'S ADEQUATE, ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL EIR, I GUESS. 
          OKAY. 
          HOW DOES THAT SOUND TO YOU? YEAH. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          SO IF WE'LL LEAVE THAT AS A COMMENT TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL, WHICH HAS BEEN NOTED, I THINK THAT STILL KEEPS US AT SIX AMENDMENTS, AND I'LL LOOK ACROSS THE DAY TO SEE IF WE'VE GOT ANY OTHER PITCHES FOR AN AMENDMENT TO OUR RESOLUTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          OH, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK THE COMMENTARY ON HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, IS THAT ALSO SOMETHING THAT WOULD RATHER, WOULD BE BETTER? A COMMENT FOR THE FINAL EIR OR SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE A MIN AMENDMENT PROBABLY MAKES SENSE AS IN THE FINAL EIRI DON'T KNOW IF I THINK IT SHOULD BE IN THE FINAL EIR AND THEN WE LOOK AT POTENTIALLY AUGMENTING OUR MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          RIGHT. 
          AS OPPOSED TO LIKE A USE PERMIT THAT FINDING, I DON'T THINK, YEAH. 
          SO WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS. 
          AND THE OTHER REASON FOR THAT TOO IS I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, REVIEW AND PERMITTING BY THE REGIONAL BOARD OR DTSC AND, AND THAT WOULD BE DONE KIND OF AS A, A PARALLEL PROCESS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S PROCESS. 
          WE, WE, WE DON'T PROVIDE OVERSIGHT GOT 
          [05:00:01]
IT. 
          OF, OF A MITIGATION OF, UH, PROCESS FOR OUR CONTAMINATION. 
          GOT IT. 
          SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE CHECKING AFTER THE FACT AS WE'RE LOOKING TO FINALIZE THE FINAL ERR. 
          RIGHT. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO YOU WOULD LOOK FOR THOSE MITIGATIONS IN THE FINAL EIR. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND THAT WOULD THEN DIRECT THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN ON AN APPROVED PROJECT. 
          GOT IT. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          WHEN YOU ARE ABLE STAFF, ANDREW, WE'D LOVE TO SEE  THE WORDS UP ON THE SCREEN AND, UH, CAN, CAN VAMP AS NECESSARY. 
          ONE MOMENT PLEASE. 
          SURE. 
          THING. 
           TALK AMONGST YOURSELVES. 
          I THINK, I THINK WHAT'S GOING TO BE BEST IS I'M GOING TO COPY AND PASTE IT IN AND ASK ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES TO PICK IT UP AND BRING IT UP ON THE SCREEN FOR EDITING, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. 
          IS SOMEBODY OVER THERE THAT CAN SHARE IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, WHILE WE'RE WAITING, I WON'T OBVIOUSLY SEE MERIT TO ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE'RE MAKING, UM, BUT I ALSO SEE MERIT TO BRINGING THIS AROUND AGAIN AS A DRAFT. 
          AND THE REASON I SAY THAT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GOING TOWARD A MOTION RIGHT NOW, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I THINK SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED ABOUT THE ADEQUACY OF THE EIR ARE PRETTY CENTRAL. 
          UM, I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL ISSUES AND SECONDARY IMPACTS FROM PARKING, WHICH IS A MASSIVE CONCERN THAT'S MISSING, WE TALK ABOUT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. 
          I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK ON KIND OF THE CENTRAL MITIGATION MEASURE, CUL ONE E THAT IS A LINCHPIN IN MITIGATION THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT. 
          UM, I ALSO THINK THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ABOUT ALTERNATIVES. 
          I MEAN, THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE FOUNDATIONAL TO AN EIR, UH, AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I THINK THERE'S MERIT TO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE'VE REQUESTED THE FEIR COME BACK, BUT MAKE SURE THIS GETS ANOTHER ROUND. 
          UM, I THINK AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO DETERMINE, WITH ALL THE ISSUES WE'RE FINDING, WHAT IS THAT THRESHOLD FOR ADEQUACY? YOU KNOW, A YES, IT'S A CATCHALL TO REVIEW THINGS AND IMPROVE THINGS IN THE FINAL EIR, BUT AT WHAT POINT ARE THERE SO MANY THINGS WRONG WHERE WE JUST SEND IT BACK, GET ANOTHER DRAFT AND PUT IT THROUGH THE PROCESS, GO THROUGH PLANNING, GO THROUGH CITY COUNCIL, AND THEN DO AN FEIR. 
          AND THE DAVID IN PROJECT IS ACTUALLY A GREAT EXAMPLE WHERE MULTIPLE DRAFT EIRS LED TO NOW, HOPEFULLY THIS WON'T TAKE 20 YEARS, BUT LED TO A MUCH BETTER PROJECT. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANNA PUT THAT, THAT I THINK THERE'S MERIT TO THAT. 
          AS MUCH AS I KNOW WE'VE KIND OF FRAMED THIS AS THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS TO CATCH EVERYTHING AND MAKE SURE IT GOES INTO FEIR. 
          I THINK AT SOME POINT WE'RE, WE'RE BROACHING INADEQUACY. 
          UM, AND IT, AND IT'S WORTH TAKING IT FOR ANOTHER ROUND THROUGH THE DRAFT, BUT JUST WANNA MAKE THAT POINT. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT INPUT. 
          AND NOW WE'VE GOT, SO OH, OH, DID YOU WANT, DID YOU WANNA GO BEFORE THIS? I, I CAN MAKE MY COMMENT AFTER ANDREW. 
          THAT'S FINE. 
          OH. 
          OH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, AS FAR AS HCPC RECOMMENDATIONS, I ACTUALLY, AS I WAS LISTENING TO THEM HAVE SIX, BUT I WAS GOING TO GO BACK AND WORK WITH STAFF AND WORK WITH THE MEETING RECORDINGS TO REDUCE IT DOWN TO THREE. 
          SO WE CAN DO THAT NOW, OR UH, WE CAN JUST, I CAN JUST ROLL ON DOWN TO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS AND GO BACK AND DO THAT. 
          I MEAN, I THINK JUST LOOKING QUICKLY THAT IF YOU WANNA SCROLL BACK UP, TWO AND FIVE ARE THE SAME, LIKE ARE, ARE RELATED TO THAT INTEGRITY PIECE THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT, BUT TOTALLY AGREE THAT YOU GUYS SHOULD LOOK BACK AT THE, I GUESS ONE WAS RIGHT. 
          ONE WAS TO 
          [05:05:01]
ANALYZE THE IMPACTS, CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON INTEGRITY, BUT THEN THE SECOND WAS TO ADD INTEGRITY AS A FINDING GOTCHA. 
          FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE. 
          AND THEN I THINK THREE AND FOUR WERE, WERE CLOSELY RELATED AS WELL. 
          SO, MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO YOU'RE GETTING CLOSER TO THAT THREE NUMBER THAT THEY LANDED ON, BUT DEFINITELY AGREE THAT IT'S WORTH REVIEWING THE RECORD TO SURE. 
          HONE IN SPECIFICALLY. 
          AND CHAIR, YOU'LL SEE THIS AGAIN. 
          SO FOR SIGNATURES IF, IF IN FACT, UH, THE, UM, THE RESOLUTION IS APPROVED, SO, OKAY, SO THEN YEAH, DOWN TO OURS. 
          SO WE HAD INCORPORATE ALL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM HCPC REVIEW AND THEN REQUEST THAT THE FINAL EIR RETURN TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW. 
          MM-HMM. 
           AND THEN PARK SPACES REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE INTEGRATED INTO OVERLAY AREAS. 
          I WOULD SAY OPEN SPACES, SO WE DON'T CONFUSE OURSELVES WITH PARKING  OR PARK SLASH OPEN SPACE. 
          WELL PARK REQUIREMENTS OR PARK REQUIREMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          PARK. 
          PARK. 
          BUT YOU MEAN PARK AS AN OPEN SPACE, NOT PARKING? WELL, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A CITY PARK. 
          IT'S NOT JUST OPEN SPACE, IT'S A PARK. 
          RECREATIONAL, RECREATIONAL. 
          UM, WELL, I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT TO ENVISION AN OPEN SPACE OF, YOU KNOW, A, A QUARTER OF A BLOCK. 
          SURE. 
          THAT, THAT TO ME IS A PARK. 
          IT'S, IT'S NOT AN OPEN SPACE. 
          AN URBAN PARK AND AN URBAN CONDITION AND OKAY. 
          URBAN PARK, LET'S CALL 'EM URBAN PARK REQUIRED. 
          GREAT. 
          PLEASE. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE MEAN GRASS, NOT CONCRETE. 
          . 
          GREAT. 
          AND THEN, UM, ALTERNATIVES WE HAD THAT WE DO UP HERE, DO YOU WANT THAT REPEATED THEN? YEAH, I WOULD FOR EMPHASIS EITHER WAY, IF WE WANNA SAY NUMBER ONE IS INCORPORATE ALL RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN THAT ENCOMPASSES THE THREE, OR WE WANNA LIST OUT THE THREE. 
          IT'S UP TO YOU. 
          SURE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, UM, RESPOND TO GHG RELATED IMPACTS RESULTING FROM TRAFFIC AND PARKING THAT I THINK WE SAID WE WERE CHALKING UP TO COMMENTS AND DID NOT NEED TO BE AN AMENDMENT. 
          CORRECT. 
          YEAH, WE'RE GONNA PUT IT INTO THE RIGHT FOR THE FINAL. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE CAN STRIKE THAT ONE. 
          STRIKE THAT. 
          AND SAME WITH GREASE TRUCK. 
          GREAT. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER. 
          SORRY FOR, UH, I WAS, SORRY. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, I KNOW WE'RE, WE'RE REPEATING THE, UM, ALTERNATIVES. 
          I WOULD JUST SAY FULLY INSTEAD OF FURTHER JUST THE ADD THE EXTRA EMPHASIS. 
          OH, YOU'VE ACTUALLY REPEAT, SORRY, I DID NOT SEE THE ACTUAL CHANGE TO THE SENTENCE. 
          NEVERMIND. 
          AND THAT'S SPECIFICALLY DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          ALTERNATIVES. 
          YEAH. 
          MM-HMM. 
           PROJECT SITE ALTERNATIVES PROVIDE MORE DISCUSSION. 
          OH, CONTAMINATED SITES. 
          I THINK WE ALSO WERE CHALKING UP TO COMMENTS FOR THE FINAL EIR, CORRECT? YEP. 
          SO WE CAN SCRATCH FIVE. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, YEP. 
          DID WE DO A STRAW POLL ON FIVE? DO WE NEED TO, I, I DON'T THINK YOU DID. 
          I THINK THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, BUT SIX, WE DID CORRECT PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST REVIEW, PROPOSED OVERLAY ORDINANCE PRIOR TO REVIEW. 
          OKAY. 
          SO JUST BEFORE WE LOCK IN THESE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, LET'S DO A QUICK STRAW POLL ON FIVE. 
          I WILL SAY FOR MY PART, UM, THAT I AGREE WITH COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT WE DON'T WANNA BE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE AND ESTABLISHING DESIGN STANDARDS, UM, INTO THIS OVERLAY, I THINK WOULD BE, UH, POTENTIALLY TOO CONSTRAINING. 
          AND WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, WHICH ALLOWS US TO DO THAT. 
          UM, DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          SO HAVING, SORRY, IT'S 1130. 
          SO ESTABLISHING DESIGN STANDARDS, UH, TO MY MIND WOULD BE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE AS A, AS A BIT OF LOBBYING BEFORE WE TAKE A STRAW POLL ON NUMBER FIVE, HANDS UP TO KEEP NUMBER FIVE. 
          CAN I JUST ADD, UH, ADD TO THAT MY, MY INTEREST IS NOT SO MUCH DESIGN STANDARDS IS DESIGN EXPECTATIONS. 
          SO THE DEVELOPER KNOWS WHAT HE'S BEING ASKED TO DO. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO COME UP WITH 
          [05:10:01]
A BUNCH OF DETAILS OF HERE'S YOUR DESIGN, BUT SO, SO WE HAVE, SO WE HAVE INPUT BEFORE HE STARTS THE PROCESS OR BEFORE THEY START THE PROCESS THAT RE SO THAT IT REFLECTS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. 
          NOT THAT SOMETHING WE, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH A CUP PROCESS THAT YOU GOTTA DO THIS BECAUSE OF THIS, BUT I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO BE FAIR TO THE INVESTOR DEVELOPER. 
          MM-HMM. 
           GIVE HIM A HEAD START. 
          SO WE HAVE TO DO LESS WORK. 
          YOU KNOW, E EXPECTATIONS ALSO HAS THE BENEFIT OF GETTING AT WHAT I WAS ALSO TRYING TO GET TO, WHICH IS WE'RE NOT ARCHITECTS. 
          WE NEED MORE HELP THAN JUST, WE HAVE DISCRETION. 
          IF WE'RE GOING TO ACHIEVE WHAT THIS OVERLAY HAS TO PULL OFF, WE NEED MORE THAN THAT. 
          GOTCHA. 
          ARE THERE ANY DOCUMENTS THAT WE WISH TO DRAW FROM? AND I'M LOOKING AT THE COMMERCIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES, WHICH I KNOW ARE INCORPORATED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE EIR, JUST IN TERMS OF DOCUMENTS WE ALREADY HAVE THAT WERE REVIEWED AND I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT THAT DETAILED. 
          FAIR. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IN THAT CASE, ESTABLISH AND PUBLISH DESIGN EXPECTATIONS TO SUPPORT REQUIRED DISCRETIONARY SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. 
          HANDS UP FOR INCLUDING THAT AS AN AMENDMENT. 
          1, 2, 3. 
          ROGER, I'M GONNA GUESS YOU WANNA DO THIS. 
          OH, HE'S READING, STILL READING ROGER? YEAH. 
          AND, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'LL KEEP THAT ONE IN. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          KEEP ARE OUR SIX, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? OH, SOME CHATTER AT THE STAFF TABLE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FIVE. 
          IS THIS, UH, TO BE APPLICABLE TO THE OVERLAY, WHICH THEN IF THE OVERLAY IS ADOPTED, THEN IT WOULD BE APPLIED TO THE HOTEL? OR IS THIS JUST A REQUEST UNIQUELY FOR THE HOTEL? THIS IS FOR THE OVERLAY OVERLAY WIDE. 
          YEAH. 
          GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER CLARIFICATIONS FROM STAFF BEFORE WE CALL FOR A MOTION TO VOTE ON THIS RESOLUTION AS AMENDED? WELL, THEY THINK I'LL LOOK DOWN AT THE DAY TO SEE IF WE'VE GOT ANY LAST SUGGESTIONS. 
          IS THAT YOUR HAND UP? YES, BUT IT'S NOT SCH HOOPER. 
          IT'S NOT A SUGGESTION, IT'S JUST A QUESTION, COMMENT IF THAT'S GO FOR IT. 
          UH, I JUST WANNA VERIFY, AND THIS HAS COME UP PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX TIMES, BUT IT'S LATE. 
          SO I JUST WANNA RECONFIRM, UH, REGARDLESS OF HOW WE VOTE THESE REC THE SUMMARY OF THIS IS GONNA GO TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL WILL ULTIMATELY DECIDE EITHER WAY HOW THIS IS GOING TO GO. 
          SO, RIGHT, LIKE IF WE, IF WE VOTE NO, IT'S STILL GONNA GO TO THEM. 
          IT DOESN'T GUARANTEE IT COMES BACK TO US. 
          THE, THE THE DRAFT EIR WILL GO TO THEM. 
          RIGHT, RIGHT. 
          SO, SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT, THAT THE PROPOSED OVERLAY IS NOT GOING TO THEM AS A NEXT STEP. 
          JUST NO, I, NO, I GOT YOU. 
          BUT I JUST MEAN THE DRAFT EIR STILL GOES TO THEM. 
          THEY STILL MAKE A DECISION. 
          SO REGARDLESS OF VOTING YES OR NO, IT'S UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE GET TO SEE THIS AGAIN REALISTICALLY CORRECT. 
          AS I, WHETHER IT'S AS THE FEIR OR AS A NEW DRAFT, EIR, IF THEY FIND ISSUE WITH THE THINGS WE BROUGHT UP, I, I MAINLY ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THERE, THERE IS A LOT OF THIS THAT OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE HAVE ALL FOUND ISSUE WITH. 
          AND I KNOW I PERSONALLY HAVE JUST, THERE'S A LOT THAT'S NOT HERE. 
          WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR THOUGH IS LIKE WHAT IS THE BEST MECHANISM TO GET THOSE CHANGES ACROSS TO COUNSEL AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND HAVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF HCPC AND THEN US TOGETHER SEEMS LIKE A MORE MEANINGFUL WAY TO DELIVER THAT MESSAGE THAN TO HAVE THE, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE HAD LAST TIME, WE HAD THE DISCONNECT AND IT FELT LIKE THE DISCONNECT CREATED A DIVIDE BETWEEN, WELL WHAT'S THE REAL, WHAT'S THE REAL SUMMARY HERE? AND HAVING THIS COMBINED WITH THE AMENDMENTS WE'VE PROPOSED MORE DETAILED IS, I FEEL LIKE A BETTER WAY TO DELIVER THAT TO COUNCIL OF HERE ARE THE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES WE FOUND THAT WE WOULD REALLY WANT ADDRESSED EITHER BY THEM SAYING, DO A NEW DRAFT EIR OR 
          [05:15:01]
THEM SAYING PLEASE INCLUDE THIS FOR A FINAL EIR. 
          SO THE, THE, THE WAY I SEE IT, AND I'LL ASK, I'LL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO, TO CORRECT ME OR, OR TO AUGMENT MY COMMENTS. 
          THIS, THIS RESOLUTION WILL GO FORWARD WITH BOTH SETS OF RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE RESOLUTION. 
          SO COUNSEL WILL RECEIVE THAT. 
          COUNSEL WILL ALSO RECEIVE ALL OF THE COMMENTS. 
          MM-HMM. 
           THAT WERE COLLECTED THIS EVENING HAVE BEEN COLLECTED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. 
          SO THOSE COMMENTS ARE ALSO REFERENCING ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS THAT'S BEEN REQUESTED. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UM, YOU KNOW, GAP ANALYSIS THAT SOME HAVE SUGGESTED EXISTS WITHIN THE DRAFT EIR AND HOW TO AUGMENT THAT. 
          SO ALL OF THAT WILL GO FORWARD TO COUNCIL AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD PROVIDE DIRECTION BASED UPON, UM, THE TOTALITY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED OF REVIEW AUTHORITY COMMENTS, AS WELL AS THESE, UH, SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE DETAILED IN THE RESOLUTION. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THE COMMENTS, THOUGH WON'T BE RESPONDING UNTIL, UNTIL THE FBIR IN TWO WEEKS WHEN IT COMES TO COUNSEL THERE. 
          CORRECT. 
          THEY'LL RECEIVE THE COMMENTS FOR REVIEW, BUT, BUT THE RESPONSES WOULD NOT BE UNTIL THE FINAL EIR AND THAT'S WHETHER WE VOTE YES OR NO TONIGHT THE RECOMMENDATION. 
          CORRECT. 
          THE RESOLUTION GETS CARRIED. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          WITH THAT, I'D LOVE A MOTION TO VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED. 
          SO, MOVE. 
          CAN I GET A SECOND? I CAN I SECOND. 
          I'LL SECOND. 
          , LET'S PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED. 
          COMMISSIONER FRIGHT? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER ERLINE? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER NOEL ABSENT. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CATER THOMPSON. 
          YES. 
          CHAIR MOSES? YES, IT IS APPROVED. 
          THANKS EVERYBODY. 
          WE ARE GONNA CLOSE MEETING ITEM ONE. 
          . 
          WE DID IT. 
          NOT BAD. 
          UH, . 
          ALRIGHT, I THINK WE CAN JUST CONTINUE ON IF UH, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO EXIT QUIETLY. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME TO. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME ON THIS TUESDAY EVENING NIGHT. 
          I'LL SAY ALMOST MORNING. 
          UH, AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO 
          [COMMITTEE COMMENT]
COMMISSION COMMENT IF ANY COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT. 
          LOOK, UH, WE'LL GO DOWN THE ROW. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CATER THOMPSON. 
          ANY COMMISSIONER COMMENT? NONE FROM YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER FRE. 
          UM, I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 30TH AND OCTOBER 6TH IS THE WEEK WITHOUT DRIVING SONOMA COUNTY, THERE'S ALSO A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 
          WE'RE ASKING PEOPLE PARTICULARLY, UM, ELECTED AND APPOINTED, UH, AND CITY STAFF PEOPLE TO TAKE THE TIME TO GO SOMEWHERE WITHOUT USING YOUR CAR. 
          UM, THE LYNCH CREEK CLEANUP WAS ON SATURDAY THE 14TH. 
          THE CITY STAFF REBUILDING TOGETHER. 
          PETALUMA AND OVER 60 VOLUNTEERS OF ALL DIFFERENT AGES CAME TOGETHER AND CLEANED UP WEEDS, TRIMMED BUSHES AND TREES, REMOVED, GRAFFITI RESTORED, NEEDED PAINTED WALLS. 
          THE CITY MANAGER WAS OUT THERE WITH A ROLLER PAINT IN A WALL. 
          IT WAS WONDERFUL. 
          UM, THE NEW POLICE CHIEF AND SOME OF HIS POLICE OFFICERS GOT TO TRY OUT ALL THEIR NEW ELECTRIC BIKES ON THE TRAIL. 
          THEY HAD A REALLY FUN DAY. 
          THEY DIDN'T WORK, BUT THEY DID A LOT OF WORK DRIVING THEIR BIKES. 
          IT WAS A REALLY GREAT DAY. 
          UM, THE LAND USED GET TOGETHER WAS LAST SATURDAY AT THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          THERE WAS A GREAT TURNOUT OF PEOPLE. 
          THERE'S A SECOND. 
          UM, GET TOGETHER ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25TH, WHICH IS TOMORROW AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT FOUR O'CLOCK. 
          IT'S A TIME TO LEARN ABOUT THE PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR LAND USE. 
          AND FRIDAY I ATTENDED THE CANDIDATE FORUM AT THE PENDULUM WOMEN'S CLUB. 
          THANK YOU TO THE ORGANIZATION, THE MODERATOR AND THE TIMER. 
          IT WAS ONE OF THE BEST CANDIDATE FORUMS I'D SEEN IN THE LAST 45 YEARS OR SO. 
          THEY REALLY HANDLED IT REALLY WELL. 
          BUT I HAVE TO SAY THAT I WAS DISAPPOINTED AND EMBARRASSED BY SOME BEHAVIOR OF SOME MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE. 
          NO, I WON'T SAY WHO, WHAT HAPPENED OR WHO WAS INVOLVED. 
          BUT THE BEHAVIOR WAS DISRE, DISRESPECTFUL, JUVENILE, AND EMBARRASSING. 
          AND FRANKLY TACKY. 
          THE RESIDENTS OF PENLAND CAN GENERALLY BE COUNTED ON TO BE RESPECTFUL. 
          THERE ARE TIMES WHEN 
          [05:20:01]
YOU DON'T AGREE WITH SOMEBODY, BUT I DON'T HAVE, BUT I HAVEN'T ALWAYS WITNESSED, UM, OUR FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS AND OTHER RESIDENTS SHOWING ANYTHING BUT COMMON COURTESY. 
          I WAS PERSONALLY SHOCKED TO SEE WHAT TRANSPIRED AND I HOPE THAT THIS BEHAVIOR IS NOT GOING TO GROW TO THE NORM. 
          WE ARE SO MUCH BETTER THAN THAT. 
          THAT'S ALL. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KUSON. 
          ANY COMMISSIONER? YEAH, I'LL GIVE A QUICK UPDATE FROM TREE COMMITTEE 'CAUSE IT PERTAINS TO PLANNING. 
          TREE COMMITTEE IS EXPLORING A DESIGN REVIEW, UH, AD HOC TO MAYBE BECOME A STANDING COMMITTEE TO HELP ASSIST AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON TREES AND LANDSCAPE IN OUR DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS SO THAT WE DON'T SPEND TWO OR THREE HOURS ON TREES AND LANDSCAPE. 
          UH, SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT THAT AND I DON'T THINK I'VE HAD A P BACK MEETING SINCE OUR LAST MEETING. 
          SO THAT'S IT. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M GONNA PASS. 
          COMMISSIONER HOOPER, I HAVE NO UPDATES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCALLAN. 
          OKAY, WITH THAT 
          [STAFF COMMENT]
WE WILL TURN TO STAFF COMMENT PLANNING MANAGER ANDREW TRIPLE. 
          ANY STAFF COMMENT FOR US? JUST, UH, JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THE REMINDER ABOUT THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, COMMUNITY EVENT TOMORROW EVENING FROM FIVE TO EIGHT AT THE, UH, LUCCHESE COMMUNITY CENTER. 
          AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENT PAGES 33 TO SOMETHING OR OTHER, THAT'S DUE ON BY THE 27TH, RIGHT? WE WANNA CORRECT. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          SO THIS WEEK GET YOUR NOTES IN IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT TO AN EVENT LIVE OR EVEN IF YOU ARE IN, IT'S NICE TO HAVE EVERYTHING NICELY WRAPPED UP AND SEND IT ON OVER TO HEATHER. 
          UM, LAST CALL FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. 
          OKAY, LET'S ADJOURN AT 1138. 
          I.
* 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.