Jun 23, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting

ALRIGHT, THANKS VERY MUCH.

UH, WITH THAT WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE ON THIS MEETING.

ITEM AND CHAIR.

UH, WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE AS WELL, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, ONE QUESTION I HAD JUST ELEVATING SOMETHING FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT DID COME IN WAS A SLIGHT DISCREPANCY IN THE HOURS OF OPERATION, UM, BETWEEN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE AND THEN SORT OF LOWER DOWN IN IT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE CURRENT BUSINESSES, HOURS OF OPERATION.

I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE SHOULD SORT OF COME INTO ONE.

AGREED.

SO THAT, UH, COULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU REQUIRE.

UH, HOWEVER, MODIFYING THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENT WASN'T PART OF THIS, UM, APPLICATION, JUST MOVING IT FORWARD AND REPLACING IT.

SO JUST TO CORRECT THAT WAS THE, THE COMMENT THAT WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY EDIT THAT.

IT ALSO LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS A LITTLE TYPO BETWEEN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

NUMBER FIVE REFERENCES, OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS, AND NUMBER TWO, BUT THOSE ARE ACTUALLY DESCRIBED IN NUMBER SIX.

[00:15:01]

MM-HMM .

AND I THINK WE CAN LOOK TO HOW THIS IS WRITTEN TO GIVE US SOME OF THAT FRAMING.

OTHER QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY BEFORE WE MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN HAVE A BROADER DISCUSSION AFTER THAT? GO FOR IT.

UH, GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT LIKE THE PRECEDENT, THIS KIND OF SETS OR THE APPLICABILITY TO OTHER SITES.

IS THIS SOMETHING WE'VE DONE BEFORE, UM, LIKE A MASTER CUP OR JUST SOME CONTEXT THERE AND LIKE HOW THAT MIGHT CARRY OVER TO FUTURE SITES AND APPLICANTS? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE.

UM, THE, THE STANDARD APPROACH HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, THAT, UM, PRIMARILY RETENANTING OF EXISTING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS ARE TREATED ON A CASE BY BASIS.

UH, IT DID SEEM LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE A THE APPLICANT PRESENTED, UM, WITH THE SITUATION OF IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT TO MARKET THE SPACE IF, IF, YOU KNOW, A MINOR CUP OR A CUP IS REQUIRED BOTH IN TERMS OF TIME AND COST, UM, FOR POTENTIAL TENANTS AND, AND WAS INTERESTED IN EXPLORING A SOLUTION AND LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVES.

SO IT WAS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR, UH, FOR THE, THE PLANNING STAFF TO INNOVATE AROUND THE ISSUE, WHICH IS A KNOWN ISSUE, UH, AS WELL AS, UM, TAKING A LEAD FROM WHERE CONVERSATIONS WERE HEADED, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AROUND FLEXIBILITY IN LAND USES AND, AND, UM, MIXES OF LAND USES, UH, ACROSS ZONING CODES, UH, AS WELL AS ESPECIALLY THE MOST RECENT EMERGING CONVERSATIONS AROUND, UM, EXPLORING THROUGH THE ZONING REFORM PROJECT, THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR A VARIETY OF LAND USES AND WORKING ESPECIALLY CLOSELY WITH BUSINESS STAKEHOLDERS, UM, TO REVIEW THOSE.

SO IT'S, I THINK IT'S, IT'S A SOLUTION THAT PERHAPS, UM, SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, THE ZONING REFORM PROJECT MAY, UM, BE ABLE TO INTEGRATE IT INTO, UH, THE FRAMEWORK THAT WE BRING FORWARD, BUT CERTAINLY, UM, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT GIVES THE APPLICANT WHO IS ALSO THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE ASSURANCE THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RETENANTING EFFORTS.

I THINK YOU SORT OF PARTIALLY ANSWERED MY QUESTION, BUT AS WE DO BRING THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TO A CLOSE AND ACTUALLY UPDATE THE GENERAL PLAN , HOW, UH, WILL THIS BE IMPACTED AND, AND OTHER POTENTIAL PARCELS LIKE IT? SURE.

SO, SO, UH, TYPICALLY WHEN THE COMMISSION OR OR THE DIRECTOR APPROVES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, THE, THE VESTING OF THE RIGHTS THAT ARE APPROVED.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK AS, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED DURING WORKSHOPS AND PREVIOUSLY, REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE ACTION OF APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS ACTUALLY EXPANDING THE PROPERTY RIGHTS TO ALLOW A CERTAIN USE THAT OTHERWISE NEEDS TO BE PERMITTED.

AND SO THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS WRITTEN IN A MANNER THAT IT WOULD, UH, VEST IMMEDIATELY UP ON APPROVAL.

SO HE DOES HAVE THE VESTED RIGHTS EVEN GOING FORWARD, IF THE ZONING REFORM PROJECT DOES NOT FULLY ENCOMPASS WHAT HE'S TRYING TO ACHIEVE WITH THE MASTER CUP, HE WOULD STILL HAVE THE VESTED RIGHTS THAT HE RECEIVES THROUGH THE CUP.

SO, SO THAT I THINK GIVES, GIVES SOME ASSURANCE, REDUCES RISK, AND ALLOWS, UH, BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND FUTURE TENANTS TO MOVE FORWARD UNDER THE FRAMEWORKS THAT, UM, IN PARTICULAR THAT, THAT ARE DESCRIBED ON PAGE FIVE OF THE STAFF REPORT, WHERE WE, WE LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, UH, MAXIMUM TENANT FLOOR AREA, A SINGLE TENANT CONCENTRATION LIMIT, AN EMPLOYEE LIMIT, UM, OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ICO ASSETS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.

IT DOES ACTUALLY ESTABLISH HOURS OF OPERATION, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE IN THE ICO.

SO THAT'S HELPFUL.

AND THEN FINALLY, IT, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE TASTING ROOM.

UM, AND, AND TASTING ROOMS ARE CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT REFLECTS OUR, OUR LOCAL AND REGIONAL MAKER ECONOMY AND THAT WE SEEK TO ENCOURAGE THROUGHOUT THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

AND IT DOES SOUND LIKE AS THE IZO UPDATE COMES TO FRUITION, SOME OF THESE MAY JUST GET INTEGRATED IN THAT'S CORRECT.

I THINK, I THINK THE, THE LIKELIHOOD IS, IS THAT SOME WILL, UM, HOWEVER WE DO, WE DO KNOW THAT WE USE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TOOL IN PART TO, UM, REGULATE OVER CONCENTRATION SO THAT WE ENSURE THAT WE HAVE A MIX OF BUSINESSES TO CREATE THAT VIBRANT DOWNTOWN ECONOMY AND, UM, AND BE A DRAW FOR, FOR SHOPPERS AND SUCH.

SO I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE, UH, ONE OF THE TOPICS OF CONVERSATION IS WHILE WE DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE FLEXIBILITY, WHILE WE DO WANT TO REDUCE BARRIERS, WE ALSO WANT TO BE CONSCIOUS OF FACTORS LIKE OVER CONCENTRATION AND SO FORTH.

[00:20:01]

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. RESON? YEAH, THESE ARE A COUPLE OF SMALLER KIND OF THINGS ABOUT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M READING IT RIGHT AND THESE ARE REFERENCES, UH, SPECIFICALLY THAT APPEAR INCORRECT, BUT THAT'S WHY I WANT TO ASK THE QUESTION.

UH, SO CONDITION FIVE, IT SAYS, UM, USES ARE QUOTE UNQUOTE SUBJECT TO OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS IN CONDITION TWO, AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE CONDITION SIX.

I THINK THAT'S THE OPERATIONAL, OKAY.

THAT'S CORRECT.

UM, AND IF WE'VE ALREADY GONE OVER THESE, YOU GUYS HAVE INCORPORATED, LET ME KNOW, CONDITION SIX A, UH, REFERENCES THE CUP PERMIT NUMBER, BUT IT DROPS A ZERO ON THERE.

NOT SURE THAT MATTERS, BUT 11 DASH CP DASH 0 4 6 2 IN CONDITION SIX A, IT'S CUP DASH 4 62.

WE CAN MAKE THAT CORRECTION.

YEAH, LIKE I SAID, THESE ARE GONNA BE A LITTLE PEDANTIC, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THE CONDITIONS RIGHT.

UM, CONDITION NINE, THERE'S A TYPO WHERE IT MISSES A FIRE, I THINK IT SHOULD SAY.

AND BUILDING REVIEW, UM, IN CON, SORRY, I'LL MAKE SURE YOU GUYS ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, BUT CONDITION NINE, IT SAYS NOTHING IN THIS APPROVAL ELIMINATES FIRE AND REVIEW.

UH, SO I WANNA SAY FIRE AND BUILDING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THEN I THINK, UM, I THINK THAT'S IT ON THOSE ITEMS. UH, AND I THINK, YEAH, I THINK I HAD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND, UH, GENERAL PLAN LAND USE.

DO WE KNOW, IS THIS PARCEL GONNA BE MAKER MICRO BUSINESS? I DIDN'T PULL UP THE LAND USE MAP AND I SHOULD HAVE ASKED AND JUST WEATHER ANY, OBVIOUSLY THIS, THESE ARE ENTITLEMENTS THEY LIVE WITH THE LAND, BUT IS THIS, IF IT IS MAKER MICRO BUSINESS, IS THIS THE KIND OF THING WE ENVISION POTENTIALLY IN THE ZONING CODE FOR PARCELS LABELED TO MAKER MICRO BUSINESS? SO KIND OF TO THAT SAME IDEA OF DO WE ANTICIPATE DOING MORE OF THIS? SURE.

UM, I, I WANT TO LOOK IT UP, BUT I BELIEVE IT RETAINS ITS MIXED USE LAND USE DESIGNATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.

BUT YES, I THINK IT IS, IT IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF HOW WE WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE, UH, MAKER MIX BI, YOU KNOW, AND, AND MICRO BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES WHERE, WHERE WE WANT TO, TO, UM, ALLOW FOR THAT ENTREPRENEURIAL SMALL SCALE ACTIVITY TO EMERGE, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH, THROUGH AN INCUBATOR APPROACH, WHICH IS REALLY PARTLY WHAT THIS IS, UM, OR TO, UH, TO BECOME A FULL FLEDGED TENANT, UM, OPERATING AT A SCALE THAT THEY WOULD WISH TO OPERATE AT FOR LONG TERM.

I THINK IT WOULD GIVE A LOT OF MEAT ON THE BONE TO MAKE OR MICRO BUSINESS KIND OF HAVING A PURPOSE WITH THINGS LIKE THIS SPECIFIED IN THE ZONING CODE.

UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT EVERY SITE WILL HAVE SUCH A ROBUST EXISTING AUTHORIZED USE LIKE THIS THAT GIVES YOU A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY.

UM, BUT YEAH.

ANYWAY, UH, NOT TO GO INTO COMMENTS.

LAST QUESTION.

APPEALS, UH, LOOKS LIKE THE PLANNING DIRECTOR WILL HAVE, UM, LEEWAY TO DECIDE IF FUTURE PROJECTS CONFORM WITH THIS KIND OF MASTER CUP.

WHAT'S THE APPEALS PROCESS FOR ANY NEIGHBORS LIKE NOTICING AND APPEALS? IS THAT SAME AS USUAL OR JUST WITHOUT A HEARING? HOW DID THEY APPEAL IF THERE'S A FINDING MADE OR HOW ARE THOSE PUBLICIZED? WELL, SO THE, THE PROJECT, UH, OR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR TO MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE DETERMINATION, WHICH IS A, A FAIRLY ROBUST DETERMINATION THAT WE USE, UM, QUITE REGULARLY, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO, TO IMPLEMENTING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

UM, AND WE'RE TYPICALLY VERY RESPONSIVE, UH, IN THAT, IN THAT, UH, DETERMINATION PROCESS.

SO IF THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT A PARTICULAR USE, UM, OR IF, IF NEIGHBORS HAVE QUESTIONS, WE TAKE THOSE INTO ACCOUNT AND SUCH, THERE'S ALSO NOTHING THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THE DIRECTOR FROM FINDING THAT A PARTICULAR, UH, RETENANTING REQUEST IS NOT IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE.

AND THEN ELEVATING THAT BACK UP TO THE MINOR USE PERMIT OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT IS CURRENTLY REQUIRED BY THE SMART CODE.

SO I THINK THERE'S TWO, UM, YOU KNOW, STOPGAPS THERE.

THE OTHER, THE OTHER FACTOR I THINK TO CONSIDER IS I BELIEVE WE WOULD RUN INTO SUCH A CIRCUMSTANCE IF WE DID SEE SOME MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

SAY FOR INSTANCE, WE SAW A RESIDENTIAL, UM, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE SITE, AND THEN RESIDENCES MIGHT BE MORE SENSITIVE TO PERFORMANCE, UM, ISSUES, ODOR, NOISE, YOU KNOW, UM, AND SO FORTH DUST PERHAPS.

AND IN THOSE CASES, THEN THE DIRECTOR COULD ALSO POINT TO, UM, THE CHANGE IN, UH, EXISTING CONDITIONS POINT TO THOSE RESIDENTS COMING TO LOCATE ADJACENT TO IT AND ELEVATE

[00:25:01]

AS WELL.

NOW, I, I DO IN SAYING ALL THIS, RECOGNIZE THAT THROUGH THE SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE DETERMINATION PROCESS, WE DON'T NOTICE, UM, AS PART OF THAT DETERMINATION PROCESS.

SO THIS WOULD BE, UH, THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF, UM, REDUCING THAT PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PROCESS.

AND, AND I GUESS IN THAT VEIN, UH, WERE NEIGHBORS CONTACTED AND IF SO, DID THEY CARE OR HAVE FEEDBACK OR, YEAH, SO WE DID ALL OF THE NOTICING WITHIN A THOUSAND UH, FEET, AND WE ONLY GOT ONE, UH, RESIDENT WHO EXPRESSED, UH, POSITIVE.

SO IT WASN'T LIKE OTHER BUSINESSES WERE ASKING WHAT WAS GOING ON OR THAT WE MIGHT IMPACT.

I WAS NOT EXPECTING THAT, BUT NO.

UM, I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY THAT THAT, UM, THERE'S PROBABLY MORE THAN JUST THIS BUSINESS THAT ARE IN THE SAME SITUATION.

IN THAT SORT OF TRIANGULAR CORRIDOR THAT'S BOUNDED BY THE RAILROAD TRACK IN LAKEVILLE STREET, THAT'S ALL DEVELOPED FOR INDUSTRIAL USE.

IT ALL IS DESIGNATED MIXED USE, UM, IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND IN THE FORTHCOMING GENERAL PLAN.

AND THERE'S, THERE'S AN ARGUMENT FOR, YOU KNOW, RETAINING THESE EMPLOYMENT FOCUSED USES, UM, PROXIMATE TO DOWNTOWN PROXIMATE TO THE, THE TRANSIT TO THE SMART STATION AND SO FORTH.

SO I THINK THAT, UM, I WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE UNTIL WE MIGHT SEE A CONVERSION OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT AWAY FROM THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, SORT OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MIX OF USES, UH, THAT WE WOULD FIND ANY, ANY, UM, CONCERNS.

UH, THAT'S IT FOR QUESTIONS.

GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER HILT, JUST ONE QUESTION IN TERMS OF THE O OPERATIONAL SCALE AND RIGHT SIZING CONTROLS, AND, AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SPECIFIC TO THIS, BUT AS WE THINK ABOUT IMPLEMENTING THE GENERAL PLAN THROUGH ORDINANCE AND OTHER CHANGES AND USING THIS MASTERS AS A SORT OF A, A TEST CASE, IF YOU WILL, IF THIS IS HOW WE WANNA PROCEED, WHERE DID THE, HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THE 5,000 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM TENANT SIZE? WAS THERE A LOGIC BEHIND, IS THERE BEST PRACTICES ASSOCIATED WITH IT? YEP.

SO THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT IS ASSOCIATED WITH SOME OF THE FOOTNOTES THAT WERE IN THE, UH, THE SMART CODE.

UM, AND THEN A LOT OF THE, UH, OTHER ONES WERE EITHER SELECTED TO, UH, CO BE COHERENT WITH THE SMART CODE OR TO AVOID, UH, SPILLING INTO A HIGHER HAZARD CLASS.

UM, AND WE WORKED WITH CLOSELY WITH THE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU TO SORT OF MAP THAT OUT.

AND THAT WOULD ALSO BE THE 50% OF THE TOTAL BUILDING SPACE.

ALSO, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM ONE TENANT IS THAT, YEAH, SO THAT WAS MORE THAT ONE IS, IS IS MORE, UH, SMALL BUSINESS INCUBATOR FOCUSED.

UM, THE IDEA BEHIND THAT ONE SPECIFICALLY WASN'T TO MEET ANY SPECIFIC, UH, CODE REQUIREMENT, BUT WAS RATHER TO AVOID HAVING ONE TENANT MOVE IN AND JUST TAKE OVER THE WHOLE BUSINESS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

MY GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHERE DID THOSE NUMBERS COME FROM? ARE THOSE GENERALLY RECOGNIZED BEST PRACTICES FOR INCUBATOR TYPE OF PROJECTS, OR IS THAT SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, FIT THIS BUILDING? UM, THAT WAS WHAT WAS, UH, SUGGESTED BY THE, UH, APPLICANT, SO WE WENT WITH THAT.

TO KEEP THEM BELOW THAT THRESHOLD.

I'M JUST WONDERING, MY QUESTION IS ENOUGH DEALING WITH THIS PROJECT THERE, IT'S REALLY DEALING WITH WHAT DO WE DO THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR OF THESE AND WHAT ARE WE SETTING UP FOR? THAT'S ALL.

MM-HMM .

THANKS.

YEP.

COMMISSIONER , UH, RELATED TO THAT, UH, THE ASSEMBLY USE OR THE TASTING ROOM USE MM-HMM .

SEEMS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN THE REST OF THE MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL USES IS, WHERE DID THAT ONE COME FROM? WAS THAT PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT OR? YEAH, SO ALL OF THE, THE USES, UM, THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE EITHER CONDITIONALLY, UH, UH, SUPPORTED IN THAT IN THE T FIVE ZONING.

AND UM, LIKE I SAID, WE WENT WITH THE, UH, FIRE, UH, DEPARTMENT AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SORT OF FIND A HAZARD CLASS THAT COULD WORK ACROSS ALL OF THEM.

UM, AND SO ONE OF THE ONES THAT WAS ABLE TO REMAIN WAS THE TASTING ROOM.

I AGREE THAT IT, IT, IT, IT .

IT DOESN'T SEEM THE SAME AS THE SMALL BUSINESS MANUFACTURING OR THE, THE FOOD PRODUCTION, BUT, UM, IT IS NONETHELESS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED SO CONDITIONALLY SUPPORTED IN THAT.

SO MAYBE ONE FOLLOW UP TO THAT, I THINK, UH, THERE'S IN THE VEHICLE CIRCULATION SECTION MM-HMM .

UM, OF THE RESOLUTION DRAFT, THERE'S MENTION OF THERE'S NO ASSEMBLY USES.

IS THIS BECAUSE IT'S UNDER 50 OCCUPANTS NOT CONSIDERED ASSEMBLY SPACE? YES.

AND SO THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE UNDER, RIGHT.

SO FOR CONTEXT, UM, ONE OF THE OTHER EARLIER PROPOSED USES WAS, UM, UH, INDOOR RECREATION.

UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD, UH, BUMP OVER TO THAT ASSEMBLY USE, UM, AND THEN REQUIRE HIGHER FIRE CLASSES FOR ALL AREAS.

UM, SO KEEPING THIS, UH, AT THE 50 PERSON, UH, LIMIT WAS ABLE

[00:30:01]

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON, AND IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND BRING IT TO THE CLERK.

CLERK.

HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING? WE RECEIVED ONE PUBLIC COMMENT PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND IT'S BEEN POSTED ONLINE.

ANY IN-PERSON SPEAKERS? I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY, NO.

THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.

OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ITEMS BEFORE WE TAKE THIS TO A VOTE? COMMISSIONER KUSON? YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IN A LOT OF WAYS I LIKE THE DIRECTION HERE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RETAINING BUSINESSES AND BRINGING SMALL BUSINESSES AND DIVIDING MASSIVE SQUARE FOOTAGES, AND THIS KIND OF DOES ALL THAT, UM, WHICH IS GREAT.

I THINK ONE PIECE I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE FOR STAFF TO EXPLORE IS NOTICING, UM, WHAT OR COMMUNICATION, WHAT THAT CAN LOOK LIKE.

'CAUSE OSTENSIBLY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE USES ROTATING THAT WON'T NECESSARILY BE NOTICED.

THIS ONE ISN'T IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, BUT FOR FUTURE, UM, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO KNOW HOW WE CAN NOTICE EFFECTIVELY LIKE WHAT THE TRIGGERS ARE FOR, FOR NOTICING WHEN NEW TENANTS ARE A GENERALLY CONFORMING USE.

UM, I THINK A BIG PIECE OF THIS TOO IS UNDERSTANDING I, IF I WERE A PROPERTY OWNER WITH ANY KIND OF RESIDENTIAL, I WON'T SAY FLEX 'CAUSE THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT P OF WAX, BUT LIKE RESIDENTIAL MAKER, MICRO BUSINESS, I'D WANNA KNOW HOW DO I GET THIS CUP, RIGHT? LIKE, MY PROPERTY'S INSTANTLY WORTH MORE, I CAN HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY WITH MY TENANTS.

SO AS THIS IS ROLLED OUT, I GUESS, IS THIS SOMETHING, OR I WOULD SAY, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD SOCIALIZE THIS IDEA THROUGH THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT TEAM, UM, TO FIGURE OUT FEEDBACK AND HOW TO IMPLEMENT THIS KIND OF PROCESS ON OTHER LIKE SITES.

I THINK THAT COULD BE A, A HUGE WIN.

AND AGAIN, PENDING PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSE AND INTEREST AND WHAT THE PROCESS LOOKS LIKE TO GET HERE.

IF IT'S JUST ONE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING INSTEAD OF TONS INTO THE FUTURE, THAT COULD BE REALLY HUGE.

SO, UH, YEAH, I'D SAY OVERALL I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS SOCIALIZED EXPLORED MORE, ADD-ON A LITTLE MORE ROBUST NOTICING SO PEOPLE DON'T FEEL AMBUSHED AS USES CHANGE.

I THINK THE ONLY OTHER KIND OF THING, AND, AND I WASN'T SURE IF I WAS READING THIS RIGHT, PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN QUESTIONS.

UM, I THINK THE REPORT TALKS ABOUT NORTH BAY MUSTANG EXPANDING.

IS THAT RIGHT TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL 700 SQUARE FOOT? NO.

BASED, NO, THEY HAVE THOSE, UH, THE TWO SUITES THAT WE USE.

THEY JUST HAVE THOSE TWO SUITES.

YEAH, THEY'RE AT THE 4,700 AND SOME SQUARE FOOT, SO THEY'RE UNDER FIVE.

THAT WAS MY ONLY LIKE, NITPICKY QUESTION, BUT YEAH, OTHERWISE, UH, YEAH, I REALLY LIKE THE DIRECTION.

I HOPE WE SOCIALIZE IT AND GET IT OUT THERE.

I DID ACTUALLY HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, AND THAT WAS, WHY ARE BAKERIES EXCLUDED IN THE FOOD? WHO'S THAT? WHY ARE BAKERIES, UH, SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED IN FOOD AND BEVERAGE PRODUCT MANUFACTURING? THE EQUIPMENT CARRIES A HIGHER, UM, UH, HAZARD CLASS, AH, IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

COOL.

I ALSO LOVE THE EXPLICIT CALL OUT OF TAXI DERMIS FUN, FUN READ RANDOM, BUT FUN.

JUST IN CASE YOU'RE WONDERING THAT, THAT THAT'S ARTISAN.

UM, OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY.

YEAH, I THINK IN ALL THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD AROUND THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, THE, THE FLEXIBILITY WORD KEEPS COMING UP.

UM, SO I APPRECIATE STAFF'S, UM, INGENUITY AND CREATING THIS SORT OF MASTER CUP APPROACH.

UM, AND I'LL BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW IT PANS OUT AND WHETHER WE GET MORE TAKERS OF THIS MODEL.

I THINK, UM, AND AS WE STARTED FRAMING THE CONCEPT, WE, WE REALLY, WE REALLY BUILT GENERALIZATION INTO IT.

UH, COUNCIL MEMBER BARN.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE THE, THE THOUGHT ABOUT SCALABILITY TOO.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT YOUR, WHAT THE PLAN IS FOR THAT? YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER KUSON BROUGHT UP SOCIALIZING IT THROUGH THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT GROUP.

UM, WHAT, UH, YOU KNOW, AT WHAT, WHAT TIMELINE DO YOU FEEL LIKE, LIKE LOOKING AT SCALABILITY, UM, MAKES SENSE, I GUESS.

WELL, I THINK THAT WHILE THIS IS FOR A SINGLE SITE, WHEN, WHEN WE APPROACHED THE SORT OF THE, THE PUZZLE, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE IT STARTED OUT AS A PUZZLE,

[00:35:01]

SO I THINK THAT WE, AS WE FRAMED IT, AS WE DEVELOPED THE OVER CONCENTRATION LIMITS AND SUCH, ACTUALLY NOT THE SPECIFIC LIMITS, BUT THE, THOSE CRITERIA, THE CRITERIA RELATED TO OVER PERCENTAGE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE.

UH, DO WE WANT TO CONTROL HOURS OF OPERATION, THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE WERE THINKING MORE BROADLY ABOUT WHAT MIGHT THOSE CRITERIA OR THOSE CONTROLS BE LIKE FOR ANY, ANY, UM, TYPE OF MASTER CUP.

AND THEY'RE REALLY THE SAME FACTORS THAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT A MINOR USE PERMIT, YOU KNOW, FOR A SINGLE TENDENCY AT THIS SITE ANYWAY, SO THAT REALLY HELPED INFORM IT.

UM, I DO THINK THAT THE, THE COMMENT ABOUT NOTICING IS A STRONG ONE, AND I THINK WHAT WE COULD DO, I, I, I WAS REVIEWING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND I, I DON'T THINK I WANT TO RECOMMEND MAKING A MODIFICATION TO THIS PROJECT, BUT WHAT WE COULD DO IN FUTURE PROJECTS IS WE COULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT, THEN PRIOR TO MAKING A SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE DETERMINATION, THE, UH, PUBLIC NOTICING WOULD BE ISSUED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.

OR IF OVER THE COURSE OF TIME RESIDENTIAL WOULD COME TO BE LOCATED NEXT TO, UM, SOMEPLACE THAT HAS A MASTER CUP, THEN UH, PUBLIC NOTICING WOULD BE REQUIRED.

AND I THINK THAT CAN CAPTURE, UH, AND CONTINUES TO BE A RELATIVELY, UM, LOW BARRIER TO ACHIEVE.

IT'S, IT'S, UH, PUBLIC NOTICING IS NOT THAT EXPENSIVE.

IT'S NOT THAT TIME CONSUMING.

YOU KNOW, IT TAKES US ABOUT TWO WEEKS BETWEEN SUBMITTING THE NOTICING AND ROLLING IT OUT FOR A 10 DAY REVIEW PERIOD.

SO WE COULD ADD THAT IN, UM, AS WE SCALE UP AND AS OTHER OPPORTUNITIES PRESENT.

UM, OKAY.

UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, ACTUALLY, APPLICANT TOM, UM, DO YOU, I, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND, UM, LOOKING FORWARD TO SUPPORTING IT.

DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE, UM, BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOOKING TO MOVE IN THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS RIGHT AWAY, THAT SORT OF THING? YEAH.

UM, I, I, I APOLOGIZE.

I'M A LITTLE HARD OF HEARING IN THE, UM, AND, AND THE SPACE IS, UH, VERY HARD, HAS A LOT OF HARD SURFACES IN IT.

UH, W WOULD YOU MIND REPEATING THE QUESTION? YEAH.

DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE, UM, A SET OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE READY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS? UM, WELL, AT, AT THIS POINT, I MEAN, MY, AT THIS POINT, THE SPACE, THE BUILDING ONLY HAS ONE, UH, VACANT TENANT IN IT.

AND, UM, I, MY LONG TERM VISION IS, UM, WELL, WE'VE GOT AN AUTO REPAIR SHOP, BUT IT'S SORT OF A SPECIALTY HYBRID SHOP.

UH, UH, IT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT WORKS ON HYBRIDS AND THE, UM, AND THE, UH, AUTO PARTS IS, IS SORT OF A SPECIALTY SHOP TOO, BECAUSE THE NORTH BAY MUSTANG, UH, HAS, UH, ESSENTIALLY HISTORICAL AUTO, AUTO PARTS.

IT'S JUST, IT'S NOT LIKE A DODGE DEALERSHIP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WE HAVE A, WELL, ALSO A W WOODWORKER IN THERE.

AND MY VISION IS CERTAINLY TO EMBRACE THOSE KIND OF BUSINESSES, BUT ALSO WE'RE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BUILDING AND TRY TO BRING MORE, UH, TENANTS OF, UM, YOUNG, YOUNGER GENERATION AND NEW, NEWER FORMS OF BUSINESS INTO THE, UH, INTO THE, UH, SITE.

UM, I GUESS MY FEEDBACK TO STAFF HERE IS TO JUST MONITOR THIS AND AS WE SEE UPTAKE, I, I THINK WHAT, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR WHEN WE MAKE THESE CHANGES IS OUTCOMES, RIGHT? PROGRESS.

SO, DO WE SEE THAT MORE BUSINESSES ARE MOVING IN? DO WE SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE APPLICANT'S VISION IS STARTING TO MATERIALIZE ON WHAT TIMELINE, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO KEEP, KEEP TRACK OF THIS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'LL BE THE BEST SELLING POINT TO OTHER BUSINESSES WHO ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING SIMILAR.

AND IT'LL BE A GREAT SELLING POINT AS WE GET DEEPER INTO THE GENERAL PLAN ZONING CODE UPDATE OR THE ZONING CODE UPDATE TO THINK ABOUT, UM, WHERE THIS COULD BE EXPANDED IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.

SO THANK YOU.

AND I'LL, I'LL MOVE THE ITEM.

COULD WE GET A SECOND TO VOTE? SECOND.

SO WE'VE GOT A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER BARNICLE AND A SECOND YEAH.

AND WITH THE CORRECTIONS THAT WE'VE, WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.

SO JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

THANKS.

COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN AYE.

A MOTION TO VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION WITH THE ENCOMPASSED EDITS AS WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING.

SO MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARNACLE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHUTT.

UH, COULD WE PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL? VOTE.

COMMISSIONER EBNER.

YAY.

[00:40:01]

COMMISSIONER NOEL? ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER KUSON? YES.

COMMISSIONER HIL? YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER BARNACLE.

AYE.

CHAIR MOSES? YES, IT'S APPROVED.

WILL CLOSE MEETING WHAT WAS MEETING ITEM THREE AND CONTINUE ON WITH THE AGENDA.

ALRIGHT.

WITH THAT WE

[2. Public Hearing – Recommendation to the City of Petaluma Planning Commission to Receive a Staff Presentation and Public Comment and Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider a Staff Recommendation to Approve a Resolution Recommending the City Council Adopt a PUD Amendment Ordinance Amending the Scott Ranch Planned Unit District (PUD) Development Standards to Rescind Section 5.3 Prohibiting Swimming Pools and Add to Table 5.1: Land Uses, Residential District, Swimming Pool, Hot Tub, and Spa as Permitted Accessory Uses, Subject to Specific Use Standards under Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) Section 7.080. Consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), impacts of the Project were previously analyzed in the Scott Ranch Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2004072137), which was certified by the Petaluma City Council on February 27, 2023 (Resolution 2023-023). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, there are no substantial project changes, no substantial changes in circumstances, and no new information indicating new significant effects. THIS MEETING ITEM WAS PUBLISHED ON THURSDAY, JUNE 18, 2026]

UH, MOVING BACK TO MEETING ITEM TWO, WHICH I WILL READ HERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECEIVE A STAFF PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT AND CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A PUD AMENDMENT ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCOTT RANCH PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO RESCIND SECTION 5.3 PROHIBITING SWIMMING POOLS AND ADD TO TABLE 5.1.

LAND USES RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT SWIMMING POOL, HOT TUB AND SPA AS PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS UNDER IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE OR IEO SECTION 7.080 CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OR CQA IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT WERE PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED IN THE SCOTT RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, UH, WHICH IS SCH NUMBER 2 0 0 4 0 7 2 1 3 7, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED BY THE PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 2023 VIA RESOLUTION 2023 DASH 23.

PURSUANT TO CQA GUIDANCE SECTION 1 5 1 6 2, THERE ARE NO SUBSTANTIAL PROJECT CHANGES, NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES, AND NO NEW INFORMATION INDICATING NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS.

AND SINCE THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, IT WILL REQUIRE DISCLOSING EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.

AND I WILL THROW TO COMMISSIONER SCHULTZ INITIALLY HERE.

HI.

UM, OUT OF THE ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION AND HAVING HAD A PREVIOUS BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE, THE DEVELOPER, THE APPLICANT, I'M GONNA RECUSE MYSELF.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS THAT NEED DISCLOSING.

ALL RIGHT, WE'LL GIVE COMMISSIONER SCHUTT A MOMENT HERE TO EXIT THE STAGE.

NEAR COMMON OPEN SPACES AS WELL.

ALRIGHT, , WITH THAT, WE'VE GOT OUR PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND WE'LL KICK IT TO THE, UH, STAFF TO PRESENT.

THANK YOU CHAIR MOSES AND GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS MIKE JANAK AND I'M A SENIOR PLANNER CONSULTING WITH M GROUP.

I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE SCOTT RANCH PUD AMENDMENT.

THIS IS PLZA 20 26 0 0 0 1.

AN OVERVIEW OF MY PRESENTATION THIS EVENING, I WILL RUN THROUGH PROJECT BACKGROUND, UM, DESCRIBE THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTED AMENDMENT, COMPARE THE, UH, UH, COMPARE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AGAINST THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AND PROVIDE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

HERE IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT SITE.

THE SCOTT RANCH PLANNING UNIT DISTRICT, OR PUD IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF D STREET AND WINDSOR DRIVE IN THE SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE CITY.

UM, IT, UH, CONSISTS OF TWO LAND USE, UH, TWO LAND USE DISTRICTS.

THE NORTHERN PORTION, UH, BEING APPROXIMATELY 12 ACRES IS THE RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DISTRICT AND THE SOUTHERN PORTION, APPROXIMATELY 47 ACRES, UM, HAS BEEN DEDICATED AS, UH, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE AND WILL BE THE SITE OF THE FUTURE HELEN PUTNAM REGIONAL PARK EXTENSION.

UM, THIS, UH, REQUEST PERTAINS ONLY TO THAT NORTHERN 12 ACRES, THE 28, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES.

UH, THE EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

ABOUT HALF THE HOMES HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED.

UM, THE, THE FRONT YARD, UH, CONTAINS APPROVED LANDSCAPING AND THE REAR YARD.

UM, THE LANDSCAPING IS UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS ON, UM, WHAT TO PUT THERE AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN.

UM, THERE IS ALSO APPROVED, UH, FENCING.

UM, THERE'S A FAIRLY ROBUST FENCE PLAN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED FOR THE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES A MIX OF, UM, SOLID SIX FOOT HIGH GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCING AND AS WELL AS, UM, OPEN WIRE, UH, VIEW FENCING, WHICH IS A COMBINATION OF, UH, FOUR FEET OF WIRE MESH ATOP, UM, TWO FEET OF, OF SOLID WOOD.

UM, THERE'S ALSO LATTICE FENCING.

THERE'S, UH, RETAINING WALLS.

THERE'S, UM, RANCH STYLE FENCING, UM,

[00:45:01]

UH, THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AS A NATION IS VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

UM, THE MINIMUM DENSITY FOR THIS, UH, DESIGNATION IS 0.6, AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPROVED SUBDIVISION, UM, HAS BEEN, UM, DESIGNED FOR.

UM, THIS REQUEST WOULD NOT AFFECT THE UNIT COUNT OR THE DENSITY IN ANY WAY.

UM, AND THE PROPOSED, UM, AMENDMENT, UM, WOULD NOT AFFECT THE CLUSTERED LAYOUT OR, UM, THE HILLSIDE DESIGN IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER.

UH, THE PROJECT ZONING IS PUD AND ON MARCH, UH, 28TH, 2023, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBERS 28 39 AND 28 40.

THOSE ARE INCLUDED AS ATTACHMENTS TWO AND THREE IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING.

AND THERE ARE ALSO, UH, SIMILAR RESIDENTIAL PITIES SURROUNDING THE SITE, INCLUDING MAXWELL PINNACLE, VICTORIA ONE AND VICTORIA TWO.

AND SO A BID ON, ON THE PREVIOUS APPROVALS, THE SUITE OF ENTITLEMENTS AND THE EIR, UM, WERE BROUGHT FORWARD, UM, TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, UM, IN LATE 2022 AND EARLY 2023, THE VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, UM, TO CREATE THE 28 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

AND THE, UH, PARK, UH, FOUR SEVEN ACRE PARK PARCEL WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 2023, ALONG WITH, UM, CERTIFICATION OF THE PROJECT EIR, UM, THE, THE NEXT MONTH IN MARCH OF 2023.

UM, THE PUD WAS CREATED THROUGH ADOPTION OF THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT, AS WELL AS, UM, ZONING TAX AMENDMENT TO ADOPT THE PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

UM, SUBSEQUENTLY, UM, TWO YEARS LATER, UH, ALMOST A YEAR AGO TODAY, UM, THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, UH, WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR MORE DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS.

AND PROJECT LANDSCAPING, UH, BEFORE THIS EVENING IS A PUD AMENDMENT, UM, WHICH IS BEING PROCESSED AS A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.

AND THAT REQUEST IS, UH, RELATIVELY SURGICAL.

IT IS TWO PART, UM, REQUEST.

THE FIRST IS TO STRIKE SECTION 5.3, WHICH IS A PROHIBITION ON SWIMMING POOLS.

AND THE SECOND PART IS TO ADD SWIMMING POOL, HOT TUB AND SPA AS A PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE TO THE USE TABLE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN TABLE 5.1.

UM, AND GOING BACK JUST A SECOND, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST, UM, WOULD BE TO BRING THE PUD, UM, UH, INTO THE SAME REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT AS POOLS IN OTHER RESIDENTIAL, UH, LAND USE DISTRICTS AND RESIDENTIAL ZONES, I SHOULD SAY, AND SO TO, TO REGULATE THEM THE SAME CITYWIDE.

AND THEN ALSO IT WOULD SUPPORT, UM, THE MARKETABILITY OF SCOTT RANCH, UM, HOMES IN ALIGNMENT WITH BUYER EXPECTATIONS.

SO IT IS A APPLICANT INITIATED, UH, REQUEST.

UM, IZO SECTION 19 0 40 E, UM, ALLOWS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO INITIATE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS.

AND THIS IS BEING PROCESSED AGAIN AS A, UM, PURSUANT TO SECTION 19 0 40 E TWO, UM, WHICH REQUIRES, UH, CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL UPON RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND SO, UH, ALLOWING THE SWIMMING POOL AS A PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE SUBJECT TO LOCAL REGULATIONS.

UM, THOSE LOCAL REGULATIONS, UM, FOR POOL CITYWIDE INCLUDE THE 2025 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THAT'S ON A FIVE YEAR CYCLE.

THE CITY JUST ADOPTED THE 2025, UH, UWMP ON JUNE 8TH, 2026.

AND, UH, THE FUNDAMENTAL PURPOSE OF THE UWMP IS TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY, UM, HAS SUFFICIENT WATER RESOURCES FOR THE NEXT 25 YEARS.

UH, CHAPTER EIGHT OF THE UWMP UH, INCLUDES THE CITY'S WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN, AND CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE OR DECLARE RESOLUTION, UM, TO ENACT THESE REGULATIONS DURING EMERGENCY WATER SHORTAGES SUCH AS DROUGHTS.

AND SPECIFICALLY DURING A STAGE THREE WATER SHORTAGE, THE CITY COUNCIL COULD ENFORCE A MORATORIUM ON ISSUANCE OF POOL PERMITS AND SPAS CITYWIDE.

UM, THEY CAN ALSO CONSIDER PROHIBITION ON FILLING OR TOPPING OFF EXISTING POOLS AND SPAS.

S UM, THE CITY ALSO HAS A WATER CONSERVATION ORDINANCE THAT LIVES IN, UM, PETAL AND MUNICIPAL CODE 15, CHAPTER 1517.

AND THIS INCLUDES, UM, THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTATION OF, UM, M WELO OR THE CITY'S WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE.

AND SO NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS WITH

[00:50:01]

MORE THAN 500 SQUARE FEET OF REQUIRED LANDSCAPE SCAPING ARE SUBJECT, UM, TO THIS ORDINANCE.

AND THEY MUST, UM, ALONG WITH THEIR FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN, PREPARE A WATER BUDGET, UM, THAT DEMONSTRATES COMPLIANT WITH THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE.

UM, WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE, POOLS ARE CONSIDERED A HIGH USE OUTDOOR WATER FEATURE.

AND SO GOING BACK TO THE REQUEST BEFORE THIS EVENING, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS PREPARED, UM, THAT WATER BUDGET, UM, ALONGSIDE THEIR, UM, IMPROVEMENT PLANS, UM, FOR CONS FOR BUILDING PERMITS AND THEIR FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS.

UM, THEY HAVE, UM, DEMONSTRATED THAT, UM, EVEN WITH A POOL ON EACH AND EVERY LOT, UM, THEY COULD STILL COMPLY WITH, UH, NOT ONLY THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE, UM, BUT ALSO THE PROJECTED TOTAL WATER USE FOR THE PROJECT, UM, UNDER THE CERTIFIED EIR.

AND SO, UM, IF YOU, THAT'S INCLUDED, THE DETAILS ARE INCLUDED IN ATTACHMENT FIVE IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING.

AND THIS, UM, ASSUMPTION INCLUDE, UM, AVERAGES THE REAR, UH, LOT, UH, REAR YARD SIZE AND THEN ASSUMES AGAIN, ONE LOT OR ONE POOL PER LOT AT A MID-SIZE, UM, FOUR 50 SQUARE FEET AND OTHER ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING, UM, FOR THE REAR YARDS.

UM, PUBLIC OUTREACH, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENT WAS MET DURING THE PREVIOUS SUITE OF ENTITLEMENTS, UH, WHICH INCLUDED A PROJECT EIR IN A VERY ROBUST PUBLIC PROCESS SPANNING TWO DECADES.

UM, FOR THIS ITEM, PUBLIC NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED, MAILED, AND POSTED ON SITE ON JUNE 12TH OF, UH, 2026 AND 13.

WRITTEN COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, UM, ONE IN SUPPORT AND 12 EXPRESSING CONCERNS OVER HABITAT, DRAINAGE, WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, AND THE SOURCE OF THE PROHIBITION.

UM, REGARDING HA HABITAT CONSERVATION, THE APPLICANT HAS OBTAINED ALL APPLICABLE OUTSIDE AGENCY PERMITS, INCLUDING THOSE FROM US, FISH AND WILDLIFE, AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.

UM, A QUALIFIED BIOLOGIST WAS ON SITE DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES OF THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION, AND NO SPECIAL, UH, STATUS SPECIES WERE OBSERVED.

UM, THE CLUSTERED HILLSIDE LAYOUT AND THE WILDLIFE CORRIDORS ARE STILL MAINTAINED AS APPROVED IN TERMS OF POOL DRAINAGE, UM, POOLS DRAINED TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM, UH, PER THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND WOULD NOT IMPACT STREAMS OR WETLANDS.

AND, UM, IN TERMS OF THE SOURCE OF THE POOL PROHIBITION, UM, IT IS EXPLICITLY, UM, ADOPTED AS SECTION 5.3 OF THE PD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

UM, IT'S NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF THE VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, UH, NOR IS IT A MITIGATION MEASURE OF THE CERTIFIED EIR.

UM, REVIEW OF THE RECORD INDICATES THESE STANDARDS WERE DRAFTED AND BROUGHT FORWARD, UM, TO PLANNING COMMISSION IN AUGUST OF 2022, UM, PRIOR TO ANY PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE PUD.

AND SO THEREFORE, UM, THE POOL BAN WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A RESPONSE TO ANY PUBLIC COMMENT OR A COMMISSIONER COMMENT.

UM, AND IT IS LIKELY INFLUENCED, UM, AROUND THE SAME TIME AS CITY COUNCIL ENACTING STAGE FOUR WATER CONTINGENCY PLANS.

UM, DUE TO THE DROUGHT IN, UM, AUGUST OF 2022, UM, STAFF IS ABLE TO MAKE THE APPLICABLE FINDINGS, UM, FOR THE PROJECT.

I'VE TRIED TO INCORPORATE THE MOST PERTINENT ASPECTS, SO I'LL JUST SUMMARIZE.

UM, THE AMENDMENT MAINTAINS THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND HILLSIDE CHARACTER OF THE PUD WHILE ALLOWING POOLS TO BE PERMITTED THE SAME AS EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY, ENSURING PUBLIC NECESSITY AND CONVENIENCE.

THE PROPOSED PUD AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW SWIMMING POOLS AS AN ACCESSORY USE WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE SCOTT RANCH, PUD SUBJECT TO CITYWIDE WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES, ENSURING THE GENERAL WELFARE AND BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY AND ANY PROPOSED SWIMMING POOL.

HOT TUBBER SPA WOULD BE SUBJECT TO SETBACK FENCING AND EXCLUSIVE USE REGULATIONS UNDER IZO SECTION 7 0 80 TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES FOR CE QA, UM, THE, THE PROJECT WAS FULLY ANALYZED UNDER THE SCOTT RANCH, EIR, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT HAS BEEN ANALYZED PURSUANT TO CE QA SECTIONS, CE QA SECTION 15 1 6 2.

AND STAFF HAS MADE A CONSISTENCY FINDING WITH THE CERTIFIED EIR IN THAT THERE ARE NO SUBSTANTIAL PROJECT CHANGES, NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES, OR NO NEW INFORMATION, UM, WITH A SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN INDICATING NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS.

THEREFORE, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE CONSIDERED,

[00:55:01]

UH, WITH THE PROJECT ANALYZED AND THE CERTIFIED EAR ARE, ARE CONSIDERED CONSISTENT AND NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NECESSARY.

AND WITH THAT STAFF IS ABLE TO RECOMMEND PLANNING COMMISSION, CONSIDER THE RESOLUTION AND ATTACHMENT ONE, WHICH RECOMMENDS CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCOTT RANCH BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

THANK YOU, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

AND THE DEVELOPER IS IN ATTENDANCE, UM, THIS EVENING AND, UM, HAS A BRIEF PRESENTATION AS WELL.

DO HAVE JULIE JONES WITH PERKINS COY.

UH, WHY DON'T WE LET THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT TEAM DO THEIR PRESENTATION BEFORE WE MOVE TO QUESTIONS JUST IN CASE YEAH.

APPLICANT CAN, UH, PRESENT AND THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO QUESTIONS.

GOOD EVENING AND THANK YOU CHAIR MOSES, UH, MEMBERS OF THE, UH, COMMISSION.

I'M STEVE ABS WITH DAVID ON HOMES.

IT'S, UH, GOOD TO SEE YOU GUYS AGAIN.

IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME.

UM, UH, FIRST OFF, I JUST WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.

IT'S, UH, IT'S A, A FEW MINOR WORDS BEING CHANGED HERE, BUT IT'S, UH, IT'S IMPORTANT TO DAVID ON AND OUR FUTURE AND EXISTING HOMEOWNERS OUT THERE AT OUR CONTRACT, SCOTT RANCH PROJECT.

UM, ALSO, I WANNA THANK, UH, MIKE AND, UH, ANDREW FOR ALL THE HARD WORK IN BRINGING US HERE TONIGHT.

UM, UH, THE STAFF STAFF REPORT WAS, UH, VERY DETAILED AND I, I APPRECIATE THE, UH, THE, THE PRESENTATION AND, UH, DON'T NEED TO REPEAT ANYTHING, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF THE KEY THINGS HERE OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EIR WHAT'S WHAT'S BEEN APPROVED IN THE IR WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING ADDITIONAL AS FAR AS, UH, UH, ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, OBVIOUSLY CON CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE GENERAL PLAN AND ENTITLEMENTS.

AND, UM, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING IS JUST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITYWIDE, YOU KNOW, PRACTICE FOR, UH, ALLOWING SWIMMING POOLS ON RESIDENTIAL S UM, THIS PROJECT GOES WAY BACK 20 YEARS PLUS.

UM, IT KIND OF GOT ALL, UH, RE REIGNITED WHEN WE HAD OUR COLLABORATION WITH KCPP AND NORTH ISLAND INSTITUTE AND, AND ULTIMATELY GOT APPROVAL BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND UNANIMOUS APPROVAL BY, BY COUNCIL.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, IT, IT, THE SCOTT RANCH, UH, PROJECT GOT APPROVED AND IT, IT'S A WIN-WIN.

IT WAS A WIN-WIN.

IT STILL IS A WIN-WIN, I THINK, FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

AND IT APPROVED 28 MARKET RATE HOMES ON VERY GENEROUS SIZE LOTS.

AND, UH, IT HAPPENED AT A TIME WHERE THE SWIMMING POOL, UM, MORATORIUM WAS IN PLACE DURING THE STAGE FOUR FOUR DROUGHT.

SO, UM, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS NEVER ANY PUBLIC DISCUSSION OR PRIVATE DISCUSSION REGARDING POOL PROHIBITION, UM, REGARDING THIS PROJECT.

UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY OVER THE 20 PLUS YEARS OF, OF COMMUNITY HEARINGS AND, AND PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, WE COULDN'T FIND ANY RECORD OF EVER SEEN ANYTHING ABOUT, UH, SWIMMING POOLS BEING AN ISSUE ON THIS PROJECT.

UM, THESE HOMES ARE OF SIZE, THE LOTS ARE OF SIZE.

THERE'S A PRICE POINT, UM, THAT THIS, THIS, THIS PROJECT IS AT.

UM, AND IT HAS A DEMOGRAPHIC OF FAMILY ORIENTED STYLE, UM, SIZE HOMES THAT THERE IS A MARKET EXPECTATION FOR SWIMMING POOLS ON THE, THIS LEVEL OF HOME.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THESE HOMEOWNERS ARE GONNA BE INVESTING A LOT OF MONEY IN, IN, INTO THIS PROJECT AND INTO THIS, INTO THIS, YOU KNOW, GREAT CITY OF YOURS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE THE SAME FLEXIBILITY AND, AND, AND, UM, SAME FLEXIBILITY ENJOY THROUGHOUT ALL PETALUMA, UM, THAT THEY HAVE AND TO CREATE VALUE AND ENJOYMENT IN THEIR INVESTMENT.

SO, UM, AND THIS RESTRICTION HAS KIND OF PUT A SOMEWHAT OF A BURDEN OF, OF, OF SALES ON US.

UH, IT'S, IT'S BEEN A HINDRANCE.

UM, WE HAVE HAD, UH, BUYERS, MANY BUYERS COME IN AS SOON AS THEY FIND OUT THEY CAN'T PUT A HOME ON THESE, THESE HUGE LOTS.

THEY, THEY TURN AROUND AND WALK AWAY.

SO WE, WE DO HAVE, UM, A COUPLE, UM, SALES THAT ARE ACTUALLY CONTINGENT ON THIS, THIS TEXT AMENDMENT APPROVAL.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, REMOVING THIS RESTRICTION WILL STRENGTHEN THE OVERALL APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY, WHICH WOULD THEN HELP US, YOU KNOW, FULFILL OUR COMMITMENT TO DELIVER THESE HOMES QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY.

AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT DAVID ON TRYING TO GET QUICK SALES AND, BUT IT'S, IT'S ABOUT US FULFILLING OUR COMMITMENT TO THIS COMMUNITY OF, OF GETTING, YOU KNOW, FULFILLING OUR COMMITMENT OF, OF BUILDING THIS COMMUNITY AND THEN ALSO, UM, TO GIVE OUR HOMEOWNERS THE SAME RIGHTS, YOU KNOW, AS ALL PET LIMITS HAVE, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE ABILITY TO, TO INSTALL POOLS ON THEIR LOT.

SO, UM, AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING FOR YOUR, UH, YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO, UH, TO COUNCIL TONIGHT JUST TO, TO, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITYWIDE PRACTICES AND TO CONFORM TO THE CITYWIDE PRACTICES FOR, UH, SWIMMING POOLS ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

AND SO, UM, WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.

UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

[01:00:01]

SHE'S OUR LAND USE AND SECO ATTORNEY THAT WAS ON IT THE ENTIRE 20 PLUS YEARS.

AND, AND THEN JORDAN FIGA WITH, UM, HE'S OUR, UH, DAVID ON SITE DEVELOPMENT, UH, DIRECTION AND FORWARD PLANNING.

SO, UM, HOPEFULLY WE HAVE THE TEAM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, SO, OKAY.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR STAFF AND OR THE APPLICANT.

COMMISSIONER KUZEN.

UM, JUST TO KICK US OFF HERE, THANK YOU STAFF AND APPLICANT FOR THE PRESENTATION.

UM, JUST TO KICK US OFF HERE FOR THE POOL WATER USE ASSUMPTION, AM I READING IT CORRECTLY? IT WOULD ASSUME THE POOL COVERS ALL STAY ON TO HIT THAT 3.9.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO HIT THAT 3.9 LEVEL THAT WAS IN THE EIR RIGHT? TO AVOID TRIGGERING ANY KIND OF REASSESSMENT.

AND I THINK I READ THIS ASSUMES THE POOLS HAVE THEIR COVERS ON IN THAT CALCULATION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.

I'LL, I'LL HAVE A COUPLE MORE TOO.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL BE ALL THE SAME PERSON, BUT I'LL TRY TO GET ALL MY APPLICANT QUESTIONS HERE.

YOU'RE NOT JUMPING UP AND DOWN.

RIGHT? I WAS GONNA SAY FOR THE APPLICANT TEAM, IT MIGHT BE BEST, UH, TO STAY CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE.

UH, YES, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT.

THE COVER IS TO BE ON, UH, WHEN THE POOL'S NOT IN USE.

SO, SO THERE'S ACTUALLY A WATER EFFICIENCY.

UM, UH, THERE'S A 90% IMPROVEMENT ON WATER, UH, EVAPORATION, UH, BASED ON THE EPA.

UH, SO THAT CALCULATION IS IN PLACE AND THAT'S CURRENTLY A CITY ORDINANCE TO HAVE COVERED POOLS, SO.

FANTASTIC.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

ADD A BIT OF CONTEXT.

UM, YOU KNOW, AND AS WE LOOK AT THE PLANT PALETTE BEING READJUSTED, I THINK THAT WAS THE BIG CHANGE IS LIKE THE SITE REALITIES AND ENGINEERING WATER USE VERSUS KIND OF THE INITIAL EIR PROPOSAL AND WE SAW A BIG DROP IN WATER REQUIREMENT.

UH, ANYTHING IN THE CON, AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR STAFF AND OR THE APPLICANT, ANYTHING IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT MAINTAIN THAT PALLET BECAUSE OUR MARGIN FOR TRIGGERING CE QA IS RAZOR THIN, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER WENT INTO THIS CALCULATION IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS, WHETHER THAT'S POOL COVERINGS OR PLANT PALLETS.

AND I THINK IN THAT SAME VEIN, OR IS IT LIKE AN H-O-A-C-C-N-R THING THAT MAKES SURE WE HIT THIS LOW WATER USE PALLET NUMBER, UH, TO KEEP US KIND OF RIGHT ON THAT LINE FOR THIS 3.9 CALCULATION.

SO DO WE ANTICIPATE, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, IS THAT IN THERE AND OR IS THERE SOMETHING ON THE APPLICANT'S END THAT ENFORCES THAT? I'LL TAKE THE LEAD IN ANSWERING THAT QUESTION.

AND THEN, UM, MR. NUUK AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT TEAM CAN FOLLOW UP.

UH, THE, THE, WE APPRECIATE THE CALCULATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED BECAUSE THE INS, THE, THE PLANT PALLET SELECTION AND INSTALLATION ON DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEEN COMPLETED TO DATE, UH, DOES CONFORM TO THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW WHERE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WAS APPROVED.

SO WE FEEL, UH, A PRETTY HIGH LEVEL OF COMFORT THAT THOSE CALCULATIONS ARE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND WHAT WOULD BE COMPLETED GOING FORWARD AS THE PROJECT CONTINUES TO CONFORM TO THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL.

UM, I DON'T KNOW.

AND, AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, AS OVER TIME ALL LANDSCAPING BECOMES A BIT TOO LARGE, YOU CAN'T CONTROL IT, SO YOU KNOW, YOU START TO REPLACE IT.

UM, THE REGULATIONS THAT APPLY IN TERMS OF LOW WATER PLANT USAGE AND SUCH WOULD STILL BE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT BECAUSE THOSE LIE IN THE CITY'S, UH, WELO ORDINANCE.

AND SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO EXPECT THAT THE PROJECT WOULD, UM, RETAIN ITS APPROACH TO WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING, UM, EVEN AS LANDSCAPING CHANGES OVER THE YEARS.

BUT I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM, UH, MR. NUUK AND THE APPLICANT TOO.

PROPORTIONS OF, UM, LOW WATER USE PLANT.

THANKS.

PLANNING MANAGER, MANAGER TRIPLE AND, UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AXON.

I THINK, YEAH, THE BEST WAY TO ANSWER THAT IS THE, THE SPAR, UM, DID HAVE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED TO TREE PLANTINGS AND SUCH.

UM, IF YOU RECALL, AND THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE.

UH, THE BUILDING PERMIT, UM, LANDSCAPE PLANS WERE REVIEWED FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPAR AND THE SPAR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

AND THEN, UM, THOSE HAVE NOT, UH, THOSE HAVE NOT CHANGED.

UM, AND THOSE ARE THE IMPROVEMENT PLANS THAT ARE IN ATTACHED TO YOUR PACKET AS ATTACHMENT FIVE.

UM, WHERE THERE, AND JORDAN, UM, FIGA WITH THE DEVELOPER CAN SPEAK TO THIS, BUT WHERE THEY'RE REALLY ABLE TO, UM, BUILD THAT MARGIN IS, UM, THAT THE EIR HAD A VERY CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE RA, THE

[01:05:01]

SO THEY, IT ASSUMED, UM, A QUARTER HIGH, A QUARTER MODERATE, A QUARTER LOW, AND A QUARTER VERY LOW.

AND THE PROJECT IS PROPOSING 86% LOW.

SO THAT'S, UM, WHY THEY'RE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT EVEN WITH THE POOLS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMING IN UNDER BECAUSE OF THE CONSERVATIVE NATURE OF THE EIR.

NOT SURE IF WE HAVE MUCH MORE TO ADD.

I THINK THAT, THAT, UM, HOPEFULLY ANSWERED THE QUESTION.

UM, I MEAN, WE, WE HAVE THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING FROM THE SPAR.

UM, FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING, UM, IS INSTALLED WITH THE HOUSES.

UM, ALL THE COMMON AREA LANDSCAPING IS ALREADY INSTALLED PER, PER ALL, PER THE SPA SPA PLANS.

SO I GUESS IN FUTURE, IF THERE ARE LANDSCAPING CHANGES MADE IS THAT SCOTT RANCH THAT MANAGES THAT? IS THAT EACH OWNER? AND IF SO, AGAIN, AS MUCH AS THIS FEASIBLE, RIGHT, THINGS CHANGE AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T BE OUT THERE WITH, UH, MEASUREMENTS EVERY SECOND, BUT DO FUTURE RESIDENTS, WOULD THEY BE INFORMED OF THESE REQUIREMENTS OR IS THERE ANOTHER ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM LIKE THE HOA IS HAVING TO IMPLEMENT ACTUAL CHANGES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH.

AS, AS FAR AS THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS THROUGH, UH, THERE IS AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, SO ANY CHANGES TO ARCHITECTURE, UM, OR LANDSCAPING IS, IS REVIEWED BY THE HOA.

UM, AND, AND AS, AS, UH, IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, THIS IS UNDER THE, THE WORLD URBAN INTERFACE.

SO THERE'S A STRICT PLANTING GUIDE OF WHAT CAN BE PLANTED, UH, OR WHAT, WHAT, WHAT CAN, UM, SO THEN AS FAR AS THE, UH, THE COMMON AREAS, THOSE ARE CONTROLLED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

SO, UH, THOSE TYPICALLY ARE, UM, REPLACED IN KIND.

THEY DON'T TYPICALLY, UM, UH, VEER OFF THE, UH, THE EXISTING PLAN, UH, PLANTING PLAN IF, IF THINGS NEED TO GET PLANTED.

SO REPLANTED, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THANK YOU GUYS FOR STEPPING THROUGH THAT MATH.

I'LL SAY FOR THE APPLICANT TEAM, MOVING AWAY FROM THAT 3.9 NUMBER, UM, FOR THE POOL ACTUALLY FITTING ON THE SITE.

AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE SITE PLAN FOR SPAR, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE REQUIRED SETBACKS, THAT YOU HAVE USABILITY, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE DID A LOT OF CUTTING TO MAKE IT FLAT TO PLACE THE HOUSES, BUT YOU STILL HAVE SOME YARDS THAT MIGHT HAVE SOME GEOGRAPHY.

UM, I GUESS THERE'S A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS THAT COULD GO WITH THIS, BUT WERE THESE PLANNED WITH POOLS IN MIND? I NOTICED THE ADVERTISING SAYS POOL CAPABLE, SO I'M, I'M GUESSING MAYBE THE DESIGN TEAM THOUGHT LIKE, HEY, SOMEONE MIGHT WANT A POOL IN THE FUTURE.

UM, DO WE FEEL, OR LIKE MAYBE AN ESTIMATED LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE FOR HOW THESE SITES CAN ACCOMMODATE, UH, THE POOLS THAT YOU'RE ENVISIONING? IS IT, I GUESS BASICALLY, DO YOU THINK YOU'LL REQUIRE ANY REGRADING, ANY SIGNIFICANT SITE CHANGES OR ANYTHING? NO, MO ALL THE, ALL THE REAR YARDS ARE FLAT.

THERE'S, THERE'S NO TOPOGRAPHY IN THE BACK.

THERE MIGHT BE SOME SIDE SLOPES, YOU KNOW, UP TO THE, UP OR DOWN TO THE, UH, THE ADJACENT LOTS.

BUT, UH, TOPOGRAPHY WISE AND THE, THEY, THEY ARE FLAT REAR YARDS.

I KNOW JORDAN DID SOME CALCULATIONS ON SIZE OF POOL, AND I THINK THE AVERAGE, UM, SIZE WAS, WAS 450 SQUARE FEET.

I BELIEVE THAT THAT CAN FIT ON, ON THE, UH, ON EACH LOT.

BUT, UM, BUT YEAH, THE, THE CALCULATIONS ARE BASED UPON SETBACKS, UM, AND, UH, THE, THE ABILITY FOR FLAT AREA TO, TO PUT A POOL ON.

SO, YEAH.

DIDN'T HAVE POOLS INCLUDED, RIGHT? SO OUR ORIGINAL EIRR REVIEW DOESN'T ASSUME POOLS IN EITHER WATER USE, BUT ANY OTHER AREA WHERE POOLS COULD BE AN IMPLICATION.

AND, AND I WOULD JUST ADD TO THAT, THAT ANY POOL WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A POOL PERMIT WHERE THEY REVIEW THE, UM, THE STRUCTURAL, IF IT'S IN GROUND, THEY'LL REVIEW STRUCTURAL, UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WERE GRADING OR THE DEPTH OF THE POOL, ALTHOUGH, UM, STEVE IS, UM, MR. ABS IS CORRECT THAT THESE WERE, THERE'S PAD ELEVATIONS, SO ALL THE, THE GRADING, SO IT'S TERRACE AS IT GOES THROUGH THE, SO IT, THE MAS MAS GRADING, AS YOU KNOW, OCCURRED IN THE STEPPED, UM, PATHS HAVE OCCURRED.

UM, AND THEN THE OTHER POINT IS, UM, SECTION I ISAIAH 7 0 80 REQUIRES, UM, SIX FOOT SETBACKS, AND THAT WAS ALL FACTORED INTO THESE ASSUMPTIONS.

SO SIX FOOT SETBACKS TO POOLS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT, UM, PER THE ZONING CODE.

OKAY, VERY GOOD.

SO WE CAME, THE SITES FEEL PREPARED.

WE WON'T REQUIRE ANY KINDA REDESIGN.

THERE IS A POOL PERMIT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CONTEXT.

SO WE'RE KIND OF CATCHING ISSUES POTENTIALLY IF THERE WERE ANY TO ARISE.

UH, THANK YOU.

I THINK FOR THE APPLICANT TEAM, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION MAYBE FOR DISCUSSION TIME, WHICH IS, UM, YEAH, JUST FIGURING OUT THE SOURCE OF THIS, LIKE WHERE COULD THIS HAVE COME FROM, IF AS A DEVELOPER, I WOULD THINK WHEN THAT FIRST CAME ALONG YOU'D BE LIKE, WHAT IS THIS, THIS IS GONNA AFFECT OUR PROPERTY.

MAYBE GET INTO THE SOURCE OF THAT, BUT I THINK YOU'VE SPOKE TO THAT ALREADY.

SO I THINK FOR THE APPLICANT TEAM, UH, I THINK I'M ALL SET ON MY QUESTIONS.

UM, FOR STAFF, I WILL ASK, YOU KNOW, FOR CQA OBVI, UH, YEAH.

IN READING THROUGH CQA, I THINK POOLS SPECIFICALLY ARE AN EXEMPTION ARE, UH, UNDER ONE OF THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS FOR CQA.

UM, BUT IN THIS PROJECT, WE HAD HAD A BUNCH OF ASSUMPTIONS THAT

[01:10:01]

UM, SO I, I JUST WANT TO GET THAT FINAL, FINAL FROM STAFF THAT, LIKE, DO WE FEEL CONFIDENT NOTHING IS REASSESSED, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BROUGHT UP IMPACTS ON BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

MY BRAIN STARTS TO THINK OF HYDROLOGY, WHICH COULD, COULD BE MINIMAL, BUT YOU KNOW, IN GOING AWAY FROM THESE DEVELOPMENTS, YOU DO HAVE A SLOPE.

COULD POTENTIAL CHEMICALS OR OUTFLOWS COME FROM THAT THAT WEREN'T ANTICIPATED? AND THE ONLY REASON I ALSO HARP ON THAT IS WE WERE, I WAS VERY KEYED INTO LIKE PESTICIDE USE DURING THIS, SO I'M THINKING THIS IS ANOTHER VARIABLE.

UM, I MAYBE JUST SPEAK BRIEFLY TO, DO WE FEEL LIKE THIS HAS BEEN COVERED? IS THERE, I COULDN'T FIND ANY PRECEDENT AROUND POOLS BEING ADDED.

LIKE I SAID, I THINK IT'S LISTED AS AN EXEMPTION UNDER CE QA SPECIFICALLY SWIMMING POOLS.

UH, BUT IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THOSE CONCERNS OF LIKE, POOLS WEREN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN, THEY COULD HAVE IMPACTS ON OTHER SECTIONS OF THE EIR.

DO WE FEEL CONFIDENT IF SO, 10,000 FOOT VIEW OF WHY THAT WE'RE, WE'RE SET? SURE.

SO THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION OF OF POOLS OR SPAS OR HOT TUBS IN THE EIR, IN THE MITIGATION MEASURES OR ANY, UH, TOPIC SECTION.

UM, THE APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED THE WATER USE CALCULATIONS.

UM, AND THEN IN TERMS OF, UH, BIOLOGICAL, UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF MITIGATION MEASURES, UH, RELATED TO SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES AND THE MITIGATION MEASURES ENSURE THAT THOSE CONSERVATION MEASURES ARE ADHERED TO, TO AVOID OR MINIMIZE ANY IMPACTS TO THOSE SPECIES.

UM, THOSE HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH, UM, WITH THE GRADING OF THE, THE SITE AND THERE IS QUALIFIED BIOLOGISTS OUT ON SITE.

UM, AND THEY DID NOT, UM, SEE ANY, ANY SPECIES, UM, DURING THOSE ACTIVITIES THEY WERE MONITORING.

UM, THE APPLICANTS ALSO, UM, OBTAINED ALL THEIR, UM, OUTSIDE AGENCY PERMITS WITH, UM, FISH AND WILDLIFE AND ALSO US, UH, BOTH STATE AND UH, FEDERAL.

UM, AND SO WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THERE WOULD BE NO, UM, IMPACTS FROM A CCL PERSPECTIVE AND NO CONFLICTS WITH THE MITIGATION MEASURES THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED AND AND DESIGNED TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT.

UM, AS FAR AS, UM, YOUR QUESTION OF, UM, STORM WATER, THERE ARE, UM, REGULATIONS IN THE MUNI CODE PERTAINING TO, UM, WHAT IS ALLOWED TO BE DISCHARGED INTO THE STORM SYSTEM AND, AND, AND WHAT HAS TO GO INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM.

AND IN SPEAKING WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS OFFICIALS, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT, UH, POOLS DRAIN TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM.

AND IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF, UM, EXCEPTION TO THAT, THERE NEEDS TO BE A CITY REVIEW OF THAT THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS AND THE WATER HAS TO BE DECHLORINATED AND TESTED.

UM, SO I THINK IT'S JUST GIVEN THAT POOLS ARE, ARE ALLOWED IN EVERY RESIDENTIAL, UM, ZONE CITYWIDE, IT'S A FAIRLY COMMON ACCESSORY USE TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

THERE ARE, UM, COMMON, UM, CITYWIDE MEASURES AND REGULATIONS IN PLACE, UM, THAT WOULD PROTECT AGAINST ANY, ANY CONCEIVABLE CONFLICT, UM, WITH THE EIR.

AT LEAST THE, THE SUBDIVISION SYSTEM THAT WAS REVIEWED BY THE EIR.

I WANTED TO DO, UH, TWO THINGS, COMMISSIONER IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION AND FOLLOW UP TO, UM, MR. JANUS.

AND, AND I'D LIKE TO TURN TO MS. JONES TO COMMENT AS WELL, GIVEN HER EXTENSIVE HISTORY OF, UM, WORKING THROUGH THE EIR FOR THIS PROJECT.

I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT IT AND, AND, UH, THE PLANNER'S REFERENCE TO THE, THE CLOSED SYSTEM, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO CLOSED SYSTEMS HERE, IF YOU WILL.

WE'VE GOT THE CLOSED SYSTEM OF THE SUBDIVISION, SO IMPLEMENTATION OR CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL WOULD NOT REQUIRE EXPANSION OF A LOT THAT ALREADY EXISTS.

THAT THAT LOT HAS BEEN DEFINED.

THE, THE IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT ON THAT, THAT LOT HAVE BEEN MITIGATED AS FOUND IN THE EIR.

AND SO THAT POOL SITS WITHIN THAT SYSTEM OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND BEEN MITIGATED THROUGH THE EIR.

THEN EVEN WITHIN THAT SYSTEM OF DEVELOPMENT, THE POOL IS A CLOSED SYSTEM ITSELF.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE REQUIREMENT THAT, UM, A POOL WOULD DISCHARGE INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM THAT GETS REVIEWED DURING THE POOL PERMIT PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT THAT DISCHARGE WILL HAPPEN, UH, THROUGH THE, THE POOL'S, UM, CLEANING SYSTEM ITSELF, UM, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM NUMBER OF GALLONS, THE POOL CONSTRUCTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO WE KIND OF HAVE A HIGHLY CONTROLLED POOL SYSTEM SITTING WITHIN A HIGHLY CONTROLLED AND DEFINED SUBDIVISION SYSTEM, ALL OF WHICH, UM, WELL

[01:15:01]

AND, AND PERHAPS ANOTHER POINT THAT MS. JONES COULD SPEAK TO, IN ADDITION TO THE EXEMPTION FOR POOLS IN, IN CQA WOULD BE THAT THE, THE EIR DIDN'T CONSIDER POOLS BECAUSE POOLS WERE NOT NECESSARILY EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED AT THE TIME THAT THE EIR WAS DEVELOPED.

AND SO, UH, I BELIEVE WHEN WE WENT BACK TO LOOK AT WATER USAGE CALCULATIONS AND THE 2000, UH, 11 AUTO AUTO-CHLOR STUDY, IS THAT THE ONE THAT'S THAT CONSIDERED A BEST PRACTICE STATEWIDE AQUA CRAFT STUDY, RIGHT? THE 2011 AQUA KRAFT STUDY, ONE OF THE COMMENTS ON THAT STUDY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A FURTHER BEST PRACTICE WOULD BE TO SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY POOLS AS A LINE ITEM FOR WATER USAGE, ALTHOUGH IT RECOGNIZES THAT OFTENTIMES ANALYSES DO NOT DO THAT.

SO I THINK THAT THAT WHILE POOLS WERE NOT EXPLICITLY EITHER IDENTIFIED AS A POINT OF ANALYSIS IN I THE EIR OR EXPLICITLY EXCLUDED FROM THE ANALYSIS IN THE EIR, THE STANDARD PRACTICE OF THE E OF AN EIR PREPARATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY IGNORE POOLS.

AND THAT'S I THINK THE QUESTION I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MS. JONES TO COMMENT ON OR COMMENT.

SO WHETHER POOLS ARE CAPTURED IN YOUR STANDARD EIR, EVEN IF IT DOESN'T EXPLICITLY PLAN FOR IT, THAT IS SOMEHOW BUILT IT, OR THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED ASK.

UM, UH, THANK YOU, UM, COMMISSIONER AND, UM, MR. TRIPLE, UH, REGARDING THE ASSUMPTIONS, UM, HAVING TO DO WITH, UH, TRYING TO ESTIMATE POOL WATER USE VERSUS NO POOL WATER USE.

UM, AS MR. TRIPLE HAS INDICATED, THERE ARE VARYING WAYS OF APPROACHING THIS, AS WAS DISCUSSED IN THAT 2011 REPORT.

UM, THE ANALYSIS FOR THE EIR MADE NO VISIBLE ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING POOLS, UM, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

UM, I DO NOTE, AS INDICATED IN THE, UM, IN YOUR EX ATTACHMENT, IS IT FIVE? YES.

UM, WHICH WAS THE, UM, WATER ANALYSIS THAT, UH, POOLS, UM, ARE CONSIDERED, YES, A HIGH WATER USE, BUT NOT AS HIGH AS LAWN, UM, AS TURF, UM, PARTICULARLY WITH COVERS, WHICH IS WE'VE DISCUSSED ARE REQUIRED, UM, IN THE CITY OF PETALUMA AND IN IN MOST PLACES.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION ABOUT HOW THE ANALYSIS WAS DONE FOR THE 2023 EIR.

UM, AND, BUT YES, IT WAS SILENT ON POOLS.

UM, IT DID IDENTIFY IN ITS CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS THAT ONE QUARTER OF THE WATER USE, UH, WAS, UM, ANTICIPATED TO BE HIGH WATER USE.

UM, AND AT THE TIME, I DON'T KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY SINCE TURF IS, UM, THE, THE HIGHEST WATER USE, THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO CATEGORIES, UM, OF ANY OF THE, UH, LANDSCAPING THAT WOULD BE IN THAT HIGH WATER USE CATEGORY.

EVERYTHING ELSE IS MODERATE AND PREDOMINANTLY LOW AND VERY LOW.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

DOES THAT OKAY? YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THAT DETAILED ANSWER.

AND I'D SAY ASIDE FROM JUST THE WATER USAGE PIECE, IT'S REALLY UNDERSTANDING IF WE INCORPORATED THIS INTO OTHER ELEMENTS THAT AGAIN, HAVE BEEN SURFACED BY THE PUBLIC AS IMPACTS.

I'M GONNA COME BACK TO THAT.

I COMMENT THOUGH, UM, BECAUSE I, I WANT TO FLESH THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT AND GIVE SOME, UM, MORE INFORMATION THERE OR JUST TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

BUT FOR, FOR THIS PIECE, I THINK MY LAST TWO ITEMS, UM, AND THIS FIRST ONE MIGHT BE FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, KELLY CREEK PROTECTION PROJECT, EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE.

HAVE THEY GIVEN ANY FEEDBACK ON THIS CHANGE OR HAVE THEY, I MEAN, I KNOW THEY'RE THE OTHER PARCEL THEY MIGHT NOT BE INVOLVED IN THIS WHATSOEVER, BUT HAVE THEY GIVEN ANY FEEDBACK OR ANYTHING REGARDING THE THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? NO, NO.

THEY, THEY'RE CERTAINLY AWARE OF IT AND, AND, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UM, THEY HAVE NOT COME OUT TONIGHT, BUT WE PLAN ON GETTING THEM OUT FOR A COUNCIL MEETING TO, TO VOICE FOR SUPPORT, SO.

IT USES FOUR AND THREE INTERCHANGEABLY.

PERFECT.

UH, AND THEN THE LAST NOTE MIGHT BE FOR STAFF, AND THIS IS FOR THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION.

I THINK WE GOT JUNE 8TH, EIGHTH AND JUNE 15TH MIXED UP.

I THINK THE MEMORANDUM FROM THE CONSULTANTS LISTED IN AS JUNE 8TH A COUPLE TIMES.

UM, IT SHOULD BE JUNE 15TH, AND THERE IS ALSO THE STAGE THREE VERSUS STAGE FOUR IN THE RESOLUTION.

I THINK IT SAYS STAGE THREE IN THE BOARD AND COMMISSION REPORT,

[01:20:01]

MIKE, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE GONNA ANSWER THIS, SO, UH, YOU, I MIGHT NEED A LITTLE MORE HELP WITH THE, WITH THE DATES, BUT AS FAR AS THE STAGE THREE VERSUS STAGE FOUR, UM, IT HAS GOTTEN A LITTLE BIT MORE STRINGENT IN THE MOST RECENT CYCLE.

SO IT'S, IT PREVIOUSLY WAS A STAGE FOUR, UM, WHICH IS BACK IN AUGUST, 2022 WHEN THE PD WAS, UM, PREPARED.

UM, AND THOSE PROVISIONS DRAFTED, THAT'S WHEN THE STAGE FOUR WAS IN EFFECT.

UM, NOW WITH THE NEW 2025 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, IT'S BEEN BUMPED UP TO A STAGE THREE LEVEL, THE, UM, COUNCIL CAN ENACT THE MORATORIUM.

SO THAT MIGHT BE BE THE DISCREPANCY THERE.

IS IT ACTUAL, IS A, THERE'S ACTUALLY A CHANGE WITH THE NEW UPDATE.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE EASIER TO, TO TRIP THE MORATORIUM.

ONE MIGHT HAVE BEEN REFERENCED IN THE PAST, AND ONE IS CURRENT IF IT GOES ESCALATES TO STAGE THREE UNDERST.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

UH, THE, AND THE DATE I WAS TALKING ABOUT IS IN THE DRAFT CC ORDINANCE ON PAGE THREE OF THE PDF, UH, AND THIS IS ITEM B, IT SAYS, UM, IN ADDITION, AS DEMONSTRATED IN THE LANDSCAPE WATER USE MEMO DATED JUNE 8TH, 2026.

I THINK THAT'S JUNE 15TH.

YOU KNOW, COUNCIL ADOPTED THE NEW WATER THINGS ON JUNE 8TH.

SO YEAH, WE'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE BEFORE WE, UM, IF WE, IF AND WHEN WE BRING IT FORWARD.

THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT.

YEAH, YEAH.

UM, YEAH, AND I THINK FOR NOW I'LL SAVE EVERYTHING ELSE FOR DISCUSSION.

AND TO THE APPLICANT.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER RESON.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND JUST ONE COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, KNOWING THAT THIS WAS PART OF THE CONDITIONS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE CONDITIONS, WHY WAS IT THAT THIS WASN'T BROUGHT UP BEFORE? THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY IN, IN THE, UH, THE, THE PED UM, CONDITIONS.

UM, IT WAS AT A TIME WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE OUR ENTITLEMENTS.

UM, IT WAS AT A TIME WHERE IT WAS, UH, PUT IN, IN THE CONDITIONS DURING THE POOL MORATORIUM.

UM, AND WE HAD A CHOICE TO MAKE.

WE HAD A CHOICE TO MAKE.

DO WE, DO WE GO IN WITHOUT STAFF SUPPORT FIGHTING A CONDITION, OR DO WE, UM, POSTPONE AND TRY TO ARGUE FOR ANOTHER SIX MONTHS? BUT IT WAS, IT WAS A CRITICAL TIME FOR US TO MAKE A DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH THAT CONDITION.

AND WE DID.

AND WE ARE, WE ARE NOW FINDING OUT THAT, UH, WE HAVE STRONG INTEREST BY, BY OUR HOMEOWNERS, EXISTING HOMEOWNERS AND, AND POTENTIAL BUYERS THAT, UH, POOLS, UM, ARE, ARE SOMETHING THAT'S WANTED ON THE SITE.

AND, UH, WE SEE THAT THERE'S NO OTHER PROJECT IN PETALUMA, NO OTHER PD PUD THAT WE CAN FIND, OR ANY OTHER SUBDIVISION THAT HAS A PERMANENT RESTRICTION ON SWIMMING POOLS.

AND, UH, WE JUST WANNA BE PART, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EVERY OTHER PETALUMA, UM, RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.

SO, REGARDING THAT SORT OF CITYWIDE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AROUND POOLS, I'M CURIOUS IF STAFF COULD SPEAK TO SORT OF WHAT THAT POOL PERMITTING PROCESS LOOKS LIKE CITYWIDE AS THAT'S SORT OF WHAT SCOTT RANCH IS ASKING TO BE TRANSITIONED TO.

ARE THERE CONSIDER, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE WATER USAGE IS WELL-REGULATED, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO, UH, THROW A SWITCH ON A MORATORIUM, THEY HAVE THAT ABILITY.

NOW, I'M CURIOUS WHAT ELSE, UH, IS SPOKEN TO IN THE OVERARCHING REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AS IT PERTAINS TO WILDLIFE, WHICH HAS OBVIOUSLY BEEN A BIG, UH, TOPIC AMONG PUBLIC COMMENT.

THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSES.

UM, SO AS FAR AS THE POOL PERMITTING PROCESS, IT'S ADMINISTERED BY THE BUILDING PERMIT.

SO IT'S A TYPE OF BUILDING PERMIT AND A PROPERTY OWNER COMES IN AND THEY WANNA BUILD A POOL OR PUT A POOL IN, IN GROUND OR INSTALL A, A SPA OR HOT TUB.

UM, AND SO THE BUILDING PERMIT INTAKES THAT THEY ROUTE IT OUT TO PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING.

UM, THE BUILDING WILL REVIEW THE STRUCTURAL, UM, AS, UH, MR. TRIPLE, UM, ALLUDED TO, THERE'D BE A REVIEW OF, UM, THE U UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND HOW IT WOULD DRAIN, ET CETERA.

AND THEN PLANNING WOULD LOOK AT IEO SECTION 7 0 80 TO LOOK AT SETBACKS, FENCING, SO NEIGHBORHOOD CHILDREN DON'T ACCESS THE POOL.

UM, AND ALSO, UM, EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE POOL FOR THE OCCUPANTS AND THE GUESTS, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, UM, THERE'D BE, YEAH, MULTI, UM, DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW OF THE, THE POOL PERMIT.

UM, AND THEN THAT, I GUESS HOW THAT TIES INTO WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, THOSE WOULD REMAIN INTACT.

UM, AND IT WOULD ALL, UM, WORK WITH THE, UM, I THINK THE, THE POOL, THE FENCE PLAN, THE WAY IT'S BEEN, UM, APPROVED AND INSTALLED AND MAINTAINS THE WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, UM, THROUGHOUT

[01:25:01]

THE SITE.

I THINK THE, THE POOLS WOULD SORT OF, UM, FIT RIGHT INTO THOSE, UM, PRIVATE BACKYARDS.

UM, AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE SETBACKS, THEY'RE ALREADY, UH, AS I MENTIONED THE PRESENTATION, THERE'S A ROBUST FENCE PLAN, UM, AND THAT ALLOWS FOR THE SEPARATION, THE WILDLIFE CORRIDORS BETWEEN THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THOSE, UM, SPECIFIC, UH, SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.

IS THERE ANYTHING, UM, AT THE BROADER CITY LEVEL THAT SPEAKS TO ADDITIONAL NOISE AND LIGHTING THAT A POOL WOULD BRING? SURE, WE, SO NOISE, UM, ORDINANCE WOULD STILL BE IN EFFECT, UM, LIGHTING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, UM, GLARE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

THOSE WOULD, THOSE THINGS ARE ALWAYS IN EFFECT, UM, EVEN AS YOU ADD ONTO YOUR HOME AND MAKE IMPROVEMENTS.

COMMISSIONER NER, UH, RELATED TO THAT, IS THERE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIRED, OR IS IT JUST THE SETBACKS THAT NEED TO BE MET FOR POOLS? UM, SO IN TERMS OF THE POOLS, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S LIKE A MINIMUM POOL SIZE FOR LIKE AN INGROUND POOL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT THE, ALL THE LOTS ALREADY MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIRED, UM, BY THE, THE PUD STANDARDS.

UM, I DON'T KNOW OFFHAND, UM, WHAT WHAT IT IS EXACTLY, BUT, UM, THERE IS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND THEN ALL THE, ALL THE BACKYARDS COMPLY WITH THE REAR SETBACK AND THE SIDE SETBACKS.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OWNER WOULD HAVE SOME, UM, DISCRETION ON THE SIZE OF POOL.

THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD LIKE, UM, OBVIOUSLY THE, THESE YARDS CAN'T FIT OLYMPIC SIZED SWIMMING POOLS, BUT THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE THESE MORE MODEST, UM, MID-SIZE, UM, RESIDENTIAL PRI PRIVATE POOLS.

AND, UM, AS LONG AS THEY CAN PUT OUT THE SETBACKS AND, UM, OTHER, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS FROM BUILDING, UM, FOR, IN GROUNDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I, I, I THINK THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A RANGE OF POOLS THAT COULD, COULD BE, UM, INSTALLED.

UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, THE SIX FOOT GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE THAT'S PROPOSED ON ALL THE LOTS, HAS THAT BEEN INSTALLED? IS THAT LIKE A MANDATORY PART OF DEVELOPING EACH OF THESE LOTS? YEAH, WE, WE, UH, COMPLETE ALL THE FENCING WITH THE HOUSE, AND IT'S PART OF THE FINAL INSPECTION BY MY, I'M ASSUMING PLANNING OR, OR BUILDING.

BUT, UH, YEAH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE INSTALLED WITH THE HOME, YEAH.

AND THEN MAYBE ONE MORE QUESTION, GEOTECH, I WASN'T ON THE COMMISSION WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS BROUGHT FORTH, WAS THERE ANTICIPATION IN THE GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN OR WHATEVER SOILS WORK WAS DONE FOR POOLS OR NO, TYPICALLY, UH, UM, I MEAN, THE, THE GEOTECH REPORT DOES HAVE, UM, CERTAIN, UM, LOADS AND STUFF FOR RETAINING WALLS AND SUCH, BUT, UH, ANY, ANYTIME THERE'S A, THERE'S A, A POOL PROPOSED, THE, THE HOMEOWNER'S REQUIRED TO GO GET A SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OR THEIR OWN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

YEAH, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF CUT, FILL DONE, A LOT OF EARTH WORK DONE.

ARE THESE PROPERTIES, ARE THEY LOCATED ON MOSTLY FILL, MOSTLY CUT, OR SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN GIVEN THAT THEY'RE GRADED INTO THE HILLSIDE? IT'S, IT WAS, IT WAS A COMBINATION OF CUT AND FILL, OBVIOUSLY, BUT EVEN IF THERE IS A, A LOT THAT HAS A MIX OF CUT AND FILL, WE OVER X THE PAD SO THAT IT DOES HAVE A, A FOUR FOOT, UM, UH, UNIFORM FILL ACROSS IT.

THERE ARE SOME CUT PADS, DID WE OVER EX ALL CUT PADS AND WE O OVER EXED ALL CUT PADS ALSO.

SO, SO ALL PADS HAVE A MINIMUM OF FOUR FOOT, UH, UNIFORM FILL ACROSS IT.

COMMISSIONER REON, FINAL THOUGHT HERE FOR THE POOL DESIGNS, OTHER THAN THE PERMIT, WOULD THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FROM SPAR APP APPLY APPLY TO POOLS AS WELL? UH, ANY, LIKE, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE SITE OR POOL CONSTRUCTION? UM, NO, THERE WOULD BE NO CONFLICTS WITH POOLS AND THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE VESTING TENANT SUBDIVISION MAP, UH, REAR YARDS ARE, ARE PRIVATE SPACES.

AND SO IT'S REALLY UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER ON HOW THEY WANT TO, UM, CURATE THAT SPACE OR PLANT IT.

AND THEN, UM, AS LONG AS THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH, AGAIN, GETTING A POOL PERMIT, UM, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE MAIN, THE MAIN REQUIREMENT.

UM, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S SPOKEN TO IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

AND THAT, AND THAT WOULD TRIGGER YOUR INTERNAL DESIGN REVIEW? YEAH.

THE INTENTION IS TO KEEP PETS AND ANIMALS AWAY FROM THE OPEN SPACE.

IF YOU WANNA JUST SPEAK TO THAT BRIEFLY.

YEAH, YEAH.

REAL QUICK, JUST TO ADD TO THAT, SO PART OF THE APPROVAL BEFORE IT EVEN MAKES IT TO THE CITY, THERE'S AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE THAT DOES REVIEW ALL, UH, STRUCTURES AND OUTDOOR SPACES.

SO THAT'S WHEN, UH, THE FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN, UM, ANY INVASIVE SPECIES AND, AND, UH, ANY HIGH WATER USAGE, UH, PLANTS GET CALLED OUT AND ACTUALLY APPROVED OR DENIED.

SO THE COMMITTEE TYPICALLY GIVES A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL THAT SAYS THAT THEY COMPLY WITH ALL OF THESE, AND, AND TYPICALLY THE CITY WOULD, WOULD ACTUALLY ASK FOR A, UH, HOA APPROVAL LETTER, UH, WHEN THOSE SUBMITTALS COME IN.

SO, AND THEN ONE MORE THING TO ADD TO THE FENCING.

THE FENCING WHERE IT HAS THE SOLID BOTTOM AND THE OPEN WIRE FENCING, UM, UH, IT ACTUALLY WORKS BOTH DIRECTIONS.

[01:30:01]

IT ACTUALLY WORKS THE SAME WAY FROM, FROM PREVENTING SOME OF THE SMALLER ANIMALS TO COME INTO THE, INTO THE REAR YARDS.

SO I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON, UM, THE, THE COMMENT ABOUT HOA REVIEW, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A, UH, SAY A PROPOSED POOL.

WHILE THE CITY WOULD ASK FOR THAT CONFIRMATION, THAT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY THE HOA, WE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE LOOKING FOR THE PROJECT TO COMPLY WITH ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS THAT MIGHT BE ENFORCEABLE BY THE HOA.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE KNOW THAT THAT HOA REVIEW AND APPROVAL OR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT.

WE ONLY ASK TO SEE THAT, TO ENSURE THAT, THAT THE PROPOSAL HAS GONE THROUGH THE HOA PROCEDURE.

WE DON'T GO BACK AND REVIEW AGAINST HOA STANDARDS BECAUSE THE CITY DOESN'T ENFORCE HOA STANDARDS.

THAT WAS, UM, UH, PROVIDED.

HI.

UM, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE HISTORY HERE.

UM, AGAIN, I WAS SIMILAR.

UH, I WAS NOT ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME THAT THIS ORIGINAL PROJECT, UM, WAS PROPOSED.

IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEEN KICKING AROUND FOR A VERY LONG TIME, SO IT'S ALWAYS NICE TO SEE NEW HOUSING ACTUALLY BE BUILT IN PETALUMA.

UM, REGARDING GOING BACK TO THE WATER QUESTION, THIS IS A QUESTION BOTH FOR, UH, THE DEVELOPERS AND FOR STAFF.

UM, I, I'VE, I NOTICED THAT THE AMOUNT OF ACRE FEET PER YEAR IS CALCULATED IN A WAY THAT MAKES IT JUST UNDER THE, UM, PROJECTED TOTAL AMOUNT OF WATER.

IN THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE, THAT 3.88 NUMBER IS AWFUL CLOSE TO 3.9 AND USING SOME ADDITIONAL SORT OF CALCULATIONS, IT'S NOT THAT HARD TO BE ABLE TO SOMEWHAT REASONABLY EXCEED THAT AMOUNT.

UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IT, IT'S ONE OF THESE, UH, I GUESS FOR THE STAFF, I'M WONDERING WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF AN E THERE WAS A COUNTER ESTIMATE OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS, THAT, LET'S SAY THAT THE PROPOSAL WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE THE UNDER THREE POINT OR AT, OR UNDER 3.9 IN THE ORIGINAL, UM, ESTIMATE.

WHAT, WHAT IS THE PROCESS? UM, WOULD THAT ACTUALLY TRIGGER A SQR REVIEW OR ANOTHER E UH, MEETING ANOTHER EIR BECAUSE IT WAS NO LONGER MEETING THAT REQUIREMENT? UM, SURE.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO WE, WE DID, UM, CONSIDER THAT HYPOTHETICAL, AND I, AND I, UH, STAFF REVIEWED THAT WITH OUR, OUR SQUA SPECIALISTS.

AND, AND SO I THINK A COUPLE, A COUPLE THINGS.

ONE IS, UM, THE 3.88 IS CONSERVATIVE AND THAT NOT EVERY SINGLE HOME IS GOING TO INSTALL A POOL.

SO I THINK THAT GIVES US A CERTAIN LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE THAT THIS IS A, A, A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE.

UM, BASED ON SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS, IT APPEARS THAT A HOME OF THIS SIZE, OF THIS PRICE POINT, WE'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT, UM, 10 TO 20% OF THE HOMES WITH POOLS.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, THREE TO SIX POOLS, UM, IN THE SUBDIVISION IF THEY WERE ALLOWED.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BRING THE 3.8 THAT WOULD NOT, WE, THE SUBDIVISION WOULD LIKELY NOT REACH THAT 3.88.

NOW, IF IT WERE TO REACH OR EXCEED THE 3.9, YOU COULD STILL, UM, YOU, YOU WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO, UM, FIND EITHER CONSISTENCY WITH THE CERTIFIED EIR OR, UM, IT, IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH OVER IT IS.

AND THE FACT THAT THERE AREN'T MITIGATION MEASURES AND THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT RELATED TO WATER USE IN PARTICULAR, UM, WOULD INCREASE THE, UM, I GUESS THE MARGIN THAT AN ESTIMATE OVER COULD STILL BE FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT IF THERE WERE MITIGATIONS MITIGATION MEASURES RELATED TO WATER OR IF, UM, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR PUBLIC WORKS FOLKS WERE SAYING, YOU KNOW, THIS IS REALLY TIGHT, THIS IS TOO CLOSE TO OUR, OUR URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND WHAT WE, UM, CONSIDER TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, APPROPRIATE WATER USE AND, UM, FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, PER CAPITA WATER USE OR PER HOUSEHOLD WATER USE, THEN WE WOULD WANNA PERHAPS CONSIDER, UM, AN EIR ADDENDUM WHERE WE WOULD HAVE MORE DISCUSSION RELATED TO WATER USE.

UM, BUT IT WOULDN'T AUTOMATICALLY, YOU KNOW, UM, CAUSE NEED FOR AN EIR.

SO I, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE PRETTY CONFIDENT IN THE ESTIMATE

[01:35:01]

AND, UM, EVEN IF IT WERE TO EXCEED, IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT, UM, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE, WITH THE EIR.

THANK YOU FOR THAT ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION.

UM, THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COMMISSIONER NER, LAST ONE FOR ME.

UM, IS THERE ANY PROVISION FOR USING POOL WATER FOR WILDFIRE MITIGATION? SHOULD THE SUPPLY RUN, I KNOW IN THE PALISADES FIRE THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT ENDED UP BEING A BIG, BIG RESOURCE AND, AND FIREFIGHTING THAT IS, HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED? IS THERE AN ANY, ANYTHING SPECIFIC IN CITY ORDINANCES? IT WASN'T DISCUSSED.

UM, I, I MEAN, I THINK I'VE SEEN JUST ANECDOTAL, ANECDOTALLY, SOME ARTICLES, UM, ABOUT THAT YOU PROBABLY NEED THE RIGHT KIND OF PUMP OR HOSE, BUT, UM, YEAH, I'M, I'M NOT AWARE OF HOW THAT WOULD FACTOR IN, UH, TO THE SITE OR I, I WOULD HAVE TO ASK OUR FIRE OFFICIALS AND OUR FIRE MARSHAL HOW THAT WOULD WORK IF THEY'VE GOT THE RIGHT EQUIPMENT TO DO THAT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY, THEY PRACTICE WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA.

FUTURE HOMEOWNERS DEMAND INCREASED WATER SITUATIONS CHANGED.

I, I KNOW IN SOME CASES WHERE WE'VE DEVELOPED PROJECTS WITH POOLS IN SONOMA COUNTY, THERE'S RECOGNITION FOR, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A CERTAIN RESERVE WELL VERSUS, UM, YOU KNOW, POOL.

I THINK THAT'S MORE IN RURAL PROPERTIES WHERE YOU'RE NOT CONNECTED TO DOMESTIC, BUT WITH FLOW ISSUES OR, YOU KNOW, IN WILDFIRE SCENARIOS.

GIVEN THAT THIS IS A WOOEY ZONE, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING BENEFICIAL TO HAVE.

UH, I, I DO THINK IN THE CASE OF THE PALISADES, IT TOOK LIKE PRIVATE FIREFIGHTING TEAMS TO ACCESS THAT STUFF, SO IT MIGHT BE A MOOT POINT, BUT JUST, JUST WONDERING IF THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AS A, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I WOULD, I WOULD THINK THAT FIREFIGHTERS, IF THEY HAVE THE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE, WOULD USE ANY, ANY SOURCE OF WATER , YOU KNOW, DURING AN EMERGENCY THAT THEY COULD USE.

AND, AND PERHAPS THEY DID SO IN, YOU KNOW, DURING THE 2017 FIRES IN SANTA ROSA.

BUT, UM, I'M NOT, UH, ALSO NOT AWARE OF ANY POLICY THAT WOULD DIRECT THAT USE OR, OR, UM, SORT OF COMMIT POOLS TO BEING A RELIABLE SOURCE OF, OF WATER FOR FIREFIGHTER.

COMMISSIONER ZEN.

JUST ONE LAST STRUCTURAL QUESTION FOR STAFF.

UM, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS.

THEY'RE MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO A PUD, LET'S SAY, INSTEAD OF THEY WERE, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE MAKING IT KIND OF DURING A CONSTRUCTION PROCESS.

IF IN THE FUTURE, UH, ALL THE SITES WERE BUILT, SOMEONE LIVED IN IT, THEY WANTED A POOL, WHAT WOULD THEIR PROCESS TO ENTITLE THAT LOOK LIKE? WOULD THEY GO THROUGH THIS SAME PROCESS, UM, DOWN THE TRACK? IF SOMEONE WANTED TO BUILD POOLS IN THE FUTURE, WOULD IT JUST LOOK LIKE THIS SAME KIND OF PUD AMENDMENT FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT? FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT? SO THIS WOULD, THIS WOULD AMEND THE, UH, PUD THAT CONTROLS THE ENTIRETY OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

SO, UM, THE 28 LOTS WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A POOL PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION.

WELL, I JUST MEAN THEORETICALLY, IF THEY WEREN'T APPLYING FOR THIS PUD AMENDMENT NOW, BUT LET'S SAY THE SITE WAS CONSTRUCTED, SURE.

WOULD IT LOOK LIKE THIS SAME ENTITLEMENT PROCESS LATER OR SIMILAR? YES, BUT IT'D BE THE, THE BURDEN OF THE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER.

BE SEEN AS A MODIFICATION OF THE PUD THAT'S APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.

AND I, AND I THINK THAT THE WAY THAT THIS PROHIBITION IS WRITTEN, BECAUSE IT SITS AT A TOP LEVEL WITHIN THE PUD, IF AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER WAS TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE PUD TO ALLOW A POOL ON MY PARTICULAR PARCEL, AT THIS POINT IN TIME PLANNING POLICY WOULD DIRECT THAT AMENDMENT TO COME FORWARD AS A MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT.

SO WE DO HAVE, WE DO HAVE PROCESSES WHEREBY, UM, LET'S, LET'S SAY FOR INSTANCE THAT A PUD ESTABLISHES DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL OF THE STRUCTURES AND THE, UM, THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE PUD AND A PROPERTY OWNER COMES FORWARD.

AND, AND I THINK WE'RE REVIEWING ONE RIGHT NOW THAT SAYS, OH, I WANT TO ADD A BALCONY TO THE SECOND STORY WINDOW ON THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE.

THEN WE WOULD SAY, WELL, THAT'S A MODIFICATION TO THAT APPROVED DESIGN, AND THEREFORE YOU NEED TO AMEND THE PUD TO ALLOW THAT MODIFICATION.

WE WOULD PROCESS THAT AS A MINOR PUD, UM, BECAUSE THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO HIGHER LEVEL CONTROLLING LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT NO MODIFICATIONS ARE ALLOWED.

ALL THAT THE PUD DID WAS, WAS APPROVE THE ORIGINAL DESIGNS OF THE STRUCTURES.

IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS HIGHER LEVEL CONTROL THAT SAYS THAT SWIMMING POOLS ARE PROHIBITED THROUGHOUT THE PUD, AN EFFORT TO MODIFY IT FOR ONE PARCEL WOULD

[01:40:01]

UNDERSTOOD.

AND I WAS REALLY GETTING TO THAT, LIKE THE SCENARIO WITH THIS BEING RECENT TO AN APPROVAL AND START OF DEVELOPMENT.

SO TH THANK YOU FOR WALKING THROUGH THAT.

I APPRECIATE IT.

ANY FINAL QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY.

WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON.

AND IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND BRING IT TO THE CLERK AND CLERK.

HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING? UH, YES.

WE RECEIVED SEVERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING, ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN POSTED ONLINE.

UM, SO PEOPLE CAN REVIEW THOSE.

IF ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, WERE RECEIVED DURING THE MEETING, THEY'LL BE PUBLISHED TOMORROW MORNING AS WELL.

OKAY, PERFECT.

UH, AND WITH THAT, I'VE GOT ONE SPEAKER CARD FROM VERONICA OLSON.

HI, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

UM, I SENT THROUGH A LETTER, UM, BUT I'M HERE TONIGHT 'CAUSE I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, THE IDEA THAT, UM, POOLS AND, YOU KNOW, TO COMPLY WITH THE REST OF THE CITY SO THAT THEY'RE IN ALIGNMENT.

UM, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITE, IT WAS A 10 YEAR OR 14 YEAR DISCUSSION BECAUSE OF, OF THE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES THAT ARE IN THAT AREA.

UM, AND IT WAS COMPROMISED WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS.

THE LACK OF POOLS WAS ONE OF THEM.

THE REASON WHY THEY WERE DONE OR NOT DONE IS AT THIS POINT, IT'S KIND OF A, IT'S, IT'S OPENING A CAN OF WORMS, IN TERMS OF THE, UM, ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS.

BUT WHAT I WANNA SAY IS IF YOU, IF YOU CHOOSE TO, TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT IN A WOOEY, IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY THAN THAN A STREET IN, SAY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

YOU HAVE WILDLIFE HAPPENING 24 7, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE FACING WILDLIFE.

SO TO ASK FOR A POOL IS COUNTER TO RESPECTING THAT.

AND I OUTLINED IT IN MY LETTER, SOME OF THE REASONS.

UM, SO, AND, AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR FIRE, YOU KNOW, SO WHEN YOU CHOOSE TO BUY A PROPERTY ASIDE A HILL AND YOU HAVE FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES, UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS THAT COME WITH THAT DECISION.

SO I THINK THAT SHOULD BE RESPECTED AND NOTED THAT IT'S NOT COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES.

UM, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION.

UH, WITH THAT WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.

I THINK ONE, UM, THING THAT PERHAPS COMMISSIONER KUSON WAS SAVING FOR DISCUSSION THAT I'LL KICK OFF AS WELL, WAS, UM, THIS SORT OF HISTORICAL UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE GOT HERE.

UM, AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE SAW IN A VARIETY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THE NOTION THAT THIS WAS A CONCESSION.

UM, SO WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT IN THE, UH, HISTORY OF THE PROJECT? SURE.

SO IT FIRST APPEARED IN A DRAFT OF THE PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

UM, THE APPLICANT WAS AFFORDED A, A COURTESY REVIEW.

UM, IT STAYED IN THE DOCUMENT AND WAS BROUGHT FORWARD IN AUGUST OF 2022 TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND THAT WAS THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ENTITLEMENTS, THE VESTING TENANT SUBDIVISION MAP, THE PUD AND THE, UM, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.

UM, AND SO BECAUSE IT APPEARS, UH, BEFORE THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, UM, IT'S CLEAR THAT IT WAS, IT WAS NOT THE SOURCE OF, IT WAS NOT A PUBLIC COMMENT OR A COMMISSIONER COMMENT.

UM, AND THEN, YEAH, I JUST ALSO JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, IT'S NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.

SO THIS PROVISION LIVES IN THE PD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

UM, IT, IT'S NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.

THOSE ARE, THOSE LIVE WITH THE VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, AND IT'S NOT A MITIGATION MEASURE.

THOSE LIVE, UM, WITH THE EIR, UM, SO TO SAY IT'S A CONCESSION, IT IT WAS A DISCRETIONARY VIEW, BUT IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS NECESSARILY NEGOTIATED WITH PLANNING COMMISSION BETWEEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE DEVELOPER AS A REQUEST OR AN ASK THAT WAS MADE BY A, YEAH, AT A HEARING IN THAT, IN THAT REGARD.

UM, BUT IT WAS

[01:45:01]

PREPARED BY STAFF.

THE APPLICANT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW AND IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD, UM, WITH THE PROHIBITION, UM, IN PLACE.

I THINK TO ADD, ADD A ANOTHER POINT TO, UM, MR. JANUK, UH, SORT OF POINTING TO THE 2022 DRAFT PUD REGULATIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD TO PLAN AND COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO THAT THE, THE PROCESS FOR PREPARATION OF AN EIR IS TO, UM, BRING, BRING THE PROJECT FORWARD AND RECEIVE DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, REVIEW A DRAFT EIR AND RECEIVE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL TO PREPARE THE FINAL EIR AND SO FORTH.

WHAT, BUT WHEN WE GO TO LOOK AT THE EIR, THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION DID NOT EXPLICITLY ADDRESS POOLS.

SO IT DOES SEEM LIKE THE ITY ABOUT POOLS BETWEEN THE DRAFT EIR COMING FORWARD AND, AND DIRECTION TO PREPARE THE FINAL EIR HAPPENING.

AND THEN THE PROHIBITION ON POOLS APPEARING IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, PUBLIC HEARING, THE DRAFT PUD THAT CAME FORWARD, SOMETHING HAPPENED IN THAT TIMEFRAME THAT WAS ALSO, AND, AND PERHAPS ONE OF THE COMPOUNDING FACTORS IS THAT'S ALSO WHEN WE WENT INTO THE DROP MORATORIUM AND SO FORTH DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME.

SO I THINK THAT IF I, I WOULD SPECULATE, AND I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THIS FOR A FACT, BUT I WOULD SPECULATE THAT PERHAPS THAT THE POOL THAT THE EIR DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS POOLS, IS AN INDICATION THAT THE PROHIBITION ON POOLS WAS NOT RELATED TO A MITIGATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THAT WAS BEING REALIZED THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY COMMISSIONER KUSON.

YEAH, AND I'LL, I'LL JUST BILL THAT POINT.

UM, Y YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST SAID HERE TONIGHT, AND I, I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT SPEAKING TO THIS, UM, A PHRASE THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED STAFF SUPPORT GOING INTO THE HEARING, RIGHT? WE KIND OF PUT NO POOLS IN THERE.

IS THAT AN ACCURATE CHARACTERIZATION? DID STAFF EITHER RECOMMEND THAT, HEY, PUT THIS AS IN A CONDITION BECAUSE WE HAVE DROUGHT, THINGS LIKE THAT.

WAS IT KIND OF AN INTERNAL TEAM THING? BECAUSE AGAIN, I WOULD IMAGINE BUILDING A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS WITH VICTORIA PINNACLE, THE OTHER ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENTS, HAVING NO POOL IS LIKE A NUCLEAR BOMB IN YOUR PRO.

I MEAN, THIS WAS ALREADY A TOUGH PROJECT, BUT MARKETABILITY, OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE GONNA WANT POOLS.

SO THAT WOULD FEEL LIKE THAT WAS A BIG MOMENT TO CONCEDE THAT.

SO JUST TO FLESH THIS OUT, I MEAN, WAS THIS SOMETHING YOU FELT WAS LIKE STAFF DIRECTED? WAS THAT AN INTERNAL, HEY, WE KNOW THE WAY THE WIND IS BLOWING ON THESE DISCRETIONARY BODIES AND WE JUST WANNA COVER OUR BASES AND GET THROUGH THIS THING AFTER 20 YEARS.

UM, I GUESS HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THAT? UM, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.

HAVING BEEN, UM, INVOLVED AT THE TIME AND HAVING GONE BACK THROUGH MY RECORDS, UM, THIS WAS STAFF DIRECTED, UH, FROM, FROM DAVID ON'S PERSPECTIVES.

SO THE COURTESY COPY OF THE, UM, DRAFT PUD STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES, UH, CAME VERY CLOSE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IN, I THINK IT WAS AUGUST OF 2022.

UM, THE APPLICANT DID ASK THAT THAT SECTION BE REMOVED, AND THEN ANOTHER DRAFT CAME BACK AND IT STILL HAD THAT SECTION IN IT, SECTION 5.3.

AND OUR RECORD IS OUR, MY NOTES, OUR RECORD IS SILENT ON, UM, WHY EXACTLY STAFF DID NOT MAKE THAT CHANGE.

I CAN ALSO, UM, STATE THAT EXACTLY WHAT MR. ABS HAS DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF WE'VE GOTTA GET THIS DONE.

UM, WE NEED STAFF REP SUPPORT.

ONE, UM, PIECE OF ALL OF THIS IN TERMS OF THE URGENCY, AFTER SO MANY YEARS OF FINALLY GETTING THIS TO, UM, BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL, WAS THAT KELLY CREEK PROTECTION PROJECT WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE TIMING IN TERMS OF GRANTS, IN TERMS OF PROMISES OF SUPPORT FOR THE PORT, FOR THE PARK, UM, ASPECT OF THE PROJECT.

UM, SO THERE WERE CONCERNS THAT WENT BEYOND JUST, YOU KNOW, WHEN CAN THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT GET STARTED AND WE CAN GET SHOVELS IN THE GROUND.

UNDERSTOOD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SHARING SOME OF THAT HISTORY

[01:50:01]

THAT IT IS AFTER A PROJECT GOES ON LONG ENOUGH, CAN BE HARD TO PIECE TOGETHER.

AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD BE YOU FROM THE APPLICANT TEAM, BUT YOU BROUGHT UP THE, UM, KELLY CREEK.

UH, IS THE OTHER PARCEL, ARE THEY MOVING FORWARD WITH ANYTHING? HAS COUNTY PARKS TAKEN OVER? UH, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AT THIS STAGE? I DON'T KNOW EXACT, I DON'T THINK COUNTY PARKS HAS TAKEN OVER YET.

AND I THINK THAT WAS ALWAYS IN, UH, ANTICIPATED TO BE A LONG PROCESS.

BUT, UM, I BELIEVE, UH, STEVE ABS CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

EXCUSE ME.

I THINK IT'S COMING DOWN TO FUNDING.

I THINK THEY STILL ARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE THE FUNDING TO JUST GET THROUGH THAT FIRST PHASE OF, OF, OF CONSTRUCTION.

SO YEAH.

YEAH, EUCALYPTUS TREE REMOVAL.

'CAUSE THEY WERE GONNA DO THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN PASS IT OFF TO PARKS AFTER THERE'S A CERTAIN LEVEL OF IMPROVEMENT.

I THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE SLOWLY STEPPING THROUGH THE IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE RECENTLY THERE WAS A, A RE A DEMOLITION PERMIT THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO REMOVE SOME OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WERE AUTHORIZED FOR REMOVAL DURING THE SPAR REVIEW PROCESS.

SO, AND I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME TREE REMOVAL, UM, THAT WAS AGREED UPON.

SOME EUCALYPTUS TREES.

YES.

SO I THINK IT'S, THEY'RE DOING SOME LOW LEVEL STUFF, BUT CERTAINLY, UH, THE, THE EXISTING BUILDINGS HAVEN'T BEEN RESTORED FOR USE FOR EDUCATION CENTER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I KNOW THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A SEPARATE DEAL, BUT I, IT KIND OF GETS TO THE HEART OF, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED KELLY CREEK OR EARTH ISLAND OR HERE, UM, IS MAKING SURE THAT WHEN WE WALK THROUGH ENTITLEMENTS, AND I THINK THIS HAPPENS, UH, WE MAKE SURE WE WALK THROUGH ENTITLEMENTS.

WE AREN'T, UM, RIDING ON ITEMS THAT EITHER DON'T COME TO FRUITION OR WE KNOW WE WANT TO CHANGE, RIGHT? SO, HEY, WE, WE KNOW WE'RE GONNA GET THROUGH WITH NO POOLS, BUT WE'LL GET THAT IN THERE LATER.

UM, THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, AGAIN, WE SEE IT, IT HAPPENS, IT'S A FACT OF DEVELOPMENT.

UH, WE DON'T WANT TO STOP GREAT PROJECTS, UH, WITH CONSIDERATIONS LIKE THAT.

BUT IT, UM, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO WEIGH AS COMMISSIONERS DURING AN ENTITLEMENT PROCESS.

'CAUSE WHEN WE TALK TO THE PUBLIC, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THEY DON'T LIKE ABOUT A PROJECT AND THEY'RE AT A LATE STAGE MEETING, WE SAY, HEY, YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE EARLIER ONE.

THAT'S WHEN ALL THESE DECISIONS WERE MADE.

SOME OF THIS IS SET IN STONE ENTITLEMENT WISE, UM, BUT IT KIND OF DOESN'T WORK THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

THIS PART OF THE REASON I ASKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WOULD THIS PROCESS LOOK DIFFERENT IF IT WASN'T SO RECENT? RIGHT? RIGHT NOW THE APPEARANCE OF, I DON'T WANNA SAY IMPROPRIETY, BUT THE APPEARANCE OF LIKE, HEY, WE SKATED THROUGH SAYING NO POOLS.

'CAUSE WE KNEW THAT WOULD BE LIKE A GOOD SACRIFICE ON THE ALTAR TO GET THIS THING THROUGH, BUT NOW WE'RE GONNA GET IT BACK BEFORE CONSTRUCTION'S EVEN FINISHED.

UH, VERSUS I THINK IF THIS HAD CAME FORWARD IN LIKE 10 YEARS, IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE SUCH AN APPEARANCE OF GOING THROUGH APPROVALS LIKE THAT.

UH, BUT AGAIN, THE DA THE DATA POINT IS, IT WOULD BE THE SAME PROCESS EVEN IF IT HAPPENED LATER.

THIS IS THE PROCESS YOU DO TO CHANGE THOSE KIND OF RULES.

UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK FOR ME, WHAT WOULD'VE GONE A LONG WAY ASIDE FROM THAT AND LIKE THE APPEARANCE AND THE OPTICS, WHAT WOULD'VE GONE A LONG WAY IS INSTEAD OF A SECRET DETERMINATION THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NOTHING HERE.

I THINK ADDING THE WATER CALCULATIONS TO LIKE A MEMORANDUM OR AN ADDENDUM SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT, HEY, WE'VE LOOKED AT X, Y, Z PARTS OF THE EIR AND WHERE ADDING IN POOLS COULD HAVE IMPACTED THIS.

UM, AND MAYBE THAT IS AT LEAST GIVING A CURSORY VIEW OF THINGS LIKE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, HYDROLOGY, ANY KIND OF OBVIOUS POTENTIAL IMPACT, AND AT LEAST SPEAK TO IT, EVEN IF IT'S SAYING NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, RIGHT? LIKE THIS, THE OUTFLOWS FROM THE SWIMMING POOLS WERE EITHER ALREADY CAPTURED OR THEY'LL MAKE SURE THEY DRAINED INTO KELLY CREEK.

I THINK THAT WOULD'VE GONE A LONG WAY TO MAKING SURE THAT WE KNOW THESE COMMENTS ARE ADDRESSED.

I APPRECIATE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT, I THINK, FOR ADDRESSING HOW WE DO HAVE A WEB OF REGULATIONS THAT ENDS UP CATCHING A BUNCH OF THESE ITEMS. UM, BUT PROCEDURALLY, I REALLY WOULD'VE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THAT DONE BEFORE THIS CAME FORWARD.

UM, I THINK, YEAH, I THINK I'VE SPOKEN ABOUT OPTICS, I'VE SPOKEN ABOUT PROCESS.

UM, YEAH, I, I'LL LEAVE IT NOW FOR DISCUSSION AND OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENT, UM, TO KIND OF SIT AND, AND THINK ABOUT WHAT'S BEFORE US FOR A RECOMMENDATION.

BUT YEAH, I APPRECIATE STAFF, UH, AND THE APPLICANT FOR KIND OF STEPPING THROUGH SOME OF THIS STUFF.

OR WE'RE LOOKING AT AN AREA THAT DOES HAVE A LOT OF ACCESS FOR ANIMALS.

OTHER COMMENTARY OR DISCUSSION? COUNCIL COMMISSIONER? UM, YEAH, SO JUST TO ADDRESS THE WILDLIFE CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF, I, I VERY MUCH AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE IDEA THAT, ESPECIALLY DUE TO ITS LOCATION ON, ON, YOU KNOW, THE WILDLIFE URBAN DIVIDE,

[01:55:02]

THE STUDIES THAT HAD SHOWN UP DO HAVE PROPENSITY OF PARTICULAR TYPE OF FROG THAT LIVES IN THAT AREA.

I KNOW THAT FROGS ARE OFTEN DRAWN TO BODIES OF WATER, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS ARE A LOT OF POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, ISSUES THAT COULD COME UP THAT BECAUSE POOLS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE INITIAL SORT OF REVIEW SESSION, THERE WASN'T REALLY ANY SORT OF IDENTIFICATION OF A POTENTIAL NEED TO MITIGATE ANYTHING ELSE WITHIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PLANNING FOR SOMETHING THAT WASN'T WITHIN THE, THE SCOPE.

UM, IS THERE, I GUESS SIMILAR TO, UM, COMMISSIONER FIN'S, UM, CONCERNS IS THAT THERE, THERE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF, I DON'T WANNA, I, I GUESS I'LL CALL IT GAMESMANSHIP WITH JUST TR I UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO BUILD HERE.

UM, THIS PROCESS HAS TAKEN A VERY, VERY LONG TIME, UM, TO GET, YOU KNOW, A RELATIVELY MINIMAL AMOUNT OF HOUSING ADDED TO PETALUMA.

UH, I, I KNOW THAT ADDING ANY SORT OF HOUSING DOES HELP ALLEVIATE OUR HOUSING ISSUES, EVEN IF THEY ARE EXPENSIVE HOUSES, BECAUSE ANY HOUSING STOCK THEN LETS OTHER PEOPLE MOVE, CREATES MORE OPEN SPACE FOR POTENTIALLY LOWER PEOPLE LOOKING TO UPGRADE OR FOR PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, JUST NEEDING TO MOVE TO THE AREA.

UM, BUT IT DOES FEEL LIKE THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF JUST TRYING TO MOVE AHEAD AT ANY COST WITHOUT REALLY THINKING OF WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE WOULD BE.

UM, AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE NOW ENTERING INTO AN, UH, KIND OF UNCERTAIN AREA OF THE FUTURE WHERE OUR WATER ISSUES ARE NOT REALLY GOING AWAY.

IN FACT, THEY'RE LIKELY ONLY INCREASING.

UM, SO IT'S INTERESTING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE KIND OF JUST ASSUMING THAT, OH, WE'RE NOT IN A DROUGHT RIGHT NOW, SO THEREFORE WHATEVER SORT OF WORRIES THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY ABOUT THE NEED TO POTENTIALLY ATTRACT HOME BUYERS WITH POOLS IS NOW, YOU KNOW, WITHIN A, WHAT IS LIKELY GOING TO BE A VERY SHORT WINDOW OF TIME WHERE WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY CONCERNED ABOUT WATER UTILIZATION IN THIS AREA.

UM, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL FUTURE DROUGHT, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL CHANGES IN WATER UTILIZATION BY DIFFERENT ENTITIES WITHIN THE STATE, OR EVEN A, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE SORT OF, UM, TYPES OF AREAS THAT PROVIDE WATER EVENTUALLY TO CALIFORNIA.

SO EVEN EXTERNAL STATES BEING ABLE TO DRASTICALLY IMPACT HOW WE UTILIZE WATER HERE.

UM, THE FACT THAT IT HAS TAKEN SO LONG TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP HOUSING AND THAT NOW WE'RE AT A KIND OF JUNCTURE WHERE, WHERE POTENTIALLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYONE ELSE IS THINKING ABOUT THIS, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S A POTENTIAL HERE WHERE WE CAN SEND IT BACK TO REVIEW OR CHANGE THE SORT OF REQUIREMENT FOR HAVING ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS, UH, FOR BASICALLY SAYING, NO, WE STILL CAN'T HAVE POOLS HERE AND THAT COULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT BUYERS.

YOU KNOW, I FULLY COMPREHEND ALL OF THE POTENTIAL ISSUES HERE.

UM, I'M WONDERING IF THAT THERE'S ANY SORT OF WAY THAT THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A MIDDLE GROUND WHERE YOU COULD SAY, OH, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS BEING BROUGHT UP BY CURRENT HOMEOWNERS FOR WANTING TO INSTALL A POOL, OR JUST BEING LIKE, HEY, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S ACTUALLY OKAY IS JUST HAVING A HOT TUB OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IS THE NEED FOR A POOL SO SUBSTANTIVE THAT THIS PROJECT OR THE REMAINING HOUSES THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNSOLD AND NOT DEVELOPED, WILL THAT DETERMINE, UH, POINT OF INFEASIBILITY FOR THE PROJECT OVERALL? I GUESS FROM A PARTICULAR STANDPOINT, UM, I, I KNOW THAT PEOPLE GENERALLY LIKE TO HAVE OPTIONS.

I ALSO KNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY BOUGHT THEIR HOUSES WENT INTO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE BUYING PERIOD

[02:00:02]

OR ARE ATTEMPTING TO CLOSE ON THEIR HOUSE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD A POOL CURRENTLY.

AND THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE STOPPED AT LEAST HALF OF THE HOMES ALREADY BEING SOLD.

SO I, I'M REALLY WONDERING, I GUESS AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHY, WHY THIS IS CURRENTLY AN ISSUE THAT IS BEING BROUGHT UP NOW.

UM, I KNOW THAT IT IS AN ATTRACTIVE TO HAVE POOLS.

I KNOW, YOU KNOW, HAVING SWAM IN POOLS ARE A LOT OF FUN TO HAVE, BUT ALSO THERE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A POOL.

SO, UM, YEAH, IT'S JUST ONE OF THESE THINGS THAT FEELS REALLY INTERESTING THAT WE'RE JUST SPENDING THIS MUCH TIME DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING EVERYTHING ELSE THAT, YOU KNOW, IS GOING ON AND WAS ALREADY KIND OF PREDETERMINED.

I, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION HERE.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF THINGS THAT I'M ALSO OPEN TO HEARING FROM OTHER PEOPLE'S PERSPECTIVES ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT ANY OF THIS.

UM, AS WELL, I, I AGREE THAT THE OPTICS ARE CHALLENGING GIVEN HOW LONG THE PROJECT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS.

UM, AND THE, THE MANY, MANY REVISIONS THAT WERE DONE TO ACHIEVE WHAT EVENTUALLY BECAME A FAR MORE CONSOLIDATED PROJECT.

UM, AND, AND OBVIOUSLY THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS WITH WEI WERE A, A BIG PART OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS.

UM, SO YEAH, I AGREE THAT FOR THIS TO LIKE COME BACK AFTER ALL OF THAT TIME, UM, DOESN'T LOOK GREAT.

I'M ALSO SYMPATHETIC TO THE APPLICANT AND THEIR, UM, POTENTIAL BUYERS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE JUST WANNA BE TREATED LIKE THE REST OF THE CITY.

WHICH SORT OF BRINGS ME BACK TO THE OVERARCHING CITY APPROACH, AND I'M CURIOUS HOW THE POOL PERMITTING PROCESS, IF AT ALL, IF IT SPEAKS TO POOLS IN THE WOOEY, BECAUSE I, I'M, I'M FEELING CONFIDENT IN THE WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES WE HAVE AT OUR DISPOSAL, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COVERING YOUR POOL IS MANDATORY AND THEREFORE DRASTICALLY REDUCES THE EVAPORATION.

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE FURTHER DROUGHT CONDITIONS, WHICH WE UNDOUBTEDLY WILL, WE'LL, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO THROW THOSE LEVERS ON TOPPING UP AND, AND SUCH.

BUT IT'S, IT'S THE WOOEY UNIQUENESS, UM, AT SCOTT RANCH THAT I'M MOST CURIOUS ABOUT.

SO I WOULD, I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO A, A FIRE OFFICIAL, UM, FOR ANYTHING DEFINITIVE.

BUT INTUITIVELY I WOULD, I WOULD THINK THAT A, A WATER FEATURE WOULD BE A NET, UH, BENEFIT IN TERMS OF, UM, FIRE HAZARD.

AND SO, UM, AND ALSO THE, THAT OFFSETS ADDITIONAL VEGETATION AS WELL.

UM, AND SO I THINK IT, IT REDUCES, YOU KNOW, FUEL SOURCE.

UM, SO THAT'S SORT OF THE, MY INITIAL ANSWER, BUT I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT, UM, WITH ANY, ANY SORT OF AUTHORITY WITHOUT, UM, DEFERRING TO OUR, OUR FIRE OFFICIALS.

DOES POOL PERMITTING COME UP IN OUR IZO UPDATE FORTHCOMING? LIKE IS THAT PART OF OUR NO, NO, IT'S, IT'S NOT BEEN A TOPIC.

UM, AND SO ALSO, UM, FIRE DOES REVIEW THE POOL PERMITS AS WELL, AND THEY DO HAVE STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND THEY LOOK AT, UM, ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT AND, UM, ALL OF THE, YOU KNOW, EXTRA PLUMBING AND, AND EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, THAT GOES INTO HAVING A POOL.

SO IT IS UNDER FIRE REVIEW AND THEY, UM, WITHIN OUR PERMIT SYSTEM, UH, IT FLAGS PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED IN THE WWE.

AND SO IN THE CASE OF FIRE WHERE THEY'RE APPLYING, UM, SPECIFIC STANDARDS, UH, WE STANDARDS, IF THERE WERE ANY OVERLAP, IT WOULD BE FLAGGED AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

POINT THERE, THERE WOULD BE, UM, SOME INTERACTION.

I THINK THE ORIENTATION FOR FIRE WHEN IT COMES TO WIE IS HOW DO WE KEEP PEOPLE AND THEIR THINGS SAFE IN FIRE WHEN THEY ARE AT THE, AT THE INTERFACE.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM PUBLIC COMMENT IS HOW DO WE KEEP THE WILDLIFE SAFE , UM, FROM THIS, THIS DEVELOPMENT? SO THAT'S WHERE I'M TRYING TO SORT OF UNDERSTAND WHERE THERE IS CONSIDERATION FOR THE, THE POTENTIAL WILDLIFE IMPACTS FOR UNIQUE POOLS THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE EITHER VERY NEAR WATER SOURCES.

YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO PUT THEIR POOL RIGHT NEXT TO ADOBE CREEK OR THE PETALUMA RIVER, LIKE DOES THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT CONSIDERATION OR SOME TYPE OF, NOT DIFFERENT CONSIDERATION, BUT SOMETHING WITHIN THE PERMITTING PROCESS THAT SORT OF SPEAKS TO THAT, UM, IN THE WAY THAT WE'RE HEARING CONCERNS ABOUT KELLY CREEK, UM, AND ALSO THE WILDLIFE NEARBY.

UH, SO I, I BELIEVE IF YOU WERE TO IMPROVE YOUR PROPERTY WITHIN A BELOW TOP OF BANK OR WITHIN A CERTAIN CREEK SETBACK, YOU MAY TRIGGER POTENTIALLY SOME ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING.

SO AT THAT

[02:05:01]

THESE PROPERTIES ARE, YOU KNOW, WELL SET BACK.

THE, THE LAYOUT IS STAYING THE SAME AS WAS APPROVED AND ANALYZED UNDER THE EIR.

SO THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY NEW MITIGATION MEASURES RELATED TO, UM, WILDLIFE, UM, THAT HAVEN'T ALREADY BEEN FACTORED INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

UM, THE POOLS ARE AN ACCESSORY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME, FIRST AND FOREMOST.

AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY WOULD BE CITED IN, IN THE BACKYARD, THEY'D BE FENCED IN, UM, AND THE WILDLIFE CORRIDORS WOULD BE MAINTAINED.

UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SIX FOOT HIGH FENCES.

I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY THERE ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR SMALL ANIMALS OR DEER TO GET INTO BACKYARDS.

I THINK THE, AS, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM WAS SPEAKING TO, I THINK THE WIRE MESH, UM, I THINK HELPS WITH SOME OF THAT.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE MITIGATION MEASURES REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, ABSOLUTE, UM, SEPARATION OF PRIVATE YARD SPACE AND, AND THE WILDLIFE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT, YOU KNOW, ENTER, ENTER YARDS.

I THINK, UM, I'D, I'D LIKE TO ALSO ADD, I'VE, I'VE NEVER EXPERIENCED THE WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE AS HAVING A FUNCTION OF ADDRESSING WILDLIFE HABITAT.

IT'S, IT'S ESTABLISHED FOR FIRE DEFENSIBILITY.

IT'S ESTABLISHED TO ENSURE THAT CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS, LANDSCAPING AND SUCH ARE, UM, FIRE DEFENSIBLE AND, AND PREVENTIVE TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

SO I THINK THAT TO CONSTRUE THE WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE AS SEEKING TO ESTABLISH POLICY OR TO REGULATE IN THE INTEREST OF, OF A WILDLIFE HABITAT IS A REACH.

OH, NO, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING THAT LIKE THE FIRE'S ORIENTATION IS TOWARDS, YEAH.

MM-HMM .

SO I, I THINK ALSO IF, IF WE LOOK TO SPECULATION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THIS, THESE POOLS ON WATER, WATER UTILIZATION IN THE FUTURE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE ANY POLICY OR STANDARDS FOR THAT SPECULATION.

WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS ANALYZED THE POTENTIAL WATER USAGE FOR THE PROJECT AND FOUND THAT, THAT THAT ANTICIPATED WATER USAGE IS, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THAT THE CITY CAN PROVIDE FOR THE NEED THE WATER NEEDS FOR THE PROJECT WELL INTO THE FUTURE.

SO IF, IF THE CITY IS CONCERNED ABOUT WATER UTILIZATION AND WATER CONSERVATION, THEN THE CITY SHOULD BE TAKING APPROACH OF LOOKING AT ESTABLISHING CITYWIDE POLICIES THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE REPLACEMENT OF TOILETS, SAY IN ALL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES, UM, AND OTHER POLICIES THAT COULD REALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON WATER UTILIZATION AND WATER CONSERVATION TO, TO APPLY SPECULATION ABOUT UTILIZATION AND CONSERVATION TO A 28 UNIT DEVELOPMENT MAY BE A, A BIT OF A STRETCH THAT'S NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.

SO, UH, I THINK THAT THERE'S A, A EXPLORATION THERE OR CONSIDERATION THERE THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD, UM, WEIGH IN ON AS PART OF ITS DISCUSSION.

WELL, THIS IS, THIS IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE POINT WE'RE ON.

JUST TO CONFIRM IF WE HAD THE STAGE FOUR, WAS THE STAGE FOUR WATER RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE AT TIME OF THIS ENTITLEMENT? UH, YES.

AND YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT, HEY, STAFF KIND OF GAVE US A SET OF P-U-I-P-U-D GUIDELINES THAT SAID NO POOLS.

WAS THAT SOMETHING AS PART OF THE STAGE FOUR RESTRICTIONS, WE KNOW NO NEW POOLS CAN BE CONSTRUCTED.

DOES IT THEN GO HAND IN HAND? ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE ENTITLING DURING THAT PERIOD OR APPLYING DURING THAT PERIOD HAVE TO HAVE SOME REQUIREMENT OF NO POOLS OR THEY'RE SOMEHOW RESTRICTED, OR, BECAUSE I'M THINKING POINT IN TIME, IF SOMEONE IS IN A GOOD REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT, WHEN THEY GET THEIR ENTITLEMENTS, GREAT.

THEY GET ALL THE ADVANTAGES.

RULES CHANGE.

THEY KEEP THEIR ADVANTAGES.

I THINK IT HAS TO GO THE OTHER WAY.

BUT IT MAYBE YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT.

IS THIS, WAS THIS PUD ADJUSTMENT, A REQUIREMENT OF STAGE FOUR WATER RESTRICTIONS? NO.

IT, IT SEEMS TO BE, UM, INFLUENCED BY IT, BUT THE MORATORIUM IS SPECIFIC TO POOL PERMITS, NOT TO ENTITLEMENTS.

DETACHED, UM, DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE PUD SAID.

AND TO EXTEND UPON THAT, LET'S SAY FOR INSTANCE THAT WE HAD HAD TO USE YOUR EXAMPLE 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD AND, AND SAY THAT WE HAD A PROJECT THAT SPAR WAS REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY OR FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY

[02:10:01]

SO IT SAID ALL, ALL DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES IN THIS PUD MUST COMPLETE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.

AND A PROJECT CAME FORWARD.

AND PART OF THAT PROJECT WAS TO PROPOSE A POOL UNDER THE DROUGHT MORATORIUM THAT WAS IN PLACE AT THAT TIME.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED DENIAL BECAUSE OF THE POOL.

WHAT WE WOULD'VE SAID WAS THAT THE POOL CANNOT BE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE THERE'S A PROHIBITION OR A MORATORIUM ON CONSTRUCTION OF POOLS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

AND WE WOULD'VE TACKED BACK TO THE CITYWIDE MORATORIUM, NOT PLACED A PERMANENT RESTRICTION ON A PARTICULAR PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS MORATORIUM EXISTED THAT WASN'T ACTUALLY PROHIBITING POOLS EX PERMANENTLY.

IT WAS ONLY PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTION OF POOLS DURING A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

NO, THANK YOU.

SO I THINK YOU GUYS GOT TO THE HEART OF EXACTLY WHAT I WAS ASKING, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MARLE.

THIS IS BRINGING BACK TRAUMA FROM MY TIME ON THE COUNCIL DURING THIS, UM, I REALLY THOUGHT THAT I WOULD NEVER HEAR ABOUT THIS PROJECT AGAIN.

SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT BACK.

UM, , UM, SO THE THINGS THIS, WHEN THESE WERE PUT TOGETHER, WE WERE IN A SER SEVERE DROUGHT.

AND THE PUBLIC OUTCRY OVER EVERY LITTLE DROP OF WATER, UM, ON THE SIDEWALK, UM, ANYWHERE WAS, UM, IT WAS, I MEAN, WE WERE, IT WAS, I WAS GETTING CONSTANT EMAILS ABOUT EVERY LITTLE THING.

UM, AND THE COUNCIL WAS, AND WE WERE UNDER INTENSE PRESSURE TO, UM, CRACK DOWN ON THIS.

THERE WAS PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO PERMIT POOLS THAT COULDN'T PERMIT POOLS.

THERE WAS PEOPLE WHO WERE FRUSTRATED 'CAUSE THEY COULDN'T CLEAN THEIR POOLS.

UM, POOL COMPANIES WERE SCARED OF BEING FINED, THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT WAS LIKE A, UM, A WHOLE TO DO.

AND MY SENSE IS WHEN, LIKE, AS I RECALL THIS, IT WAS THAT THIS WAS A SORT OF A VOLUNTARY, YOU KNOW, MITIGATION MEASURE TO SHOW HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, WE'RE BEING CONSCIOUS OF RESOURCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

UM, WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.

UH, AND, AND THE EIR WAS PRE PREPARED WELL BEFORE ANY OF THESE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

SO THE IDEA THAT THE EIR DIDN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE, UM, OR THE, THE IDEA THAT THE EIR ASSUMED THERE WOULD BE NO POOLS.

I DON'T BUY THAT BECAUSE THE EIR WAS LITERALLY YEARS IN THE MAKING, RIGHT? WELL, BEFORE THERE WAS THESE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WERE PUT TOGETHER.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S AN ENVIRONMENTAL REASON.

I THINK THAT IT WAS QUITE LITERALLY AN OPTICS THING IS WHY THIS WAS DONE THIS WAY.

UM, AND WE ARE, UM, THE, THE POINT OF TRYING TO SET A, A NEW STANDARD FOR WATERWISE CONSTRUCTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT ON A 28 UNIT HOUSING PROJECT, LIKE THESE THINGS DOESN'T FEEL EQUITABLE, REALLY.

UM, AND SO I'M INCLINED TO, UH, TO GRANT THIS RIGHT NOW.

UM, BUT, UM, I'M, I'M CURIOUS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO, TO SAY ABOUT THIS.

I, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON A MINIMUM OF MAXIMUM SIX POOLS, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT EVERYBODY HAVING POOLS.

I WAS LOOKING OVER THE OVERHEAD OF THINGS IN, IN THE WHOLE WINDSOR DRIVE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THERE WAS NOT A TON OF POOLS.

I THINK THERE'S LIKE THREE THAT I COUNTED.

UM, ALSO, I, I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN'S COMMENTS ABOUT HOT TUBS.

LIKE TO ME, IT'S BANANAS THAT WE DON'T ALLOW HOT TUBS.

LIKE EVERYBODY COVERS THEIR HOT TUB, RIGHT? LIKE THAT'S NOT A, UM, AND THE IDEA THAT YOU BUY A MILLION DOLLAR HOME AND YOU CAN'T PUT A HOT TUB IN FEELS WRONG.

RIGHT? IT'S LIKE SAYING YOU, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN'T PUT IN, YOU KNOW, ARTIFICIAL GRASS IN MY, IN MY, MY YARD BECAUSE, UM, THE CITY DOESN'T LIKE ARTIFICIAL GRASS.

PEOPLE DO IT, RIGHT? IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THERE.

UM, SO, UH, I'M INCLINED TO, TO SUPPORT THE, THE STAFF PROPOSAL, UM, ON THE BASIS THAT THE EIR DEFINITELY DID NOT ASSUME THAT THERE WOULD BE NO POOLS.

I THINK THAT'S, WE CAN AGREE THAT THAT'S A FACT.

UM, AND THE EIR WAS POURED OVER BY, BY MANY, MANY PROFESSIONALS.

LIKE THIS HAS BEEN A HEAVILY SCRUTINIZED AND STUDIED PROJECT, MAYBE THE MOST HEAVILY SCRUTINIZED AND STUDIED PROJECT IN PETALUMA, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY IN MY

[02:15:01]

LIFETIME IN PETALUMA.

UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS, IT FEELS LIKE LET THE PEOPLE EAT CAKE.

THERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT, UM, WE'RE, THERE'S, WE'RE NOT SAVING, I DON'T THINK WE'RE SAVING MUCH HERE.

UM, AND I THINK PEOPLE WHO, PEOPLE DESERVE THE SAME STANDARDS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE IN PETALUMA HAS, ISN'T THAT WHAT BEING FAIR IS ABOUT? SO ANYWAY, UM, THAT'S MY 2 CENTS.

COMMISSIONER KUSON.

I THINK TO THE EXTENT THERE'S CONSIDERATION ABOUT WANTING TO REQUIRE, UM, ADDITIONAL EIR ANALYSIS, THIS BODY WOULD NEED TO DETERMINE THAT YOU HAVE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S SOME SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT ARE GOING TO, TO OCCUR POTENTIALLY FROM, UM, PUTTING SOME POOLS IN THE AREA.

YOU KNOW, I PULLED UP THE, UM, REVISED DRAFT EIR CONCEPT PLANS AND ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.

I DON'T SEE POOLS ANYWHERE IN THOSE SITE PUMP AND YOU SEE THE BUILDINGS.

UM, BUT YEAH, THAT ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT POOLS ARE CONSIDERED, I HAD IT IN MY NOTES AND I'LL JUST THROW THIS OUT TO THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE, UM, JUST SAYING THAT WE HAVE NO, SO WE HAVE THE ADDITIONAL WATER USAGE ANALYSIS PROVIDED VOLUNTARILY, BUT WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR, AND HAVE NO BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF INTRODUCING UP TO 28 CHLORINATED WA BODIES OF WATER AT AN URBAN WILDLAND EDGE ABOVE KELLY CREEK ON A SITE WITH A FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED ENDANGERED SPECIES, THE CALIFORNIA RED-LEGGED FROG.

SO I THINK FOR ME, THAT THAT IS ONE ELEMENT OF THIS.

NOW, WHETHER OR NOT POOLS ARE EXPLICITLY COVERED, LIKE DOES EVERY EIR ASSUME A DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE POOLS REGARDLESS OF PUD GUIDELINES AND DESIGN DOCUMENTS? I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE MORE FOR INTERPRETATION.

UM, AND I THINK THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO, UM, THAT IT WASN'T EXPLICITLY STATED THAT WE WERE, I MEAN, AGAIN, WHEN WE SAW THE REVISED DRAFT EIR AND THE FINAL ER WE WERE PICKING TO APART LIKE PESTICIDE USE, EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION, WE WERE TRYING TO DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AROUND THAT.

JUST IT FEELS LIKE WE MISSED A TRICK OF MAKING THIS A, A SLAM DUNK IS HAVING SOME LANGUAGE SPEAKING TO THE EIR.

AND WHAT WAS ALSO INTERESTING IS THE NEW WATER USAGE DOCUMENT WAS APPENDED TO THE FINAL EIR AND THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

IT'S LIKE UNDER FINAL EIR DOCUMENTS DATED JUNE 1ST.

SO IT'S LIKE, OKAY, SO WE ALREADY KIND OF ACKNOWLEDGE THIS IS SOME KIND OF ADDENDUM TO EIR FINDINGS IN SOME SPIRIT.

UM, SO I WOULD THINK WE COULD TAKE THAT AND LOOK AT, AGAIN, THESE OTHER AREAS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, SOMETHING TO ASK FOR, UM, BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

THE RECOMMENDATION OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T STATE THAT, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A STATEMENT FROM A BIOLOGIST JUST SAYING, LOOK, ADDING IN-GROUND POOLS ON SITES NEAR, IT'S OUT OF THIS CRITICAL HABITAT ZONE.

IT'S NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.

RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW IF A STATEMENT LIKE THAT, UH, I, I WOULD LIKE THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE IN THIS PROCESS OF MOVING IT TO COUNCIL.

UM, YOU KNOW, YEAH, WE, WE DON'T WANT TO STOP.

LIKE I SAID, WE DON'T WANNA STOP PROJECTS, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN THERE IS NO CONCRETE REASON FOR IT AND IT WAS PURELY AN ENTITLEMENT KIND OF ASSISTANCE PIECE, UM, THEN I DO WANNA MAKE SURE WHEN WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK, WE'RE AT THE VERY LEAST THOROUGH TO WHAT ARE, I WOULD SAY COMMON SENSE.

BUT WHAT ARE PRETTY CLEAR, LIKE POTENTIAL REVIEWS UNDER SEQUENCE, ESPECIALLY WHEN VOLUNTARILY WE'RE ANSWERING ONE OF 'EM, WE'RE SAYING, HEY, WATER USE FOR GOOD, WELL, LET'S JUST PUT THAT THROUGH ITS PACES ON A COUPLE OTHERS.

UM, SO I'LL INTRODUCE THAT TO THE GROUP AS STAFF.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE TO CONDITION A RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL SAYING, HEY, WE THINK THESE GUYS SHOULD ALSO ANALYZE TWO OTHER AREAS LIKE HYDROLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AS WELL, AND ADDEND THAT TO THE FINAL EIR, IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE, OR IF THAT HAS ANY SUPPORT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE OUR LEGAL COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER THAT'S POSSIBLE.

, THANK YOU.

UM, I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT THE STANDARD IS FOR REQUIRING AN ADDENDUM TO AN EIR.

UM, AND SO TYPICALLY ONCE WE HAVE A FINAL APPROVAL ON A PROJECT WITHIN EIR, WE DO ACTUALLY HAVE TO EITHER FIND THAT THE PROJECT ITSELF IS DIFFERENT OR WE HAVE A NEW PROJECT.

UM, AND THAT'S GENERALLY CONSIDERED A LEGAL QUESTION.

I, I DOUBT THAT TRYING TO ADD POOLS TO THE PROPERTIES WOULD RISE TO THE LEVEL OF CHANGING THE PROJECT OR BRINGING FORWARD A NEW PROJECT.

SO WE'RE IN THE REALM OF POTENTIALLY ASKING FOR A SUBSEQUENT OR SUPPLEMENTAL EIR.

AND THE STANDARD FOR THAT IS BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, WHICH IS SUCH EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND WOULD ACCEPT AND RELY UPON TO MAKE A DECISION OF THIS KIND BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

THAT SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WILL REQUIRE MAJOR REVISIONS OF THE PREVIOUS EIR DUE TO THE INVOLVEMENT OF NEW SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OR A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS.

[02:20:01]

I'LL ASK STAFF, WE DID NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF REPORT FROM A PROFESSIONAL BIOLOGIST OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE THAT I SAW ON THE RECORD OR IN PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OR ANYTHING.

DO WE HAVE ANY LICENSED BIOLOGIST OR ANY KIND OF SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE LIKE THAT? THAT'S CORRECT.

THERE'S NO SITE SPECIFIC SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

AND, AND ALSO I WOULD ADD TOO, THAT, THAT, UM, I THINK THAT WE DO HAVE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT POOLS ARE CLOSED, SYSTEMS THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DISCHARGE INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT WOULD REDUCE, UH, GREATLY ANY POTENTIAL FOR IMPACTS TO HYDROLOGY IN THE AREA OR IN THE ASSOCIATED PROTECTED LANDS OF THE KELLY CREEK.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, UM, UH, UNLESS THERE'S MORE COMMENTS, I'LL JUST MOVE TO APPROVE THIS AS WRITTEN.

I THINK IT'S PRETTY LOGICAL.

I MEAN, I THINK THERE, IF THERE WAS TWO FAMILIES OUT THERE WITH KIDS THAT WANTED TO BUILD POOLS RIGHT NOW, AND THEY WERE GONNA BE THE ONES WHO WERE SHOULDERING THIS, WE PROBABLY, THERE WOULD BE A DIFFERENT 10 YEAR TENOR.

WE WOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE SAYING, THIS IS DEVELOPERS TRYING, YOU KNOW, GREEDY DEVELOPERS DOING THIS.

THEY WOULD BE SAYING, THERE'S A COUPLE OF FAMILIES THAT WANT TO BUILD POOLS AND WE SHOULDN'T LET THESE KIDS HAVE POOLS.

THAT'S WHAT, LIKE LITERALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE.

UM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

IT'S, UM, ABOUT EQUALITY AND, UM, THIS WAS, UH, A LINGERING, UM, THING TO, FOR OPTICS FROM A TIME WHEN WE WERE UNDER INTENSE SCRUTINY, UM, AROUND WATER.

AND, UM, THIS ISN'T GONNA, YOU KNOW, EXCEED OUR WATER THRESHOLDS AND IT'S NOT GONNA, UM, BUT IT IS SETTING A, A POOR STANDARD FOR, UM, THE WAY WE APPLY OUR, OUR RULES AND REGULATIONS IN THE CITY.

SO I SUPPORT IT.

CAN I JUST GET A CLEAN MOTION TO APPROVE? A MOTION TO APPROVE, UM, THE STAFF PROPOSAL, THE RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE THE PUD AMENDMENT? YES.

COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN? AYE.

UM, MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER BARNAL AND A SECOND.

ANYWHERE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER EBNER, IF WE COULD HAVE A VOTE PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER EBNER.

AYE.

COMMISSIONER NEWELL? ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER KUSON.

YOU KNOW, I WAS GONNA ASK, IT LOOKS LIKE OUR FINDING IS BASED ON GENERAL WELFARE.

IS THAT RIGHT? THIS, THE FINDING FOR THE CHANGE? THAT'S ONE OF THE FINDINGS.

YES, THERE ARE, UH, I BELIEVE SIX REQUIRED FINDINGS IN THE, IN THE PC RESOLUTION.

ALSO, THE SAME FINDINGS ARE MADE IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

BUT YEAH, GENERAL WELFARE IS ONE OF THE FINDINGS.

UM, WITH THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, I THINK I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN JUST BECAUSE I LITERALLY CAN'T MAKE UP MY MIND ON THIS.

SO, COMMISSIONER HILT ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBER BARNACLE.

AYE.

CHAIR MOSES? YES, IT IS APPROVED.

IF I MAY, UH, THERE'S NO OPTION TO ABSTAIN IF YOU HAVEN'T DECLARED A CONFLICT OR, UM, YOU KNOW, OTHERWISE REMOVE YOURSELF AT THE BEGINNING.

BUT THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DO HAVE A DUTY EVEN IN DIFFICULT DECISIONS TO MAKE A DECISION ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

THAT IS ONE OF THE COMMITMENTS AND THE DUTIES THAT YOU TAKE ON BY BEING A COMMISSION MEMBER.

SO I WOULD REALLY URGE COMMISSIONER KUSON TO, UH, VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN VOTED YES.

UM, I'LL VOTE.

NO THANK YOU.

I'M JUST GONNA RECOUNT, UH, THE VOTES.

COMMISSIONER EBNER VOTED YES.

COMMISSIONER NO IS ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER RASON VOTED NO.

COMMISSIONER HILT IS ABSENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER BARNACLE VOTED YES.

CHAIR MOSES VOTED YES.

THAT'S FOUR IN FAVOR.

TWO AGAINST AND TWO ABSENT.

THE MOTION IS PASSED.

NO.

FOUR IN FAVOR.

ONE AGAINST, ONE ABSENT.

[02:25:01]

RECUSED FOR THE RECORD.

RECUSED, CORRECT? MM-HMM .

WHY DON'T YOU READ IT BACK ONE MORE TIME, ARIEL, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE GOT OUR ACCOUNT IN THE RECORD ACCURATELY.

SORRY.

UH, COMMISSIONER EBNER VOTED YES.

COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN VOTED YES.

COMMISSIONER NEWELL VOTED.

SORRY.

COMMISSIONER NEWELL IS ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER RASON VOTED NO.

COMMISSIONER HILT RECUSED.

COUNCIL MEMBER BARNACLE VOTED YES.

CHAIR MOSES VOTED YES.

THAT IS FOUR IN FAVOR.

[COMMITTEE COMMENT]

WILL CONTINUE ON TO COMMISSION COMMENT, AND AT THIS POINT I'D LIKE TO OH, IF YOU GUYS NEED TO, WE CAN STOP.

OKAY, THANKS.

UM, I'LL JUST KICK THIS OFF BY SAYING THAT THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER ZEN'S FINAL MEETING AND IF HE'D LIKE TO REFLECT ON HIS SERVICE AT ALL, AND I KNOW WELL FIRST WE'LL HAVE STAFF, UM, PRESENT THE LETTERS OF RECOGNITION AND THEN INVITE HIM TO SHARE, UH, ANY REFLECTIONS.

I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD STAND UP FOR THIS, BUT SINCE YOU'RE RIGHT NEXT TO ME, .

SO, UH, WE DO HAVE SURE.

WE DO HAVE, UH, ACTUALLY TWO CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION.

UH, THIS CERTIFICATE IS PRESENTED TO DARREN KUSON IN RECOGNITION ABOUT STANDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY OF PETALUMA.

THANKS YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY PRESENTED ON THIS DAY, JUNE 30TH, 2026.

UM, ACTUALLY IT'S FORWARD DATED TO THE, THE LAST DAY OF YOUR SERVICE AS A COMMISSIONER, AND IT'S SIGNED BY MAYOR KEVIN MCDONALD AND CITY MANAGER PEGGY FLYNN.

SO THERE YOU ARE.

CONGRATULATIONS.

AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS ALSO FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER KUSON SERVICE ON THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE'RE PRESENTING THIS TODAY ALSO, CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION BECAUSE THE, UH, THE COMMITTEE WILL NOT BE MEETING AGAIN UNTIL JULY, AND SO HE WOULDN'T BE AVAILABLE TO RECEIVE IT.

SO, ON BEHALF OF THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, YOU THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

WELL, THANK YOU, ANDREW.

STAFF FELLOW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, UH, YEP.

SAW SOME GREAT PROJECTS.

IT WAS A GREAT TIME TO BE PART OF PLANNING COMMISSION.

APPRECIATE IT GAVE ME A WHOLE NEW APPRECIATION FOR HOW INVOLVED OUR COMMUNITY IS.

UH, HAVING LIVED IN MANY DIFFERENT CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY, IT'S RARE TO FIND PEOPLE AS ENGAGED OR WILLING TO WADE INTO CITY POLITICAL ISSUES, DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, UH, AND IT'S BEEN A HUGE EYE-OPENER FOR ANYONE WHO'S EVER CONSIDERED RUNNING FOR PLANNING COMMISSION.

DEFINITELY DO IT.

NO FASTER WAY TO MEET YOUR COMMUNITY, LEARN ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY, UH, AND PETALUMA IS OBVIOUSLY COMMUNITY WITH A, A RICH HISTORY AND, UH, AT A REALLY EXCITING TIME, AT A REALLY EXCITING CROSSROADS OF DEVELOPMENT.

SO, YEAH.

THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH.

I'M EXCITED TO PASS THE MIC AND, UH, LET SOME NEW VOICES GET ON HERE.

AND YEAH, EXCITED FOR THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER REON, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

IT'S BEEN, UH, AN HONOR TO SERVE WITH YOU AND ALWAYS APPRECIATE YOUR ROBUST COMMENTS AND, UH, YEAH, THOUGHTFUL INSIGHTS.

THANK YOU TO, UH, COMMISSIONER GOLDMAN, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMISSION COMMENT.

UM, I KNOW THAT THEY LEFT, BUT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY WHO SHOWED UP TODAY.

UM, AND FOR ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY THE PUBLIC, UM, FOR, UM, OUR PREVIOUS MATTER, UM, WE DO READ EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEND, WE DO TAKE THEM INTO CONSIDERATION AND THEY DO, UM, ENHANCE THE AMOUNT OF PART PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND JUST OVERALL AMOUNT OF, UM, THOUGHTFULNESS THAT DO GO INTO THESE DECISIONS.

UM, SO THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE WHO PARTICIPATED TODAY.

UM, I WANTED TO EXTEND A CONGRATULATIONS TO CITY STAFF ON A SUCCESSFUL FAIR.

UM, I KNOW THAT THERE IS A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND MUCH MORE CONVERSATION TO COME AROUND THE MASTER PLAN.

UM, AND IT WAS EXCITING TO SEE, UM, ALL THE, YOU KNOW, PICTURES COMING OUT OF, UH, OF THE FAIR WITH, YOU KNOW, THE PETALUMA SIGN AND, AND PEOPLE GETTING EXCITED ABOUT THAT PROCESS.

UM, AND I KNOW IT WAS A LOT OF WORK AS ALWAYS.

SO CONGRATS TO CITY STAFF.

UM, ON A SUCCESSFUL FAIR IN 2026, I ALSO ATTENDED THE, UM, AIRPORT DISPLAY DAY, WHICH, UH, PLUG FOR THAT COMING UP.

UH, A FEW MORE SATURDAYS THIS SUMMER.

FUN TIME FOR THE FAM.

YOU GET TO SIT IN A HELICOPTER IF YOU WANT.

UM, AND YEAH, A, A A NICE SHOWING, UH, OF, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS COMMUNITY EVENTS NOW THAT WE'RE IN THE THROES OF SUMMER.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORK PLAN.

UM, ONE, UH, UPDATE FOR EVERYBODY.

WE HAD AN, UM, A WORKSHOP ITEM AT OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING TO TALK ABOUT THE CITY'S

[02:30:01]

UM, IT WAS A REALLY RICH CONVERSATION.

UM, OUR NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER HAS HIT THE GROUND RUNNING AND PUT TOGETHER A GREAT WORK PLAN TO STREAMLINE, UM, PROCESSES FOR OPENING BUSINESSES, UM, DO OUTREACH TO, UH, FOR BUSINESS RETENTION, BUSINESS ATTRACTION, UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE BROUGHT UP AROUND MANUFACTURING BEING LIKE SIX TIMES, GENERATING SIX TIMES MORE, UH, REVENUE PER JOB THAN LIKE RETAIL.

SOME REALLY INTERESTING STUFF IN THERE.

UM, AND, UM, OVERALL I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING JUST A LOT OF, UH, ENERGY THAT, UM, THAT OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BROUGHT FOR THAT PRESENTATION.

UH, IT WAS A GREAT WATCH TOO, IF YOU'RE REALLY INTERESTED IN THAT STUFF.

SOMETIMES IT'S KIND OF A ESOTERIC WHOOPTY DO YOU KNOW, WORD OR TERM, BUT, UM, IT, SHE, SHE REALLY, YOU KNOW, UH, MADE IT TANGIBLE, SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD REALLY LATCH ONTO AND UNDERSTAND.

SO, UM, HIGHLY RECOMMEND WATCHING THAT.

UM, AND THEN QUESTION, UH, WHEN WILL WE SEE THE ZONING CODE UPDATE WORKSHOP COME? I HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU, , AND WHAT A GREAT WAY TO, UH, TRANSITION INTO IS SEGUE INTO SEGUE INTO REALLY QUICK, REALLY QUICK COMMITTEE COMMENT.

I JUST WANNA APPRECIATE, UM, CATHERINE REINHARDT, THE LIGHTING OF THE NEON CHICK.

OH YEAH.

PEOPLE PROBABLY SAW IT ON SOCIAL MEDIA, THE HISTORIC SIGN PRESERVATION PROJECT.

I WAS THERE LAST SUNDAY AND IT WAS GREAT.

IT WAS GREAT TO SEE A NON, THAT'S WHY I JOKED WITH, UH, HER AND BILL REINHART.

IT WAS GREAT TO SEE A NON-CONTENTIOUS HISTORICAL PRESERVATION PROJECT THAT WAS JUST LIKE EVERYONE WAS EXCITED ABOUT.

SO BIG, UH, BIG SHOUT OUT TO THEM.

EXCELLENT.

WITH THAT, WE'LL GO TO STAFF COMMENT.

[STAFF COMMENT]

COMING FORWARD IN, UM, AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER TIMEFRAME.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

AND, UH, COMMISSIONER KUSON ON BEHALF OF STAFF.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I REALLY WANT TO, UM, JUST SHARE WITH YOU THAT FOR ME, PUSH PERSONALLY, I ALWAYS VALUED YOUR PUSHBACK.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE ROLE IN, OF THIS BODY IS TO BE DELIBERATIVE.

AND, AND WE DO THAT BY PUSHING BACK, BY CHALLENGING ASSUMPTIONS, BY TESTING, UM, EVIDENCE AND, AND, UM, POSITIONS AND SUCH.

AND SO THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN VALUABLE.

UM, AS WELL AS I THINK I, I, I WANT TO SUGGEST THAT YOU DID THIS INTENTIONALLY, BUT, BUT I ALWAYS APPRECIATED WHEN YOU WOULD PROBE FOR GREATER CLARIFICATION, AND I BELIEVE YOU DID THAT TO HELP THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF A CONVERSATION OR A POINT THAT WAS DRIVING A DECISION THAT MAYBE THE COMMISSIONERS WERE SEEING FROM ONE PERSPECTIVE, BUT THE PUBLIC MAYBE DIDN'T SEE THAT WITHOUT A BIT MORE, UM, CLARIFICATION AND DISCUSSION.

AND, AND THAT'S A, A, A HUGE SKILL.

SO THANK YOU ON BOTH OF THOSE ACCOUNTS.

UH, WE'LL MISS YOU, UM, WITH REGARD.

WE'LL GET TO THE ZONING REFORM PROJECT, BUT I'VE GOT A COUPLE BEFORE WE GET THERE.

UM, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE PROPOSED VISION FOR THE PETALUMA NORTH STATION SPECIFIC PLAN.

THE, UH, THE COMMISSION IS VERY ENGAGED IN THAT PLAN AT SEVERAL LEVELS AND, AND, UH, WE APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR SUPPORT AND INFLUENCE ON, UM, SOME OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE SO FAR.

I THINK IT'S, IT'S A VERY THOUGHTFUL VISION AND IT'S GOT SOME REALLY NEAT ELEMENTS TO IT.

SO, UH, TUNE IN FOR THAT ON JULY 6TH WHEN IT WILL BE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL.

UH, IF COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED VISION, THEN THE ASK OF COUNCIL WOULD BE TO DIRECT THE, UH, PROJECT CONSULTING TEAM AND CITY STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD THEN WITH PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT EIR AS WELL AS THE DRAFT, UM, SPECIFIC PLAN.

UH, AND THAT WOULD THEN BE WORKED ON OVER THE NEXT PROBABLY, UH, FOUR TO FIVE MONTHS.

SO UPDATE THERE.

ALSO THE DOWNTOWN STATION AREA TRANSIT ORIENTED COMMUNITIES UPDATE, WHICH WOULD INVOLVE AN UPDATE TO THE CENTRAL PETALUMA SPECIFIC PLAN, THE 2013 SMART CODE AND THE, UM, PETALUMA STATION AREAS, TOD MASTER PLAN.

UH, WE, WE HAD RECEIVED FUNDING FROM, UH, FOR THAT PROJECT FROM MTC, UM, ABOUT A YEAR AGO.

AND WE HAD TO GO THROUGH SOME SCOPE REVISIONS.

AND THOSE SCOPE REVISIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, FORWARDED ON TO MTC, SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO PICKING THAT UP WITH THE MTC, UM, TECHNICAL CONSULTING TEAM, UH, BEGINNING PROBABLY IN THE SEPTEMBER TIMEFRAME.

SO LOOK FORWARD TO MORE INFORMATION ON THAT, AS WELL AS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PLANNING PROCESS THROUGH A WORKING GROUP SIMILAR TO THE, UM, THE PETALUMA NORTH STATION PROJECT.

UH, THEN, UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE WEBSITE FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS MASTER PLAN HAS BEEN PUBLISHED.

AND SO THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO, UM, OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC OR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

[02:35:01]

UH, AS WELL AS SORT OF STAYING DOWN IN THE DOWNTOWN CENTRIC AREA.

THEN, UM, THE, UH, PETALUMA RIVER PARK, UH, PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED REQUIRES SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW THAT IS MOVING FORWARD THROUGH PLANNING REVIEW, AND WE ARE SEEKING TO COMPLETE THAT YET THIS FALL AS WELL.

SO, UM, KIND OF TWO, TWO BIG PROJECTS THAT ARE UNDER REVIEW WITH THE, UH, THE STATIONARY UPDATES COMING FORWARD THIS FALL TOO.

AS FAR AS THE, UH, PETALUMA ZONING REFORM PROJECT, I CHECKED IN WITH, UH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, BRIAN O YESTERDAY.

UM, WE ARE, UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH PREPARING THE PROJECT WEBSITE AS WELL AS COMMUNICATIONS AROUND PHASE ONE.

IN PARTICULAR.

IT IS AT THIS POINT IN TIME, A THREE PHASE PROJECT.

THE, THE GOAL WOULD BE TO BRING A PHASE ONE FORWARD FOR A STUDY SESSION BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION IN AUGUST, AND THEN TO MOVE VERY QUICKLY TO, UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL TO TRY TO ALIGN WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.

WE DO THINK THAT THAT IS, IS ACHIEVABLE.

IT'S, IT'S VERY AGGRESSIVE, BUT, UM, WE DO BELIEVE IT'S ACHIEVABLE PRIMARILY BECAUSE PHASE ONE IS, UM, REALLY A TECHNICAL UPDATE.

SO THOSE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN THE GENERAL PLAN THAT ARE JUST WAITING TO BE CODIFIED WOULD BE IN PHASE ONE.

THERE ALSO MAY BE SOME LIMITED DECISION MAKING, BUT THE NATURE OF, OF CODIFYING POLICY IS SUCH THAT WE OFTENTIMES FIND OURSELVES SAYING, HERE'S THE POLICY AND HERE ARE THREE OPTIONS FOR HOW IT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED.

SO IT'S A BIT OF A DIS DIFFERENT DECISION MAKING PROCESS THAN IT IS WHEN YOU'RE WORKING ON A POLICY PROJECT AND YOU'RE SORT OF TRYING TO FLESH OUT THAT POLICY, UH, AND THEN EVENTUALLY MAKE A DECISION ABOUT IT.

SO, UM, AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE HEADED FORWARD WITH COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT WITH, UM, DRAFTING THE WEBSITE FOR PUBLICATION, AND I THINK WE'LL HAVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION OUT TO YOU IN EARLY JULY.

UM, WHICH THEN BRINGS ME TO, TO JULY.

WE DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS IN JULY, BUT THEN I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THE STUDY SESSION AROUND THE, THE PETALUMA ZONING REFORM PROJECT BEING SCHEDULED IN AUGUST.

AND THAT'S, UH, ALL WE HAVE THIS EVENING CHAIR.

WHEN DOES COUNCIL DO ITS FINAL VOTE ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE? AND ITS FINAL EIR RIGHT NOW, IT'S SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 14TH.

SO WE JUST, WE HAD CONVERSATION TODAY AND, AND ZONING REFORM COULD, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FIRST PHASE OF ZONING REFORM IS REALLY THE PHASE THAT TAKES THE 31 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ASSIGNS REASSIGNS ZONING DISTRICTS TO IMPLEMENT THOSE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OR CREATES NEW ZONING DISTRICTS TO IMPLEMENT THEM.

SO THAT'S A PRETTY MAJOR MOVE IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO, UH, DO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW.

THAT'S REALLY THE FIRST STAGE IN IMPLEMENTING THE GENERAL PLAN.

SO THE GOAL IS EITHER TO BRING THE, THAT PHASE ONE IMPLEMENTATION FORWARD AT THE TIME OF THE GENERAL PLAN, OR VERY SOON AFTER, LIKE WITHIN A MATTER OF, YOU KNOW, WEEKS AFTER.

'CAUSE WE DON'T WANNA END UP WITH A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE AN ACTIVE GENERAL PLAN, CORRECT, CORRECT.

THAT HAS ALL OF THIS, YOU KNOW, VISIONING WORK IN IT MM-HMM .

BUT THEN THE ACTUAL ZONING IS LAGGING BEHIND WITH THE FORMER AND YEAH.

WHAT ARE YOU ENFORCING? OKAY.

OTHER, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.

WITH THAT, WE CAN ADJOURN HERE AT 8 39.