 Okay, we'll call this meeting to order. Welcome to the Santa Rosa City Council July 9th City Council meeting Can we get an announcement or roll call, please? Let the record show that all council members are present with the exception of council member combs. Thank you Report on closed session madam city attorney Yes, the council met in closed session this afternoon on items 2.1 and 2.2 Both concern existing litigation and on both matters the council gave direction to staff. Great. Thank you for that Staff briefings. Mr. City Manager. Yes, before I invite some folks down. I do have a FEMA direct housing program update the FEMA direct housing program ends tomorrow July 10th Five Sonoma County households are currently in the program and are located in our bees at the fairgrounds All five have either located long-term housing or actively looking with assistance from Rock Sonoma County disaster case managers For those still actively looking they have all been able to identify a temporary housing plan upon moving out of the RVs at the Fairgrounds tomorrow One of the households will receive a hotel voucher from the city's rapid rehousing funds to cover the cost of temporary housing While they wait for their long-term housing To be ready for move in Rock Sonoma County will be on site at the fairgrounds tomorrow to present To be present during a FEMA's exit interviews and closing procedures to date The city has designated 48 housing choice vouchers provided by the Santa Rosa Housing Authority to Rock Sonoma County To assist fire survivors with long-term housing of those 23 have been issued to fire fire survivor Households and eight of the 23 went to households that were in the FEMA Direct housing program and I would really like to thank our colleagues at FEMA and Cal OES for providing the extra extension of two months Um for the program and now I'd like to introduce Janeline Holmes and adam peacock from Rock Sonoma County to give an update. Thank you All right. Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to Give an update on the efforts we have going with Rock Sonoma County I think this is our second time coming to chat with you about the work We're doing in partnership with a lot of different nonprofits, but definitely with the city of Santa Rosa So just as a kind of reminder, this is Rock Sonoma County's mission We're a collaborative network that addresses the long-term recovery needs related to the disaster of the 2017 Sonoma County fires Um what a long-term recovery group is is initiated by FEMA after a community disaster It's part of kind of FEMA's playbook of how they move forward with individualized recovery Focusing in on especially individuals who are highly vulnerable as well as people who typically don't qualify for The standard assistance whether it's through FEMA or other government entities We work collaboratively with a variety of community organizations And we try to create one unified system of care Bringing together all of the faith-based and non-profit organizations working on this so that Rather than individuals trying to figure each individual organization out We're able to work collaboratively towards them And typically long-term recovery groups last for about three to five years after a major disaster has happened So these are some of the participants in Rock Sonoma County We've got over 35 organizations But these are some of our uh stand our our pivotal pieces We also have had a really great relationship with the county of Sonoma the city of Santa Rosa FEMA and Cal OES As we continue to advocate for the needs of the individuals that we're serving So as genuine mentioned, we've got roughly 35 organizations who have worked with us This collaborative allows us to really tighten the safety net in our community to make sure that people do not fall through the cracks It also allows us to Protect against redundancy when it comes to providing resources for fire survivors Allowing the resources we have to go as far as possible And finally it allows each participating organization to do what they do best And so how this works together is that we utilize a committee structure We've got eight really strong committees Those include our executive committee our housing committee our disaster case management committee Communications donations management volunteers emotional spiritual and physical care and then our unmet needs committee And our disaster case management is really the key committee that interfaces directly with the fire survivors Our focus is on individual assistance. And so each Individual or household who have been impacted by the fires Has an opportunity to come to meet with us. We do a very detailed assessment with them And our goal is to create based on their need a recovery plan And a key element that I'd like to highlight in that recovery plan is it's not just based upon the Resource need that they have But it's also based upon the time that their recovery will take and that's a key element because As we're seeing now almost two years from the fire the the length of the recovery time is its own part of the recovery process for people I'd like to speak just for a moment about who's eligible for help from rock sonoma The answer to that is all fire survivors are eligible for help from rock sonoma county We have a resource center, which we'll talk about a little bit later But we do give priority to our most vulnerable communities And we'll talk a little bit about the help that we've been able to provide I just wanted to to um take this picture of the cup of water and use it to Help explain a little bit how we look at things If someone had a cup of water about that full On october early october 8 of 2017 and um They were their home was in the path of the fires. Let's just say that that cup got emptied our job at Rock Sonoma county is to come alongside those fire survivors and help them refill that glass And there's a sequence of delivery for that Of course, we start by looking at what type of insurance they may have had What type of programs from fema and other government organizations May be available to them What are their personal resources and financing they might have And then what other community-based resources are available as we partner together After we've been through all of those types of scenarios Then we begin to look at What the unmet need remains to be and that's where rock sonoma county comes in we come in And help get them as close to that water line as possible to help make them whole after the fires So in a specific way looking from the lens of our clients and and we'll share in a moment about how many clients we've been able to work with It's as simple as this someone who's impacted by the fire Signs up for help. They come into the rock resource center. They visit our website They talk to one of our partner organizations and are referred to us Um, and then we do an intake interview with them And they are paired with a case manager to determine their eligibility We do a needs assessment and as I mentioned, we develop a personalized recovery recovery plan to help them in that process Um, we're not only providing resources as we see that word navigate there, but we often advocate on behalf of the fire survivors and um, this would be a good opportunity as Mr. Mclin already mentioned just to Acknowledge the extensions that we've got twice from fema for those in the direct housing program And um, we were part of the advocacy process for that and I can just say on behalf of rock sonoma county How grateful I am for the efforts of the city of santa rosa In that advocacy, uh, it's my opinion That we may not have gotten the extension if it wasn't for the efforts of the city of santa rosa and I'm happy to say that the extra month that we've gotten for that Has made a huge difference for the fire survivors in that program And um, we have housing options. We didn't have 30 days ago as a result of that extension. So I want to say thank you Uh, and then finally when other resources have been utilized as I described Our case managers help quantify the unmet need and we advocate with philanthropic partners Who have agreed to work with us to help find the resources necessary To complete the recovery process for our clients So a little bit. Uh, this is our most recent update for the council in terms of what we've been able to accomplish to date So we have met with 1325 clients to assess their needs which resulted in about 13 000 plus interactions Many of the individuals we worked with needed minor assistance such as replacement of uninsured equipment Replacement of lost wages or maybe gap funding for rent while transitioning to a new home So we were able to work with those individuals in a quick fashion And then with those that are not able to kind of get their Situation resolved with minor assistance. They get assigned to what is called a dcm or disaster case manager Currently we're working with 386 clients to create recovery plans And 275 cases are considered a level three or four Triage and what that means is we triage people into levels one through four Levels three and four are most vulnerable cases people who Have totally lost everything and have very limited recovery resources Typically, this is underinsured uninsured Homeowners or renters in our community that lost their home And then our on top of that we've already been able to help about 335 clients Completely resolve their situation and restore that back to where they were prior to the disaster Also want to call out it was already called out by city manager mclinn But a little bit more about the housing committee that we are working through with our rental and construction partners First we've helped to rehouse over 200 renters who lost their rentals in the disaster Obviously not news to you But renters came and became extremely vulnerable afterwards because there was no right to rebuild for many of them And so we put a lot of emphasis in trying to rehouse and put special resources towards our The population who were renters Additionally, we've had an amazing partnership with the city of santa rosa to provide the 48 housing choice vouchers to the most vulnerable That has been an absolute game changer to have those vouchers for some of the individuals working with particularly those in the FEMA village it had those individuals would not be able to recover If not for these 48 housing choice vouchers. These were the only thing that would have worked for them So we are extraordinarily grateful for this partnership Um, additionally, we've been able to disperse over 2.4 million dollars of direct client assistance to fire survivors Uh, that means helping them with their rent helping them again with lost wages helping them to replace furniture So on so forth Um and over half of those individuals were considered extremely low income based on the HUD income guidelines And then lastly one of our the things we're very excited about and launching right now is a partnership with an organization called hope city It's a national organization that does volunteer Rebuilds for homeowners and they're able to get the cost down to $150,000 per home So this is wonderful again for our underinsured and uninsured homeowners Who are not able to rebuild and this is a great way for us to retain these individuals in our community through this partnership with hope city Like just to make a few comments about the rock resource center, uh, this is a single location That's available to fire survivors as they come and and again. This is a great place for fire survivors who have Lost anything any level of their recovery to be able to come get resources and information It's located at 140 stony circle suite 204. We have a slide about that coming up a little bit later But um, I'm happy to report that we've had just under 700. This was at the end of june Individuals who have visited the resource center looking for information and help We also have roughly 30 individuals A month who come in for help and are either not really wanting to be a client of rock or Coming for something very specific that's really more of a case Assistance need than it is being part of disaster case management. And so it's a great place where we're helping fire survivors directly We've been able to offer 85 distinct events for fire survivors. So this would be something like a group counseling. There were a lot of just Trauma informed care opportunities that were made available after the fires and have continued insurance workshops other things to help fire survivors negotiate and navigate the recovery process It's also been a place we've been able to utilize for our partner organizations to increase Their own organizational development and capacity as it relates to relief So we've done over 70 training and support events for our partner organizations So a little bit about Where we are and where we're still seeing the need for the individuals we're working with The first thing to note is we are still experiencing fires fires coming in for the very first time to receive support assistance We're almost two years post the Disaster and individuals are just now Being able to kind of get through the trauma of everything that's happened and actually reaching out to figure out how they can move forward In our community. So this is Still kind of eye-opening to us that we're seeing people coming in for the absolute first time We're also again not a surprise many to the council here or many people in our community There are difficulties finding affordable rentals and we are Still always trying to look at funding for those who were renting and didn't have a pathway to rebuild We've been seeing a lot of renters coming through Our front doors and the needing to continue to advocate for The ability for them to continue to stay in our community despite the fact that we're not a homeowner and lost their house We also have some concern about how the federal and state government assistance is going to be able to fill the gap of unmet needs We know a lot of that assistance is still being detailed and outlined exactly how it's going to roll out But based on some of our initial things that we've heard and experiences we've had We're concerned that there's Quite a few fire survivors who Have significant need but may not qualify For those programs and and so that's going to put significant burden on our local community to find those resources and Finally just wanted to communicate that based on our current caseload of those who are working With our disaster case managers, we're estimating an additional 4.6 million Of funding that's going to be going to be needed just to help the current disaster case management clients recover So with that this is our contact information as well as the address for the rock resource center It's well the phone number if you know somebody who's still in need Please feel free to direct them there as well as this is mine and adam's contact information as well with that will conclude our presentation Great. Thank you for that presentation Although adam you were thanking us I want to thank you because when I was part of the team in dc when we were trying to get that extension It's very helpful to be able to call you and you're actually boots on the ground giving us that update with Hopefully no one else would have to experience that but we really I think we're Successful to do a large part to your efforts to in connecting the people are needing those resources with us Deal with the federal government. So you have great bridge there. So I really appreciate that I also appreciate the presentation because um here we are talking two years post fire And I think many members of our community who maybe don't live in the northwest or fountain group Don't realize the recovery is still going on and there's still people in need here So my one question for you if people wanted to assist after seeing this, what would you suggest they do? Yeah, if they could contact us at the rock resource center. We have a volunteer coordinator Who helps? Connect those who want to help with resources that we're making available to fire survivors And there's a number of ways to participate right now We know that There's going to be a need with these volunteer builds for people willing to volunteer time You don't have to have incredible skills. You're working with contractors to help do that work. And so If they could go to either the website The rock resource center or call that number we can connect them With those opportunities to help Additionally, I'll add that we also are always looking for landlords That are wanting to rent to our individuals, especially with the section eight vouchers So help me to spread the word around apartment leads and property management leads that we could pursue On behalf of the people that we were able to get assigned vouchers would be great Great. Thank you council questions for rock reps See none. Thank you so much for the presentation any other reports mr For the rebuild nothing on this item now, okay, we have one card on this item wade analyst It works. Okay. That's fine My name is wade and nilis. I'm here representing community action partnership in rock rebuild in our community I just have a testimony here from one of our recent on fire survivors has completely recovered I'm just reword a word. I wish you he wrote To the funders of cap and rock I wish to express my gratitude for your help and let you know What a difference you may have made for me after the fire in october 2017 burned my apartment to the ground It took me a few months to lend my own apartment It was at market rate I proceed quickly blow through my savings from driving buses for 20 years and through my 401k And a month before I ran out of cash. I was told that I was in line for the HUD voucher I was then introduced to wade analyst my case manager and program director at cap Wade was a kind efficient accurate and careful Documenting everything we needed and making sure I understood what I needed to do He always was on my side and I shared me through A maze of communications and documents successfully until I got my voucher along with the subsidy checks. It was a miracle I suffered from chronic depression PTSD and probably a few other psychological complaints My pain was to my plan was to end my life when I ran out of money and I had no hope And no vision of being safe and secure in some kind of way The voucher and the rent subsidy payments acquired through wade Assistance have given me the security and safety and now my plan is to go out and make difference where I can And maybe play some music too Obviously rock cap and wade have made a huge difference for me and not Once did I ever feel I was less than anyone else? I thank wade for his efforts and also I thank you the funders of these programs I don't know what else to say, but thanks for the way you have impacted my life Noah Henderson So that's just a quick testimony and You know you have any further questions. I could just answer the best I can I appreciate that way in wade is one of those behind the scenes rock star working for community action partnership with Disaster case management. So thank you wade for all that you've been doing No question. Thank you Again, no no other reports On the fire recovery rebuild. Okay, and also for members of uh, who are present in the chambers You'll notice that we have some different screens now. Uh, this is our first opportunity to use our boat cast Um, so there is a bit of a learning curve We're taking odds which one of us is going to need help first But you'll also see the names will be up there and the countdown for the public comment And then once we start voting you'll actually be able to see that there So hopefully be a nice smooth transition and I think we're all ready for that All right city managers report. Do you have anything to report mr. City manager? Yes, I do to celebrate national parks and recreation month The recreation team is hosting their annual senior membership drive during the month of july new members to the senior the person's senior wing and steel laying community center can get To try a free class and have a chance to win a prize annual memberships are $24 And you will receive a discount on drop-in classes sign up at either facility or online at santa rosa rec Dot com returning members continue to receive discounts to participate in their favorite programs such as ukulele line dancing ping pong And chair volleyball summer is the busiest time of the year with 5,000 youth enrolled in swimming lessons 4,000 youth attending one of our summer camps and 3500 adults playing adult softball Howarth park boating and sailing classes are full and the new animal barn camp is sold out Sunday concerts in julia park start this started this past sunday and friday movies than howarth begin in august recreation invites you to come join the fund Thank you, mr. City manager. Madam city attorney report. I have nothing to report this afternoon. Okay Statements of abstention from council members. Are there any? Yes, sir Thank you, mayor. I'll be abstaining from item 16.2 as my Home is located within 500 feet of the subject property, which is the south east southeast greenway project Mr. All these yeah, thank you related to approval of minutes. I was absent on the 20 I'm sorry the 11th of june and on vacation on june 18th So that's 12.3 and 12.4 Any other abstentions Mr. Tivis thank you, mr. Mayor I'm going to be abstaining from item 15.1 out of an abundance of caution given my role as executive director of st Vincent appall another service provider For the homeless Okay, thank you And I will be abstaining from item 12.2 the minutes from the june fourth meeting as I was not in attendance All right for the mayor council members reports What I'd like to do first is jump to 11.1.1 and give an update and we have several cards on this item It's related to the climate action subcommittee So the climate action subcommittee met on june 11th and staff made a presentation On our council tier one goal of climb climate action plan after the presentation staff was looking for clarification on next steps regarding item Number four of that tier one priority The all-electric ready ordinance by 2 to 1 vote the subcommittee provided feedback to staff to change the goal from all electric ready ordinance to all electric ready reach Ordinance Staff has told us the change in focus will not alter the due date And bring this back to council to debate you on the direction and confirm that the majority of council supports this direction And mr. Gowan. Is there any other information you would like to provide for that? are there Before we hear from the members of the public are there any questions that anyone on council may have about that proposed change Seeing none Oh, you do mr. Tibbets. Yes, if somebody on that committee could just give me kind of a A distinction between reach and all electric ready or I would prefer staff do that not that Mr. Rogers isn't capable or i'm not capable but mr. Gowan is very Well capable to answer that Thank you and good afternoon david gowan assistant city manager wanted to Give a differentiation between the two options so the all electric ready ordinance is essentially putting an ordinance in place that would Require homes built be ready for electrification Wouldn't require having them go electric. It would just have to be the wired for electric What we're looking at doing is looking at all electric reach code Which would require any new homes built after this is adopted which would be in the january Amy for january 1st would be required to be all electric from that point forward Again, this only relates to single family homes and homes are multifamily up to three stories And that that I apologize for my ignorance, but that Ordinance if you will or mandate from the state and the state building code is is codified. We just have to adopt it We would be doing a reach code which would be going over and beyond what the building code Currently is recommending. Okay, so we would go beyond that which is the reach code Which we would do in tandem with the building code updates So we'd use the forum the public engagement process coming back to the council going to the public Over the next from between now and october when you would hear this and take an action on it Multiple times and so you'll see this probably three times the public will see it multiple times And you'll see the whole package come back in october Okay, thank you Any other questions for mr. Gown? Okay, several cards here. Uh first up jerry Bernhaft followed by abigail zoker Mr. Mayor council members Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this item I'm a local environmental attorney I've been focused on climate change and Ghd reduction both in my work and as an active citizen and i'm just here today to support Adoption of the reach code The 2017 fires Were you know, there's pretty clear consensus that You know the Climate crisis was a major contributor to that event and We need to do everything we can to avoid future events of that nature And this is a really good step in that direction So thank you for considering it. I hope you'll adopt it. Thank you abigail zoker followed by Ted tiffani I'm abigail zoker. I live here in santa rosa and I just want to urge the city council To take action and be a leader on this It's easy for us to look around the country in the world and see all the people who contribute to the problem Of climate change. Why don't they stop cutting down that tropical rainforest? Why don't they they they But this is a chance for us to take action that makes a difference and be a leader And I think that's what we'd like to be in the city and I Live up to our better selves and not let fear hamper us from taking what we know is the right step I've heard people make arguments about the increased cost Associated with construction of all electric and there's some people here today to speak on that It's it just doesn't make sense if you're not putting gas in it's a reduction in cost So I think really what we're looking at is fear of change and I'm sympathetic to that But we have to take the plunge. We have to be the people who are taking action Instead of looking to other people to solve us our problems. So please Be the city council. We want you to be thank you. Thank you Ted tiffany followed by neil bolger Mr. Mayor councillor members. Thank you very much. I'm Ted tiffany with guppin and blavok consulting engineers also a codes and states Codes and standards advocacy for the major IOUs The reach code is cost effective for the all-electric reach code and I urge you guys to follow that couple of comments and Councilman tidbits I want to thank you for all your help in the rebuild effort and through that was a huge uplift in Energy education around the all-electric it allowed us time with cinnamon clean power to get outreach materials cinnamon clean power putting out their Advanced energy center to get outreach for education for all the electric buildings And we have the infrastructure in place to really support the all-electric reach code There's nothing stopping us from doing the all-electric buildings in santa rosa and I want to remind everybody One of my best runs is an oakland firefighter and when his crew was up here battling all the fires in sonoma county The one thing they faced after every combustible material was burnt In those homes was a natural gas system still flaring off And it took pgne almost six hours to turn that natural gas system off while we're searching for survivors and bodies and Trying to make sure everybody was out. We were still facing the natural gas fires And we just had one of the worst earthquakes we've had in state history And one of the biggest battles the oakland firefighters faced in loma parida was all of the natural gas fires over 80 of them in the city And again, we couldn't shut off the natural gas supply system I want to remind everybody about that hazard that we have underneath our feet That is contributing to global warming and as a real disaster Waiting to happen and that's one of the biggest fears I have in my house is my chimney collapsing Onto my natural gas system that will break that line and burn my house down The house will survive, but it will burn So I want to get natural gas out from under our feet And that starts with all the new construction in santa rosa, and I hope you guys pass this for each good For the safety of our first responders So thank you very much. Thank you. Neil wolder followed by jeff blavet Hi, thank you so much today for listening to my comments My name is neil bulger and i'm a professional engineer and a co-owner of a small energy efficiency consulting company in sonoma county We work extensively in the building energy efficiency space Which consulting on buildings as well as supporting statewide efforts in changing energy codes such as this one and such as the reach code And as you know, our state is on a path towards reducing our greenhouse gas emissions And buildings are a major piece of this effort The ratcheting down of energy codes happens every three years which can definitely feel like a burden to the construction industry Having been a part of that process I can assure you though that the codes are backed by a tremendous amount of research to identify key technologies And construction methods that are working and scaling the market today In a recent report published this april on residential building electrification in california It found that new construction homes going all electric will actually save the house 130 to 540 a year compared to a new house built with gas This is in addition to the cost of not having to install the new gas line Which would save an additional $6,000 in first cost towards that new construction home This study was published by sce and folks at the los angeles department of water and power as well as it's smud And is a great resource of the snapshot of where the market is today in building a new A new set of rules Today it's my understanding that both options kind of being put forth One gives an option to still install gas while the other would move us towards the reach to only do all electric While these options may look the same today They don't look the same in the long run On average american homeowners only live in their homes for an average of eight years And while it may be the desire of one homeowner to put a to build a brand new home with new gas lines today It creates a future burden on the next homeowner who wants to buy that house And now needs to upgrade that house when the time comes and all electric is all there is While it's your professional obligation to serve the people of our city to the best of your abilities It's my professional obligation as a professional engineer to present you with the insights I can on market transformation efforts taking place all across our state Thank you for a chance to speak today and your continued efforts to support making santa rosa a leader on climate change Thank you. Uh jeff followed by tish levy Good evening council. My name is jeff blavuet. I'm with goodman of blavuet consulting engineers We have an officer in santa rosa san francisco sacramento We've been business for 60 years and we design all electric buildings among other things We're doing um, we're putting six buildings at the jc Onto a geothermal system right now the the bank theater Is being renovated. It's an all-electric building We are designing sonoma clean powers headquarters right now and their advanced energy center um, I've been involved with the windsor town council on helping them with uh two apartment developments to be all electric zero net energy And I just want to tell you that there is no reason To not go all electric. Um, it's safer. It's more efficient It's going to help save our climate And um, it really is the right thing to do and there is no technical reason. There is no cost reason Why all electric buildings should not be the norm going forward? I You know, I've been in this business for 30 years And we've all been used to designing gas water heaters and gas boilers And I I look at some of my colleagues who are selling those products and I tell them you better find a new product to sell because gas boilers and gas water heaters going to be On the decline over the next few years Not only that but the gas infrastructure That we see is so inexpensive right now with fracked gas The the cost of upgrading the the infrastructure to maintain safety standards is going to fall on fewer and fewer shoulders And it's going to become less and less economic as time goes on So I I do urge you to go with the all the all electric reach code Thank you, uh tish liby followed by christine hoax Hi, i'm tish levy. I'm a santa rosa resident I'm also the a columnist for the Gazette I've been writing about the climate crisis for them for 11 years Uh, I was at the subcommittee meeting. I was so thankful that you voted to move forward with the reach code These are some things that came out at that meeting which I wrote an op-ed piece in the gazette that said the same thing Basically natural gas is methane It's 84 times more Uh read it when you're burning natural gas in your house. You're breathing methane It's also the fire danger which has been adequately More than adequately discussed, but it's true We live in a fire zone and we live in an earthquake zone And many people do not realize that the 1906 San Francisco earthquake was really the san francisco fire Most of the so much of the damage there was from burst gas mains. We don't need this and uh More importantly, it will save money Just the upfront cost alone is going to be over $6,000 savings When you don't have to plummet with gas So I hope that you will I urge you to adopt this I think it's the best thing we could do At the city level other than plant a million trees Uh to reduce global heating So thank you so much for your consideration for looking at this Thank you for all of the positive things you're doing about Getting us on the right track Thank you christine hoax Good afternoon, uh, my name is christine hoax and I am a on the steering committee at 350 sonoma and We're a local climate action group Affiliated with 350.org We one of the things we do is Whenever we can was we ask individuals and groups to lead on climate action and transition to a fossil free future And that's what i'm i'm asking you to do today and having our homes All in transitioning our homes to an all-electric ready And even better to have them all electric ready to go is An important point in the transition that needs to happen Now Right now Because climate emergency is upon us I just like to say having you know, so taking up the all-electric ready Ordinance and the reach code is is important to do that and to do that as soon as possible. Thank you very much Thank you Okay bring it back to council the reason I wanted to come before the entire body Back in when we did our council goals in february We just had all-electric ready ordinance We're now based on the recommendation from our subcommittee changed that to all-electric ready reach ordinance Timeline would still be the same when I think it's october 31st of this year And I just want to make sure that the body as a whole is comfortable with that direction Mr. Tibbets Thank you mayor first I want to thank you for actually going through this process and bringing it back to the council with this update You know, I was one of the ones who voted For the all-electric ready ordinance a couple of weeks ago And like this is one of those I think pretty rare instances Being behind this day is where I'm glad that I lost because I think what we're actually going to be getting through this process Is a much more significant and a beneficial policy as far as greenhouse gas emissions are concerned But I also just encourage, you know, our staff this has been a A long-awaited process for especially a lot of the advocates in the community that we really try to do our best To make it happen and thank you mayor for bringing it back Great any other comments concerns seen nodding heads? I think the direction from the subcommittee is the direction we're going forward. Thank you Okay, I'll bring it back to council for council members reports. We'll start over here. Mr. Tibbets Do you have anything you'd like to share? I would Following up from the last meeting I had stated that I would be asking the council to consider mixed income housing and going through a review of the financing structure of how that works and what kind of Oftentimes precludes us from being able to do it as well as policy solutions to help us achieve it I'm not going to be doing that here today because we received Notification from assistant city manager guin that that report on inclusionary housing and the jobs Linkage fee will be coming back to the council in september and october So for anybody watching that process that will stick to that process in that timeline I do have a question for staff actually about pace on bill financing some of the some folks who are on the oakmont village association's fire safety committee reached out to me And asked what the city had in the way of a pace ordinance to allow for on bill financing for home hardening And I wanted to bring it here to the council to ask my colleagues and staff about it Because if we have it it sounds like a great tool that people ought to know about who live in the wooey wildland urban interface area And also I wanted to be able to let the the folks participating in this committee With the status of our ordinance is so so we'll we'll get a report out to council and let the status of our PACE ordinances and if and if this um and and if home hardening is part of the conversation Okay, thank you Ms. Wyoming anything to report? Save you for second to last mr. Oliver's Thank you mayor. I'll I'll be brief. I just uh wanted to express some words of concern Regarding the rose and village project public hearing that we had two weeks ago What concerns me is the negative message we as a body sent to our residents and to our home builders When we at the final stages of a decades long effort came close to the railing and project which came before us With strong community support Well arguably not a perfect project as it relates to affordable housing needs It is still a good project that fits well in the overall revitalization of rose and village Looking at the final result of a unanimous vote would lead many to believe that this was a simple vote for a good project In reality with the community and builders experience was our tendency to at the 11th hour Attempted redesigning project was supported which was supported by our planning commission and the rose and community Our home builders the development community and our residents have reason to be concerned And I would caution us not to send mixed messages about our commitment to supporting housing for all Of our residents and in particular housing that is affordable to those earning lower wages. Thank you Mr. Swayer Thank you mayor. I just wanted to say that I concur with councilmember Oliver's comments and caution I was concerned that evening. I was very uncomfortable And at times a painful experience to see us Give that mixed message and I want to thank you councilmember Oliver as we're bringing it up and I concur with your concern Mr. Vice mayor any report Thank you, mr. Mayor. I've got a number of things since we had a week off there First and foremost, I wanted to thank park and rec And in particular allister for putting on the annual whitewater rodeo Little over a week ago My boat was not particularly successful. It floated backwards But it was a good opportunity to get out on the Santa Rosa creek With neighbors and in particular with our students who are learning about good stewardship So that was a lot of fun and thank you for putting that on we had a very successful Burbank neighbor fest that is part of the city's ongoing program to re-engage neighbors and talk about resiliency And connectivity That was a great opportunity. I want to thank 2030 for putting on their annual red white and boom Festival again as many of you know fireworks are not legal in the city of santa rosa And so having an opportunity for folks to come and to celebrate as a community while being safe and sane was a really good thing we had SCTA so i'm a kind of transportation authority yesterday There were two really significant items on the agenda that the council should be aware of one was the official call for projects For potential measure m funding that we'll be working with staff to get our list over and then there was the bigger Regionally significant projects list that we did approve unanimously as a board Two of those projects are very familiar to this council One is the Realignment of her and avenue and one of them is the extension of farmers lane Which we've talked about as a critical evacuation route as well. And i'm sure director nut somewhere Was really excited to see that one go through We as the city manager mentioned kicked off live at juliard park this last sunday I hope to see folks out there enjoying the good vibes going forward and then finally Thank you to staff for a really good and really well attended neighborhood meeting last night on the encampment pilot project Obviously there were Was an article about it this morning and there's been a lot of discussion about it from the dais But really want to thank the neighbors and and folks who came out to To listen to ask questions and really for such a charged and divisive issue Really everybody was very courteous of one another. It was a really successful meeting. I felt Thank you two things report on We had our leadership council meeting yesterday And action was taken on the following items First we received the 2019 sonoma county homeless point in time count report and had some discussions both from the research analyst who actually conducted part of the study and Provided some direction to the leadership council We also received and accepted the evaluation of the sonoma county's coordinated entry system from the consulting form technical assistant Collaborative a lot of information is there and if you're interested if you go to the home sonoma county website The entire report is there What we on the leadership council did was direct the white paper be studied further by our technical advisory committee Two groups the housing first in the coordinated entry task group And we also requested periodic updates to the leadership council We also received an update on the awards the capital funds under the 2019 nofa aka the heat funding 15 projects were Listed there council directed cdc to continue working with all capital projects and provide updates at our next meeting in august Of the 15 three of the 15 projects That the assessment from cdc was either withdrawn or incomplete information So we've requested additional information those three projects totaled almost 900 thousand dollars So we asked the cdc to continue working towards completion of that Uh as is typical because I think some of our folks went to your meeting Our meeting was scheduled for two hours went three hours And so the rest of the meeting was will be continued on our august 22nd meeting one other Thing I wanted to share with council about council set along some of you have been on council for a while Other mayors have done this. It's an opportunity for anyone on council to invite someone to sit up here with the dais with you Uh and again, it's just going to be a pilot project here There's only one at a time and I ask that if you have someone who's interested in participating in that to go through me because We would only like one obviously uh next Tuesday morning when we have a joint planning commission council meeting that wouldn't be appropriate Um, but again, it's an opportunity for other folks in the community to take a look See what it's like being in a council agenda from this side of the table And observe and learn from each of us up here. So again, it's a pilot program And I would just ask, you know, that person obviously not a speaking role They can't interrupt the meetings, but you're there to support them and show what it's like to be at this table Okay, any questions about that? Okay sure sure Thank you, mr. Mayor for allowing me to go out of order. Um I wanted to briefly address the um the tragic loss of life in my district last Um week and just want to express my sincerest condolences to the family Of the 16 year olds who passed away and the other two girls who were tragically involved in this incident I want to encourage everybody who's got a teenager or as a teenage driver to follow the laws of their license and to remember that uh to drive slowly and to be very careful and um as our summer sets on just to Remember that tragic things can happen and that it doesn't have to be a right of passage that we can be These things can be prevented by uh being cautious. Thank you Thank you for that All right, i'm 11.2 board commission and committee appointments So we have two under discussion for uh this meeting One is the bicycle and pedestrian advisory board disabled community representative Those of us present today interviewed one applicant and there's one vacancy So entertain any motions if someone is inclined to do so Yes, I would but let me pull up the name real quick Christine Uh, yes, I would make a motion to appoint christine logan to the bicycle pedestrian advisory board Representing the this the disabled community representative Okay, we have a motion in a second. So now for our First vote to push your second Your votes, please Success, thank you. Well done And uh, we have our board of building regulations Appeals there's two vacancies. We have two candidates one incumbent one in no appointment. I would entertain any motions Uh, I move both of the applicants as listed. Thank you. Do we have a second second? We have a motion in a second your votes Soon to be And we have unanimous vote. Thank you Item 11.3 is designation of voting delegate alternate to league of california cities annual conference This is required by california league of cities Um, if I could first see who else will be attending I will be in attendance the vice mayor will be in attendance. Is anyone else attending the league? mr. Alvarez mr. Sawyer Ms. Fleming, okay So I'd entertain a motion as to who we'd like to represent and we can identify up to two alternates I will move that mayor schwedhelm is our primary representative I'll second that We have a motion in a second your votes Through through the mayor. It says that mr. Alvarez seconded Okay, say that one again. I missed it. No, I use the the device to make the moat this make the second. Oh good work Okay, as as suggested This is our first rodeo A mover and a shaker And with that I'll I'll make the motion that vice mayor rogers be the alternate Okay, we have a motion and we have a second by mr. Sawyer Let's not get cocky now your votes, please And then also pass the unanimous. Do we want to identify a Second alternate. I will make a motion to have councilmember Fleming is our second alternate Do we have a second? Are we fine with Who made the front let's just vote And then also passing unanimously. Thank you Uh item 11.4. Uh, mr. Tibbets. This was request for an agenda item consider contract and with legal service provider for homeless individuals Yeah, thank you. I wanted to give you all a little bit of background on this Before you make your votes today. I had the opportunity to sit down and have dinner with ronnie rubinoff of Lee laid not long ago And she brought this to my attention that there's a lot of state funding available right now for homeless advocacy That requires local matching funds and obviously there's Self-interest there and having that conversation with me But she was the first to say that she would expect some sort of an rfp process So I want to say that right off the bat But the conversation itself. I think still really merits our investigation right now in california There's about 20 percent of the homeless population that is eligible for ssdi benefits But is not collecting it and one of the primary reasons why is that the barrier to obtaining it is is they Do not have someone legal expertise to deal with the social security office and appeals court In order they have an address to receive that mail from those institutions To finish their paperwork and start becoming recipients of benefits So as we look at homelessness as a tier one priority I thought boy this could really be low-hanging fruit To be able to have someone in this community working with some service provider To be able to actually pair people with these benefits because I believe it's about $850 a month It's not necessarily well actually there is some kind of a time Restraint the funding request to the state of california. I believe and need to have a matching fund by october of 2019 But I don't expect it to be a long conversation And that's it Questions for mr. Tibbett's mr. Oliver's Yes, so from what I understand then is this is going to be dependent on On somebody making an application for grant funding to make this happen So you're not suggesting that this the way I turn into a contract with the specific legal service now But that's going to be open to who applies So with the process be then mayor or city City attorney is that somebody would apply and make a Outreach to us to be a partner in this effort or Or do we take the the action now? How does that happen? Right today is just to schedule the full conversation if the If the motion receives four votes, we will put it on the agenda for a later date And in terms of your question That would be something that we'd look at it how that's structured again If the council is interested in having it come back on the agenda at a later date Okay, thank you mr. Rogers So mr. Tibbett, it's just a Discussion about creating an rfp putting an rfp out having that come back Approve that and find funding In the budget that is not currently there That we have not allocated is what I mean You'd like us to have that conversation by october Uh I mean preferably probably at least 30 to 45 days prior to that time because then there would be an rfp Solicitation period and we need to make sure that that's concluded before the state deadline in october But I guess with that in mind it can come at that time I can Proceed this forward as a study session so that the council can give input on how the process should look as it should be an Rfp should it be an rfi are we going to do just a sole source? Based on an rfi I don't want to narrow the conversation And and rule out your voices in that process what i'm really just focused on here is making sure that We give this opportunity our attention Mr. Sarge Thank you, mayor and i'm curious about the Time commitment by staff at this point and we just went through the budget process Is there any way to determine At this point or between now and when the item might hit exactly what would have to be pushed down So that would be part of a presentation I mean a solicitation would have to go through the city's attorney's office It would it would require staff work. So if we came back We would we would have to discuss what has to be deferred Okay, we have one car on this item adrian lobby My name is adrian lobby. I'm a founding founding member of homeless action I'd like to uh encourage you to go forward with this item As many of you know having some kind of income when you're homeless is a lifeline It can keep you in out of all kinds of difficult situations It's also a a kind of lifeline for a lot of low income housing Providers because they can expect to get a little bit of rent from people who have some kind of income And that's very important and lastly, I'd like to say aside from the potential of getting social security Benefits for homeless people This also provides some help just for legal help We have people who are in and out of the misdemeanor court on relatively minor things Those things can turn over to become felonies and That keeps you out of housing So it's really important to have some legal representation for people and I I really hope you'll go forward with this Thank you. Thank you Do you have a question mr. Always Yes, I guess I was confused so What I'm hearing is that there's grant funding coming from the state or that we would be offering the these grants It would be a combination my understanding Ernesto's it'd be a combination of both Like most of the things from the state it requires a local match for us to be able to get it You know probably receiving a dollar for dollar match the cost. We're probably talking about here and don't quote me on this but It's probably in the range of 50 to 70 thousand dollars So that's just hopefully giving you a little bit of an idea Thank you And who is eligible to apply for these grants? Is it the city or or a nonprofit? I believe it's it's through a partnership of both But you're taking me into territory where I don't have concrete answers Which is why I think if you are interested move it forward so we can find out I guess I have a concern as to whether this is the right place I mean are we not having other discussions related to homeless issues So within some other committee or some other body that would discuss this and and having A grant opportunity available seems like then that we would work on entering into a contract It would come to us into a contract to apply for this grant is I think that would be the normal process So my question is is it at the right place at the right time right now? That's my only concern Mr. The question I have you mentioned an october timeline Where I'm struggling with this sounds like a great idea But october is like tomorrow in the city process So we'd have to reschedule us get this on the agenda get the report out And I'm not sure where the money would come from since we just finished our budget process So you can give you give me a little bit more information about the october timeline that you mentioned You know I I really can't I I can get back to you on it Because again, I don't want to be over committing You know myself or the the parties that are interested in applying for this service in conjunction with the city If there was a concern about process here Maybe providing direction to and I'm looking at at director blind up there I know you're super busy But maybe figuring out what that process looks like and then giving us a report out At the next council meeting or something because I recognize councilmember oliveris that there are probably processes That are more streamlined than us discussing it But would that be unacceptable? I just want to make sure that we don't you know prematurely Sunset on on this opportunity without us all getting the opportunity to learn more about it So even if you vote today the earliest point for our conversation would be in august if you look at the remaining july schedule Next tuesday is going to be an all-day affair. And so I would just say For us to get to a study session is looking like august. I would just point that out Then with that in mind, I'll try to make this easy for the council Can we just provide direction to the appropriate staff person to to communicate with legal aid to figure out Exactly what the opportunity is and and what it would require What what's on the agenda today is simply the vote as to whether you want to put The matter of Contracting with the legal services provider. That's what's on the agenda. So that's what you would be voting for today Simply whether to put it on a future agenda Mr. Weiss Thank you, mr. Mayor. I wish this had come to us three weeks ago when we were doing our budget Clearly, we've got a lot of details that need to be worked out here As a courtesy I'm going to give you my vote to bring this forward and allow us to have a conversation because I don't want to miss the Opportunity and perhaps when we have that conversation We can talk about where that funding actually would come from and what the program would look like So I will support it today to move forward to a conversation Uh But I'm going to need more details before we can actually approve anything Thanks Any other comments mr. Sawyer? Thank you, mayor Oh, I do have concerns about the staff's obligations What we just went through during our budget hearings Just recently we're talking about the elimination of quite a few positions in our city Reducing or putting stress and pressure on our existing employees and the possibility in the in the near future of actually Uh laying employees off I don't think that given our financial situation and the fact that we did just go through those budgets We have wants and we have needs and I see um when I have to choose This particular item as a want or a need Um, I think that it is a want but I I cannot move I can't personally move forward with Obligating staff to even do the research at this point Any other comments Yeah, and for me where I'm starting I've talked to her need about this and it sounds like a great idea But again knowing the capacity of our organization and we just went through this I wish we would have had this three four days because What my fear would be staff commits to make this presentation and we still miss out on all the other things that are going on It wouldn't be a successful conclusion And I'm hoping that there are some other Avenues that legal aid can find to find this funding We still are bringing it to us if there's some other methodology that we might be able to find to assist with their efforts You know, I'd be willing to entertain that So madam city chair and so I know councilmember combs second in this motion Do we need another motion in a second tonight or do we just vote based on? Oh, I'm sorry it was okay. We have our first all right So Do we want to push about so the motion would be from mr. Tibbetts, correct? Correct Can you motion? Now we're rolling and your votes And that motion does not pass three i's and three nos the nos being the mayor Councilmember Oliver's and councilmember Sawyer All right item 12.1 Any questions corrections to the may 28th Council minutes We'll accept those item 12.2 the june 4th. I'll be abstaining from that so anyone who was there Oh and Yeah, I'm the only one abstain from that any corrections to those minutes Seeing none that that will we'll accept those I'm 12.3 the june 11th And that would be mr. Oliver is abstaining any corrections Seeing none and the final one 12.4 the june 18th minutes Again, mr. Oliver is abstaining any corrections Okay, we'll accept those Mr. McGlynn consent calendar Yes item 13.1 resolution adoption of memorandum of understanding unit 9 police safety management represented by the santa rosa police management association effective july 1st 2019 through june 30th 2020 Item 13.2 resolution acceptance of the rosland fire station located 830 burbank avenue and authorization for the mayor to accept a deed for the conveyance Item 12.3 resolution approval a second amendment to professional services agreement with the grains martin stein and richland llp for legal services item 13.4 resolution approval General services agreement with staples contract and commercial llc for office supplies Item 13.5 ordinance adoption second reading ordinance of the council of the city of santa rosa Amending title 20 of the santa rosa city code reclassification of property located at 1665 gernville road apn 036 dash 010 dash 010 from the rr 20 rural residential zoning district to the r Dash 3 dash 1 8 multifamily residential zoning district file number prj 1h 089 i'll you know 13.6 resolution city county funding agreement for samuel l jones homeless shelter Thank you council any questions Do we have any cards on consent calendar? Mr. Rogers Do we have a second mayor? I will move items 13.1 through 13.6 of the consent calendar and waive further reading of the text And your votes In that passage unanimously Do we have any cards for public comment items not on the agenda one card elizabeth nilan Wow, look at all the people and what do I have ready nothing? But I am here and I I've been going to the homeless action committee on monday mornings and enjoying Meeting all the people that care about the homeless Although of course not all the people that care about the homeless come to the meeting Like I don't know what I really want to say heck. I haven't been listening to berkeley radio enough this week I really know anything but oh, I know 24 people have died in custody And I like that headline about how dirty the detention centers were and I heard that the children be so served frozen food You know so, um, I just personally It's it's a baffling situation to see how the homeless are being handled and managed by Our community I'm glad that i'm slightly involved at least I have a homeless son in berkeley who was attacked by the senator as a pd during a medical emergency It'll be five years in february And he has no income except me My my donations and I get my donations. I get a lot of my donations from the street And I love to break that law that tells me I can't hold a sign that says I need help Yeah, it's freedom of speech and apparently the california vehicle code has a law against Holding a sign by the road And I've been into court many many times and they they they don't get really nasty with me And I don't get really nasty with them. We just kind of process it through I believe it is freedom of speech and I believe it is protected by the constitution I heard a little blurb on the public rate not the public radio, but the local news station for the bay area and it said that the one percent are trying to have a new constitutional convention so they can rewrite the constitution I'm not even a little bit surprised Yeah, I like peace and I think if we could live in peace we'd be a happy country, but as long as we keep Waging war against other countries We will have dissension here Among us, so that's enough. Thanks Thank you. Victoria yannis Victoria yannis from homeless action exclamation point I'm here today because I wanted to speak about the The police sweeps on the homeless that are set to take place according to city policy Because we were not allowed to speak yesterday at the public meeting My thing is decriminalized homelessness and so The facts presented were that there were 3,000 homeless and the amount of beds we couldn't really get clear Nevertheless After all we've been through after all the sweeps, you know homeless hill Sixth street Camp mackayla Dollar tree Joe redota trail I'm sure I'm missing a few there point being This has been the only response to homelessness that this city has come up with even though We have been in an emergency status for over a year this upsets me because I'm involved in the defense of Homeless that gets cited so We have a system Where there's nowhere for people to go and then the only response that the city council has is to please their constituency To show them to have some street theater out there between the police and the homeless And to clean up the streets for a little while it won't last long We need to get some trumps concentration camps out here to go along in the line of the way things are going Sorry about that. I slipped anyway I just want everybody to know you know that Nobody wants to mess up anybody's parks or anything. It's just that there's nowhere for people to go And it's a violation of the 8th amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment To be constantly moved along and nowhere to go So what's happening is people are getting cited and then they are prohibited from Appearing in any of the locations Thank you. Yeah, these are pretextual charges Item 15.1 Item 15.1 report Request for proposals of for operation of samuel l jones hall Homeless shelter for housing first operations for fiscal year 2020 2021 kelly keikendall presenting Good afternoon. Mayor schwed helman members of the council I'm going to jump right to this next slide and give you a little bit of background as to why we're here this afternoon So as part of the fiscal year 2019-20 budget hearing staff proposed to repro program approximately 1.6 million dollars of funding available from a 2016 2017 affordable housing Notice of a funding notice of funding availability Anoka and we are looking at using 400 000 dollars towards the sam jones hall roof contingency You're aware that that work is going to be happening soon I believe Transportation public works will be for you next week with the design build contract for that We were awarded 1.2 million dollars through homesonoma county In state heat funds and so there remains a balance of about 400 000 dollars for that project The balance we're proposing of 1.2 million dollars For capital and programming improvements at sam jones hall and i'll talk a little bit more about that in a couple slides So as part of the budget hearings and this proposal to reprogram these funds from affordable housing to homeless services councilmember combs raised The question about a future agenda item or an agenda item regarding requests for proposals for the operation of sam jones hall This slide i'll provide some background on the shelter. So in 2002 The council along with a community group known as shelter solutions began looking for a new A year-round shelter in santa rosa In 2003 a property was selected in southwest santa rosa as a former army reserve facility This is currently known as samuel l jones hall homeless shelter In 2004 council selected catheterities as the operator There was a request for qualifications process that was run as part of the selection To applicants submitted proposals or qualifications catheterities in the redwood gospel mission A review panel so council selected catheterities as the operator based on a recommendation from a review panel That was comprised of council members Neighbors and staff from the county the community foundation sonoma county and santa rosa city staff In 2004 the city acquired the facility. We received 1.1.5 million dollars in funding from the state Housing and community development department for acquisition and rehabilitation The city also contributed approximately 800 000 dollars for the acquisition and rehabilitation of this facility In 2005 sam jones hall opened its doors for our shelter This slide provides a little information about changes to the occupancy the beds and programming over the year since it opened in 2005 The initial occupancy was 80 beds In 2009 a change was made to the conditional use permit As a result of the consolidation of the brookwood shelter increasing the year-round occupancy to 120 beds In 2014 a another change was made to the conditional use permit to allow for 188 beds We had 50 winter shelter beds and 138 year-round program beds And most recently in 2017 2018 We increased occupancy to 213 beds for the housing focus program plus beds dedicated to the homeless encampment assistance pilot program or for emergent situations 138 of the 213 beds are prioritized for Beds for coordinated entry and up to 75 beds are prioritized for the encampment pilot or for emergent situations And that action was approved through the flexibility provided to the city through the council's proclamation of homeless emergency So our revision to the conditional use permit did not happen at that time So our current operating agreement with catholic charities As i've mentioned they have been the operator since the facility opened in 2005 Last june council approved a contract With with catholic charities for approximately 1.3 million dollars In that contract and in the resolution approving this there was authority To execute future or subsequent contracts subject to budget appropriation So this just past june as part of the 1920 budget process council Approved the 1920 budget and that included appropriation for the shelter So the the budget or contract with catholic charities for this year And what council approved with the budget is approximately 1.1 million from city general funds $255,000 from the county of sonoma. You just approved with a consent item the funding agreement memorializing that commitment of funds for this year And a community foundation sonoma county approximately 70 000 dollars Bringing the the operating agreement with catholic charities to 1.3 million Catholic charities also receives an annual allocation from the continuum of care Recently rebranded home sonoma county Approximately 175 000 dollars bringing the total sort of operating expenses For the shelter to 1.5 million, but our contract with catholic charities is 1.3 Moving on to some highlights For the shelter so catholic charities has successfully operated the shelter for 13 years And by successful, I mean they have met their program scope of work and goals And they've submitted their reports in a timely fashion They've also been very responsive to concerns or issues that have arisen from the neighborhood or from individuals at the shelter And I also want to point out that they have really been a partner in the city's efforts to implement housing first and all the changes that Have been going on to the shelter for the the past couple years to implement a housing focused program there So as I mentioned, we had a winter shelter that ran for four years That concluded at the end of fiscal year 16 17 and we combined those beds To form the housing focused program in august 2017 In terms of housing focused program outcomes. I just the report for For 18 19 is due tomorrow I just received that from catholic charities from Before coming to council and I haven't had a chance to sit down and look at it What I can tell you is that system-wide Exits to Exits from emergency shelter to permanent housing are about 18 percent of individuals exiting shelter are going to permanent housing Catholic charities for the last couple years. It's ranged between about 15 to 20 percent So they are they're trending, you know an alignment with with our system performance measures and actually Looking at the numbers quickly before coming here. They're they're a little bit down from last year and that is not uncommon Um, especially with an agency like catholic charities They're an early adopter of housing first and also our system of care in adopting housing first and serving more Vulnerable individuals that we're going to see our housing placement rates drop So once I have a chance to go over the report, I'll be able to to share it with you Okay So next steps and considerations for this evening subject to your direction tonight if you choose to move forward with Issuing an rfp for an operator for the shelter. We would want to consult with our partners and funders So the community foundation and the county have been funders of the shelter since it opened in 2005 We'd also want to consult with homesonoma county because this is a regional shelter And the other piece here is direction on the 1.6 million dollar NOFA funds as I mentioned Staff is proposing and we will come back to you with this proposal in september To make further capital improvements in addition to the roof and programming improvements And this includes there's a large dorm at the shelter right now. We're proposing to split that dorm into a navigation center um set up specifically To serve the most vulnerable Coming into the shelter And then the other half of the large dorm would be split into two smaller dorms To provide increased accommodation for persons with disability and privacy That's one of the main concerns that we receive from people coming into the shelter or those less willing to accept shelter Is the large congregate setting at sam jones hall. So we're looking at making some improvements there, of course with your Approval we're looking at bringing in terms of programming improvement or looking at bringing in specialized staff To deal with more the more vulnerable individuals. So behavioral health specialists and we're also um Looking at just overall programming improvements to improve our housing outcomes in alignment with councils housing first strategy and homesonoma county's efforts around this issue So What we're the proposal will be a pilot program for for one year the capital improvements will Will be ongoing but in terms of having specialized staffing that would be a pilot program for for one year to see if far If we improve our outcomes and we come back to council with that like I said in september With that i'll move to the recommendation It is recommended by the housing and community services department that the council receive report On the samuel jones hall homo shelter and by motion provide direction to staff regarding issuance of a request for proposals For housing first operations of the shelter for fiscal year 2021 Great. Thank you killing for that presentation Council questions for cali or any other staff Mr. Heisler Thank you, mr. Mayor Miss kikindal first. I wanted to point out you called it a regional shelter But on slide six. I don't see any funding from any other cities I just want to make sure that I pointed that out um You mentioned that the reports from catholic charities have been on time Where can the public find those reports and in particular you mentioned the one that for 18 19 That is due tomorrow that you said you received today. Where will the public be able to find those reports? So the city has a webpage dedicated to our efforts around homelessness And if you do sr city.org Slash homeless it will take you to the main homelessness solutions page from there There's a bar a data bar that you can navigate and there's information on all of the programs that the city's funding So all of our year-end reports from last year are available And like I said once I get a chance to sit down and review this year-end report for sam jones hall and our other programs Maybe have some questions for our contractors. We'll be posting those I'm going to say probably by the end of the month or early next month Great. Thank you One of the things that I'm really curious for us to explore and I don't necessarily know if it's in the rfp Or if it's in one of our future discussions But the point-in-time count came out and one of the things that it showed was while there's a 2 drop 1.8 drop in homelessness across the county The amount of sheltered versus unsheltered as a ratio changed And I wasn't sure if you've had a chance to look at that at all I'm seeing shaking heads from the city manager I'd be interested to hear if that is a reflection of performance by the service provider or if there's something in the change Where we went to lowering barriers That has kept people from going into the sheltered So we'll come back and give you That that we've just received those reports as well. So we're trying to to Understand them better Unfortunately, that's not what tonight's about tonight's about whether we're going to issue an rfp For for services for the shelter the homeless shelter itself That's that's what we're really trying to get to but we're happy to provide that that in a future conversation And I understand that Understanding why people aren't going to the shelter is really important to me and understanding on whether or not We need to do an rfp on the person providing the services at the shelter and again It's just that this data is so fresh and we're analyzing the data So we may not have that answer we can push this item back We will need to get to some clarity by early fall Because we there's a large process on issuing an rfp and making a decision And we need to have enough time if there's a change in providers to to do a transition It's a it's a huge workload. So We can we can do a deeper dive on that but we're not prepared to answer that question this evening Okay, and I I appreciate that I I am interested in that conversation and that data point madam city attorney the Intent of this item is to talk about an rfp Can you talk a little bit about what the difference between an rfp and an rfi is And whether or not council has the opportunity to go that direction should we choose tonight? Yes, you could give direction for an rfi instead of an rfp rfp is a more comprehensive You will have proposals that are actually ready for your adoption An rfi generally will provide more general information and they'll never generally be another step In evaluating that and moving forward So it'd be an opportunity for us to gauge whether or not there's interests from other service providers and even taking on What we are asking to be done at that that shelter. Is that correct? That's correct and Should we go that route if nobody puts in other than catholic charities for the rfi what would happen? You would have a couple of different options you could move forward with You could move forward with Contract you could move forward with an an rfp at that stage see what if there are any other Service providers that are interested in in doing that providing that service So you'd have some options at that point Similarly with a request for proposals you'll generally have some options as well if you received proposals that none of the proposals you were happy with There are ways to To back out of that as well generally We'll include that in an rfp. So great. Thank you so much Other questions, mr. Hallers Yeah, opening up that door. I guess I would ask the same question is would an rfq process also be relevant to this To this item as well I don't know if staff wants to weigh in but an rfq would be another Option that would tell you who's out there who may be interested and it would simply give their Qualifications it would not be a full-on proposal generally For the operation. So it depends on how far you want to get at this with this process So so so I would I would just say The reason we're proposing an rfp is because the intent is to run the homeless shelter So usually you use the other you might use an rfi to sort of understand who has interest in it an rfq Generally is looking for qualifications But our recommendation would be either an rfi process an rfp because we there is no intent to not Continue services at that location. So if you want us to do an rfi we could find entrance Usually if you do get multiple interests, you're now having multiple workloads because you usually are going to go from an rfi to an rfp You usually don't make the selection of an rfp, especially if they're really really close But you know again, we're happy to entertain the direction that council wants but that would be Qualifications wouldn't necessarily fit here. We're looking for a provider to provide a service got it. Okay Uh, there was another piece of that question. I I think that I had I'll come back to it. Thank you Mr. Shaw, you have a question Thank you, mayor I understand at least in the private sector I know that when I was running my own business that if I was dissatisfied with the service of a provider I would look for someone else And there would be evidence. I would have personal evidence and personal experience with a particular service provider And make a decision that I needed to consider other options. So i'm curious at what point would we be able to Discover substantiated gaps in the services that are provided by catholic charities To prompt us to look into the community Or into this region for someone to potentially take their place So i'm i'm what my first reaction is it feels like a phishing expedition Let's find out who might out there might want to take on this contract Before I hear that there is substantiated evidence that of a gap and the services being provided by our current one So when when when would we hear that? Well again, I mean, I think I think just diving in there a little bit This has been one of the questions that you know, it does take a considerable amount of staff resource We're not necessarily hearing that what I will point to is that this has been a contract that has been in place since 2005 which is a considerable period of time And so there might be just as part of a due diligence not necessarily based on performance But as it's public funds and in the public interest to sometimes go out And make sure that we're getting the most quality service At the best operating price So there is some argument to be made that there's been a length of time To end and you you often go out after a period of time It's not a complaint on service levels, but you know, there is something to be said about competing for public funds And to follow up and I'll go go ahead. I would simply reiterate that that there is no The decision to go out for an rfp does not necessarily indicate any dissatisfaction with the existing Service provider. It is exactly as the city manager indicated that periodically It is appropriate to engage in a Competitive review of the market So it is not necessarily A reflection on the current service provider to do a general market check And yes, this this particular contract has been in place for some period of time Without that competitive review And I appreciate that and we are dealing with with the with public funds And it also would be spending public funds to go through an rfp process And also there is a high level of disruption that would not only occur with the With that rfp We would have to be dealing with it the very of our current provider would have to be dealing with an rfp Which is no simple task And if there was a change there would be a high level of disruption to are these vulnerable clients that we have at Sam Jones hall potentially If a decision was made to move to a different provider Yes, and if I may just add to that That it is certainly within the council's prerogative at this point to Continue the contract as a sole source contract with appropriate findings of why it is advantageous To continue with the existing provider Again, that is something that that you would balance The the needs of the city and the needs of the community that we're serving So at the end and I want to put forward that staff has not this is not a staff initiated this question has come up from council members We are looking for direction to see if there is any desire Under this this current conditions because it has been a considerable period of time for us to proceed into competitive review for services Miss wine Thank you My question stems from a concern or just wanting to more information in general During our budget process. We heard that I believe if my memory serves that we had a roughly 1600 serve Individual served but we weren't clear on whether or not it was one, you know 1600 individual Served or the same individual served 1600 times I mean that math doesn't add up and then in my own exploration with our catalytic charities I was informed that Perhaps we have some reviews that come to us. I'm wondering is there a feedback mechanism for the council to get this information From what's I understand the report came in yesterday But it's also my understanding that we have regular reporting that is done by our service provider and it's um Curious to me how how we might be able to make a decision without all the information Our quarterly reports are no, sorry They all of our contractors submit quarterly reports and I do have on our homeless solutions page under data the year-end reports from last year quarterly data is as We input it into the city's open data portal. There's a homeless services dashboard So for most of the homeless services programs, there is quarterly data being input there I'm happy to share that information with council on a quarterly basis But it's there for you to check anytime and we do update it quarterly Thank you Mr. Allvarez Yeah, and I wanted to clarify that we we have not Had not been in a multi-year contract with catholic charities We just renew it year by year because we need to be able to allocate the resources to our budget first And then that is that that that occurs after that, right? That is correct. Okay. So yeah, because I I don't want to get into the position of moving to A place where we're going to be Um Having our appeasement every year. I can I because this is difficult work I think they've been doing some amazing work here with our homeless population So I would just caution that But I get it though that we have to make sure that we have the resources to fund anybody on a year-to-year basis Thank you Thank you I have a couple questions One, what is the city process for We're guidance to our policies procedures have when do we go for an rfp not necessarily homeless services Any contract that we have with the city who makes the call? Well again, I think staff reviews it sort of looks at where the program sits and the relationship and we had sent out Some rfi's for other types of services had not gotten any substantive response to that We we looked at the fact that the home Sonoma county work was underway Trying to get consistency in some of the data collection To really understand how we were making an impact So and again there did not seem to be an issue with the services being provided The catholic charities have been flexible With us and with the council in exploring mid-year opportunities Being able to realign their business model. So at this time, there's not a clear direction on this Because we were looking at the circumstances under review But we in the in an effort of transparency We wanted to bring this forward and say if you wanted us to explore this This is the time so that we can start to figure out because it would be a lengthy process To go through a solicitation to a review of program Because we'd want to be ahead of that in the budget cycle for the end of the fiscal year because if we needed to make a Transition that transition needed to be needed to be prepared for months ahead of time So I I get that my question is more the rest of the city what i'm hearing you say It's almost like a case by case for ongoing contracts based on performance and the sub-matter experts Is it the best interest of the city could do this? Yes, we're to go rfp rfi. Yes, okay, and Kelly you'd mentioned scope of work. Who sets the scope of work for any of these contracts? So that that we work with staff on that, um, you know, and I'm looking at past years And how the contractor's been performing and how we should set the the scope for the upcoming years I'm also looking, you know, it to the county It's some of their contracts and their scopes to see, you know, what they're monitoring and their programs and Looking at system-wide performance measures and the outcomes that we want for our shelter in terms of increased exits to housing and reduced lengths of time in shelter and The time up a person is experiencing homelessness So a variety of resources, but it boils down to staff Working with the the contractor to develop the scope of services So the city's in the driver's seat with that one. This is what our expectations. Yeah, okay, and then I know we just found the funny for same-just all the roof and maybe to Premature I have a concern while we're doing that because I don't know the last time we replaced the roof Clearly it was sometime before 2005 if ever What are the anticipated impacts because the concern I have is that if we're going through this rfp process We're replacing the roof. What happens to the clients that are out there now? Do we know the operational impacts of replacing the roof at this point? We have some estimates mayor the In talking with transit and public works We'll know for sure once the contractor opens up the roof and sees how far he has to go into the deck Thus the request in the presentation for the 400,000 dollar contingency Ideas that if we have to move folks From one section of the building one dorm to another There's another possibility of leasing a free span structure for the parking lot temporarily Relocating beds outside. Well under the tarp While that section was being replaced ideas like that are being considered. Okay, and do we have a Understander when would we expect that project to be complete or is it unknown until they open it up the roof? I'm told by director nut that they would rely on The contractor opening up the roof and deciding on the extent of the damage. Okay Thank you. Those are all the questions I have for now. We have a couple cards on this one First up paul carol followed by adrian lobby Paul carol. I'm uh, I live in the city of san aroza Mayor schwedhelm and members of council Santa santa rosa's first real homeless shelter was on sonoma avenue I guess you called the brookwood shelter across from the police station It was called a temporary shelter Catholic charities was chosen as the operator and that was 2004 as it showed above. It's now 2019 The san jones hall is a main emergency shelter for santa rosa It has been operated by catholic charities since it opened I have not heard of any issues with the operation of the shelter I have not seen any reports or audits of the way the shelter is operated A shelter of this size in the era of housing first is going to be a challenging place Persons in recovery may have to shelter next to someone who chooses to be drunk or high Um, this is a way the shelter has to be operated to qualify for any state or federal funding The agenda item in question is a rush to a solution Without any problem being identified defined or studied It is putting the cart before the horse by several miles Do we need to know more about the way sonoma county shelters are operated? Yes, we do But for different reasons in questioning a service provider's compliance with the contract Can anyone show that catholic charities has not complete complied with the contract they have with santa rosa I've read the contract and the report submitted by catholic charity charities I think they are achieving a great deal in a difficult environment The county of sonoma and all its jurisdictions need to work together to make as much of an impact On the lives of the homeless as possible We may only have one touch point to do it We need the coordination of services beyond beds to make that touch point matter Instead of parsing issues to the point of absurdity Let's build a coordinated system that achieves success for the homeless We do not need to tear things down to do that Please reject moving forward with an rfp Thank you. Adrian lobby followed by mario lopez Thank you. I'm adrian lobby. I wanted the founders of homeless action I respectfully disagree with mr. Carroll We have been asking you for several years now to do some open bidding for the Various things that catholic charities works for with the city And partly because there is a widespread opinion among the providers that we talk about the various Agencies that do various kinds of homeless work That the city is only interested in working with catholic charities And that there's really no room for any of them to Be part of this landscape And we think that that does not build a healthy provider network We want to build the entire system to be stronger I don't know if there's anyone out there who is willing and ready to take on All the responsibilities of the sam jones shelter I don't know if there are people from out of town who might do a better job I do know that I was in this hall last night And there were many many questions about data How many people how many beds are in the shelter? How many people are exited from the shelter? And it was very unfortunate that neither the staff from the city or from the catholic charities in We're able to answer those questions. They said, oh those those details are in the county We're going to have a report tomorrow Simple questions. We're not able to be answered And this has been our experience. We have looked at the reports that catholic charities Does quarterly and we see if a number and go well, that's interesting. What does that mean? It's very difficult to drill down to see what is actually happening So we would like to see this rfp go out. We'd like to see who else is interested in working on this project We'd also like to see the contract Rewritten so that it's built built up on process on Reality what happens not not what people do You know, not that we have counseled so many people or we've had so many people come and go But how many people have had housing? How many people have gotten rapid rehousing the kinds of really Specific measurements of what happens to individuals once they enter the shelter So I really encourage you to do this. I hear there's some hesitation up there I think it's just a simple matter of due diligence. It's been a lot of years Thank you very much. Thank you mario lopez My name is mario lopez And I am staying at the homeless shelter summer young I was sent there from the hospital on june 13 I Was told I was going to be sent to a safe place But two nights ago Someone tried to come in with the gun And the response from the People there was to block the entrances with heavy furniture Desks and things like that And that creates a fire hazard because then we cannot go out Nothing is done there. I've been there for a few weeks now The plumbing needs to be fixed the lights need to be changed I volunteer to do many of the repairs But they say that No, uh, because I have to come to the city of sonarosa because it's city owned So the city is responsible for the shelter and anything that happens there And so therefore I could not do anything there. Nobody has come like take care of the weeds growing up everywhere The mobs That are used to clean the bathrooms at the same ones The same maps to be used to clean the other areas. That's not right In my life. Well, now I am sick. That's why I'm there, but When I am not sick I have run big companies and I know about many laws and regulations And nothing is being done there and nobody is responsible for anything I have tried to contact Catholic Charities for weeks to address some of the issues, but Nobody listened to me and I cannot see anybody I have Tried to call the city of sonarosa, but they say it's catholic charities run They are responsible when I contact catholic charities every person I have talked to catholic charities. They say it's city owned The city is responsible for fixing things. So my question here is Who is responsible for the shelter and I was told I was going to be in a safe environment Is not safe and I was told that People are allowed to use drugs and alcohol in the shelter, which happens every day because In that way they do it in a safe environment It might be safe for them, but it's not safe for the rest of the people Who are staying there? So my question is who is responsible for the shelter anybody Thank you, sir. Unfortunately, we can't respond to your questions bring back to council any additional questions No questions Mr. Alvarez, you have this item We'll get a motion and then we'll have comments Thank you, mayor. I I do have this item. Uh, and again, um, still trying to think of the process and how we got to this point recognizing that We we have approved contracts with catholic charities year after year based on Performance, I think number one there is an evaluation process As mr. Carroll had pointed out trying to identify what is it that we're trying to solve And at the end I think one of the things we're trying to solve is this Perception that there may be there needs to be others given an opportunity to submit proposals for this What I would like to see is maybe some kind of a process developed where we can do that at the future But there's so much going on right now in our community That I have from my perspective have no desire to change horses right now as we're moving along. There's so much happening My my motion would be to I don't know if it's proper based on how things are worded today Would be to enter into a contract with catholic charities for the next fiscal year. I know we allocated the resources I don't believe a Contract has been issued. So my my motion would be to proceed with that and to have staff perhaps discuss At what point do we I guess one of the triggers for having a process life. I don't think we should never ever have An r.r.p. But I don't believe this is the time. I don't believe the data supports it Yes, we will always have customer satisfaction issues. I mean we're dealing with a very complex issue here But I don't believe that this is the time to Going to a process of exploring other options. Mr. Wine you had a comment. Yeah, I just want to point a clarification council member is the The motion to consider is to consider our request for proposals for next fiscal year Not the fiscal year we're in now. We're already under contract. We're already in a contract for 1920 We're under contract very well then at this point I I I do not have a desire to make that motion that we enter into an r.r.p. Mr Mayor So I don't know if anybody else wants to do that or if i'm allowed any other alternatives That could be because I think staff wants direction That could be your motion that we not enter an r.r.p. For fiscal year 2021 for the operation to sandwich jones hall That is correct. That would be my motion second So we have a motion to second bring it back to council for comments or discussion Miss lemming jim Thank you, mr. Mayor I differ from my colleagues who did not take our staff recommendation as a council It's our responsibility to shepherd public funds even when it is inconvenient Frequently our responsibility to our democratic principles is time-consuming and again inconvenient The challenge is inherent in these responsibilities doesn't no way excuse us from meeting them For this reason and without any prejudice in regard to our current operator I do support issuing our r.f.p. And I do not support Just simply extending a contract without any meaningful review that's been In operation for almost 15 years. I do believe that the public deserves a day To hear about the ins and outs of this and I don't believe that our staff would have wasted their time and brought this forward If they didn't believe that this was in the public interest other comments Mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor We are obviously lacking Some of the data and proper analysis that we need to do to determine whether or not there is a reason to change horses I would be as I mentioned in my previous questions interested in seeing an actual analysis of why we are seeing some of the ships in the behavior of folks Going into shelters or not understanding that it's a system-wide problem. Not just a sam jones hall problem I do think that catholic charities has been remarkably flexible working with the city Accommodating us as we have tried to get our hands around what are the best practices for addressing homelessness We've asked them to expand their capacity. We've asked them to do things that are quite frankly very unreasonable And I think part of some of the complaints that we do hear from the public Is that we are asking one service provider to do too much At that homeless shelter and that we need to invest better in additional resources elsewhere as well The bennett valley senior center conversion was a great opportunity for us To try and do that to be able to have a more comprehensive approach to how we're solving this rather than just focusing on one shelter I do know that an rfp Is a little bit too far for me right now in Understanding how far stretched thin We're asking catholic charities already to be I know how how much time and effort that'll take on the staff side And from catholic charities I do think that we need to have something In the near future Whether it's a study session to be able to actually review how operations are are going Or In the future doing an rfp or an rfi type situation I'll support the motion tonight Because I do want to make it very clear that catholic charities has been very accommodating to the city Many of us have gone out there and we have seen the shelter But that doesn't tell us All we need to know about the day-to-day operations and that certainly doesn't tell us what we need to know in terms of data Thank you in my comments are similar to the question The scope of work we get to decide what we're going to measure and what we're going to evaluate So I I'm you know, we've got a long-term relationship with catholic charities And that's the challenge in working in this environment and having worked with a variety of different community groups building the relationships It doesn't happen overnight and I think it's solid with our current provider So some of the questions I'm hearing about the how are we going to evaluate the success of the current provider? I would you know, invite further exploration and working with leadership council and the technical advisory committee on home Sonoma county Let's do this region wide because as someone mentioned, um, you know, I think we're really the only low barrier regional shelter in Sonoma county So that's what we're trying to do on the leadership council in home Sonoma county is having catholic charities be a partner with us in that I think is in the best interest of all of our community members So mr. Sawyer Thank you, mayor I think it's important to understand that my desire is not to turn a blind eye to Issues that that that our provider may be having with this with the provision of that service And and I think that the opportunity to To review um, some of the behaviors of either the employees or whatever it might be We need to be mindful and watchful when it comes to any of the anyone who has a contract with the city And I would be always be interested in in looking for ways to improve that service But I like my colleagues At least, you know Councilmember oliver us and and the vice mayor I'm not looking to make a change at this time So I think we're ready for the vote a vote cast can get ready for us You vote splays And so motion passes with four yeas and one no from councilmember fleming. Thank you Next item 16.1. Mr. City manager I item 16.1 public hearing adoption of revised animal services fees joey henowitz administrative analysts presenting All right. Good evening mayor swedhelm and members of the council as mr. McLean mentioned I am joey henowitz administrative analyst representing the city manager's office tonight as most of you are aware the City of santa rosa has an agreement with the county of sonoma to provide animal regulation and sheltering services within the city limits of santa rosa And i'm prepared before the council tonight This evening along with animal services director john skeal Proposing several animal service fee increases for fiscal year 1920 Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor members of the council. Thank you for your consideration of the revised animal service fees the revised Thank you the revised fee increases before you this evening to help animal services recover more costs associated with providing services And to maintain the quality of services as with previous annual presentations. I'll be providing a brief Overview of animal services as they relate to the current services agreement And pending your adoption the fees would go into effect july 10th of this year or tomorrow pending your approval Next slide please. Thank you As our um, and I want to just remind the community to remind council as our community continues to recover and rebuild from recent Emergencies and disasters I wanted to highlight the valuable and lifesaving work that animal services provides for all animals large and small As we prefer prepare for yet another potential fire season I want to assure city council and this community that sonoma county animal services stands ready and able to respond to any event I would also like to take this opportunity to once again acknowledge and thank the city council staff and residents and the entire community For the tremendous support that was given to animal services and that has been given to animal services over the years It's a critical aspect of our mission That we are here for the protection health and safety of people and animals And we hope to be here for many more years to come and next slide Over the past four years or as long as I've been here now Animal services has focused on improving the lives of animals at the shelter through the enhancements that are helping to change shelter perception Image techniques systems and strategies that help to improve a positive adoption outcome Despite challenges we continue to make improvements to the facility and to our operations We've diversified and built upon our successful volunteer program And it has been through our volunteers that we've been able to acquire new equipment and resources through grants and donations including of a new fully equipped American Kennel association emergency response trainer trailer, which will be going to service later this month akc It's all of these types of efforts and more which help to ensure that animals at the shelter have the best chance of being rescued Adopted return to their owner or faster Okay, thank you This slide focuses on the importance of license compliance, which as of the end of 2018 was just over 44 percent Or almost 2.5 percent increase in the license sales over 2017 The calculation is based on the estimated number of dogs in san rosa, which is just an estimate License compliance is and always has been a major part of our strategic planning goals As license revenue is critical. It's a critical funding source and partially helps to support staffing and operations at the shelter Responsible dog owners who license their dogs not only help to support operations at the shelter But they also help to keep the county pack safe as they are vaccinated against rabies Have a micro ship to ensure that they are if they are last they can be quickly returned to their owners Oftentimes without even having to come to the shelter This frees up space at the shelter for unwanted abused and neglected animals And allows our staff to more more time to work with those more difficult cases Next slide, please Next slide and my last slide The 24 fees before you this evening Are being implemented to cover more of the actual costs in covering Various fees including impound and boarding fees kennel and pet shop licenses and several other fees As listed on your fee schedule These fees are expected to generate an additional 37 763 dollars based on the number of fees we charged last year The fee adjustment once approved would go into effect. As I said already july 10th of 2019 Last slide. Thank you I'd like to conclude this presentation by obviously requesting that you approve and adopt the fee increases But also to once again, thank you in this community for your ongoing support both financial and in kind for the rescue Treatment welfare and care of animals. We would not be successful without you And before I conclude I just want to also like on a personal note to thank you for the opportunity to have Worked with the city of sanarosa This will most likely be my last presentation as unfortunately due to budget and organizational changes My position is being eliminated Well, that concludes my presentation and I request that you approve the revised fee schedule. Thank you once again Thank you john for that presentation and I've really appreciated the invitation you've given to me when I visited not only your employees, but the whole operation It's very well done. And I think Interesting voyage from your very first meeting was what day two on the job or something like that to where you're now But you've done a wonderful job. So thank you for that Council any questions on the presentation And Do we have any cards? Mr. Tibbets, I believe you've been tapped in for this one. Yes, I have Well, first of all, I just like to thank you mr. Skeel for all the work that you've done on behalf of the city And excuse me. There is a public hearing for this Oh, I'm sorry. Am I bad? Okay No cards. So then let me open the public hearing You don't have to fill out a card if anyone's interested. Please step up to one of the mics and provide us information Seeing no movement. We'll close the public hearing mr. Tibbets So with that, I'll move a resolution of the council of the city of san aroza approving and adopting the Sonoma county animal services Revised fees and waive for the reading of the text We have a motion in second any additional comments Seeing none your votes, please Little drum roll And that passes unanimously For those present. Thank you very much for the presentation Okay Mr. Sawyer is going to have to abstain from this item. So as soon as we get another council member for quorum, we'll be able to Continue Mr. Sawyer, if you could pass the word once you get up there Thank you very much Okay, mr. Goon, I believe we have our quorum Okay, thank you Item 16.2 is a public hearing on the southeast greenway and presenting is jessica jones supervising planner Thank you. Um, good evening mayor shut home and members of the council. Um, so i'm going to be Doing a joint presentation here. I'm going to start off. Um, give you Little background of the project. Um, and then we will move into kind of the meat of the project itself and the environmental analysis And that will be presented by the consulting firm who has been helping us with this place works We have bruce brubaker and terry mccracken here from place works who will be helping me with the presentation We also have zack matley from w trans who will be here to answer any questions you might have regarding the traffic analysis Great. So before your presentation, I want to lay out how the meeting will go We'll first i'll first ask for all the exparte communications from any of the council then we'll go to the staff presentation Questions for counsel on the presentation, then we'll open the public hearing Close public hearing and then any additional questions? Okay, then we'll make our motions so Yeah, I think that's it right? Okay, so let's go to as a council exparte communications. Mr. Tibbets. Yes I met with a representative of the greenway campaign yesterday at the trail house Ms. Fleming I met with representatives from the greenway campaign at soco coffee Mr. Rogers I think it's impossible for any of us to say that we haven't met with the folks from the greenway campaign But no additional information was learned that's not publicly available in the documents I too over the years have met with many members of the southeast greenway and Everything that I've been told is all contained in the public documents Please proceed with the presentation Okay, thank you So as was mentioned the project that is before you is the southeast greenway project It is what is actually before you for this process is a proposed general plan amendment and zoning code and rezoning amendments An environmental impact report was prepared for this process The implementation and adoption of what is before you could potentially result in up to Just over 47 acres of park and open space land Approximately 244 multifamily units and about 12,000 square feet of commercial space. So that is what is analyzed in our environmental analysis and what is potentially Could result from the proposed amendments to the general plan and the zoning code What I would do on a stress is that there are no physical changes No development proposed at this time So just quickly to orient ourselves We are talking about the southeast greenway which is an area of land In southeast santa rosa that it was previously identified as an extension of highway 12 It spans the area from Farmers lane where highway 12 currently ends to spring lake regional park It is about 57 acres and spans about 1.9 linear miles And so this is a an aerial of that area as it looks today So as you can see it is just kind of an open space right now And we'll get into What is being planned for the future? So as I mentioned before we get into the details of the project itself I did want to go over some background as was alluded to this process has been ongoing for quite some time Back in 2009 the southeast greenway campaign group Was formed and this is a group of community members who wanted to see This area looked at for potential future park uses In 2011 and 2013 the city council as part of their goals and objectives Acknowledged the southeast greenway community planning projects and also supported efforts for the southeast greenway campaign By monitoring and providing information In 2014 the city of santa rosa joined the southeast greenway community partnership. So it does include At that time it was the city of santa rosa the sonoma county water agency The sonoma county regional parks the southeast greenway campaign which again is a group of citizens As well as land paths in In august of 2014 The california transportation commission At that time decided to rescind the freeway adoption. So basically they Acknowledged that they cal trends was no longer planning to move forward with an extension of highway 12 in that location And they were willing to look at selling the property for a different type of use Also in 2014 The sonoma land trust joined the partnership and they have been part of the process in looking at What is required to acquire the property? In july of 2015 the council approved a memorandum of understanding between cal trends sonoma land trust and The southeast greenway partnership Again to just kind of solidify what the process would be moving forward In october of that year the council initiated the general plan amendment rezoning and environmental impact report or eir That is before you tonight In june of 2016 the council approved a professional services agreement with place works the consultant that is sitting With me tonight to help us prepare the general plan amendments rezoning and the environmental environmental impact report In october or august and october of 2016 The city held two community workshops Which were very well attended to get an understanding of what the community wanted to see For potential land uses and potential future development of this area We'll go into the details of those community workshops a little bit later in the presentation In november of 2016 the planning commission and city council held a joint meeting To discuss the project and provide a direction to create a single land use and circulation alternative at that time the commission and council did look at A couple of alternatives that were resulted out of the community workshops and so They then worked to form a single preferred alternative Then in march of 2017 We again had a joint planning commission and city council meeting to provide feedback on the finalized preferred alternative That was developed After that in may of 2017 An eir scoping meeting was held to get an understanding of what the community and various Agencies wanted to see included as part of the analysis for the environmental impact report And that environmental impact report was completed and released the draft eir was released for public review in august of 2017 The planning commission held a public hearing on that draft environmental impact report as well as the project in september of 2017 um, and then as You can imagine. Um, we had a little bit of a delay In october of 2017, uh, the fires hit the city of santa rosa And due to the amount of staff time, um to address those fires as well as work on other housing related projects The southeast greenway project was unfortunately put on hold The other piece of this reason why the the project was put on hold was During the public review period for the draft eir The city received a number of comments Regarding the traffic analysis and a concern that the analysis needed to address Possible future impacts to this area Should the farmers lane extension not occur At that time the analysis Included review of what the impacts would be With the farmers lane extension because it is a planned project in the general plan So after some reflection, uh, we determined that yes, we did need to do that additional analysis. So Time was spent to look into that and provide that additional traffic analysis in addition to the the delays due to the fires and the housing Work that we were working on So in november of 2018, uh, we were able to um get back to work On the project A revised draft eir was released to the public in january of 2019 that included that additional traffic analysis that i mentioned And we'll go over that in a little bit more detail later on the presentation In february of 2019 the planning commission held a second public hearing on that revised draft eir And the final eir which includes the response to comments on both the draft eir as well as the revised draft eir Was released in may of 2019 Uh, also in may of 2019 the planning commission Heard the presentation that you're receiving tonight including a request to Recommend that the council adopt the general plan amendments rezoning and certify the environmental impact report and that At that time the planning commission did vote unanimously to move forward with that recommendation So i'm now going to hand it over to our consultants. Um, who are going to go through the project analysis and the environmental impact report Thanks jessica Bruce prubaker i'm the principal in charge of this project with place works and have been for three years plus It's i'm very happy to be here to discuss this project with you tonight Um, i'll start by talking about the community workshops. We held two major workshops The first one in august of 2016. How was very well attended at montgomery high and we filled the room There was a lot of uh interaction and input from participants a lot of good discussion among community members and with us um, and the the result of that workshop was A strong sense from community members about what was desired for the Greenway including open natural spaces parks and gardens Some interest in housing and retail in places And then concerns including security parking How other types of development and housing? So uh place works developed three alternatives And guiding principles We had a stakeholder committee as well that we worked with and we came back to the council With the next workshop. I mean to the community with the next workshop, which was in october About 150 participants. We also ran an online survey and a paper survey that was passed out and we had really good response from that Uh, we ranked we asked participants to rank their preferred alternatives And we had an interesting result which were two of the alternatives Or one alternative one was favored for both land uses and circulation So we uh, we used that information to develop a draft preferred alternative and brought it to the council And commission for a study session Which was in november of 2016 Um, all that material was considered by commission and council And a preferred alternative was developed Using their guidance in that study session We took that input away and Developed a preferred alternative Which came back to council in a further meeting and it looks like this The preferred alternative Shows to the left is downtown And and west and to the east is spring lake park and up the hill There is mostly green open space along the corridor, but they have different flavors Some of it is parks and recreation the lighter color. Some of it is natural resource And to the to the far east and some of it is agriculture And school joint use which is the blue color near montgomery high So there's a lot of uses shown here that are mostly park uses in open space. There is also uses shown that include housing and the the properties to the far or the The portion of the greenway to the to the west shows Housing and mixed use and there's a portion in the center along you lupo, which also shows mixed use Next slide Council and commission gave guidance about that less illustration and also some additional guidance That's summarized here. I won't read them all but it there's there was some guidance about housing about bicycle and pedestrian facilities And also about making sure the plan is financially feasible So we took that input we took our illustrative and we developed a draft general plan amendment The general plan amendment has Amendments to the general plan in three elements the land use and livability element the transportation element public service and facilities element The the amendment includes strikeout and new tax to regarding the The southeast greenway in all of those elements it includes in the land use element a description of the greenway land use and a conceptual Circulation concept that I just described To kind of guide future development of the greenway It also includes new goals and policies as part of the elements that address and implement the vision from the community and council direction This is the actual land use diagram amendment So the overall land general plan land use diagram for the city showing inserted into it the General plan amendment for the greenway and the uses shown in the greenway. These are More distilled than the illustrative plan that I showed you it shows parks and recreation mostly Which allows for all those different uses? I showed in the illustration and it also shows other portions with housing Next slide. There's also a zoning amendment that has text amendments to the zoning code and it shows Zoning districts for the greenway That they're showing up here. They're mostly open space and recreation uses with some housing So I'll turn it over to terry to talk about the environmental review Thank you, bruce. Um, my name is terry mccracken I'm also an associate principal at place works and I am going to talk to you about sequa Which is the state's primary environmental protection law with california environmental quality act secret requires that public agencies disclose environmental impacts and specifically looking at physical impacts to the environment The eir is an informational document is intended to disclose the impacts that are the physical impacts to government agencies as well as the general public The eir itself is considered the heart of sequa. So it's one of the just one of sequa's mechanisms for Reporting this information it identifies any mitigation measures any impacts and it describes alternatives to the proposed project Where mitigation measures Are not feasible it also provides an explanation of why the mitigation measure is not feasible We're going to talk a little bit more about the alternatives in a future slide But just to be clear the certification of the eir is not the same thing as the approval of the proposed project The eir that we evaluated includes all the general plan amendments and the types of uses and the rezoning that bruce has described It is a program level eir So i want to emphasize that we're looking at big broad impacts and the environmental impact report does not evaluate Construction level or specific project. So again as jessica also stated There's no specific development that would occur as a result of approving or certifying this eir This chart basically describes the eir process that jessica has already gone to in great detail started in april 2017 again just the sequel part of it did With the notice of preparation and it extended through to where we are Tonight at the city council considering recommendation of the project and the certification of the eir, but it's had multiple Phases along the way where we received public input and made responses to those comments. So we're going to talk about that a little bit more The eir is a is what we're considered to be like a full scope eir and that it did evaluate all of the topics required under sequel So the 14 topics that we did evaluate are listed here on this slide And it did Let's see i was going to mention that the sequel guidelines were updated since this eir was Was produced and those same topics that all the new requirements are also included in the in these categories So the draft eir the conclusions found Some of the topics had no impact at all and these are primarily due to the location of the project There's no ag land on this site. There's no mineral resources and these were clearly identified as having no impact And then we had other categories that are listed here that are Determined to be less insignificant Without any mitigation at all and these are primarily due to some of the Descriptions that bruce provided that the the plan itself is considered to be self-mitigating and that avoids wetlands It avoids other areas. So the project itself isn't it make creating impacts in those topic areas There's also standard regulation that can be put in place to make it a kind of a self-mitigating Plan so in these topic areas we found that no mitigation or additional mitigation On top of already required regulations and general plan policies would find the impact to be less insignificant However, some of the impacts that we did find did require mitigation measures and these were under topics of biology cultural resources and transportation and circulation Types of mitigation that we used for biological resources were really concerning more construction related impacts making sure that we had protocol and performance standards for Construction that could take place like during when nesting birds would be in season We wanted to avoid sensitive resources such as the california red-legged frog and then also there's numerous special status plant species that are out there And so we have protocol and mitigation measures to avoid those during certain times of the year With respect to cultural resources, this is really about the unearthing of a Unknown resource and so it also has protocol for how you would follow if you did Uncover something during construction Some of the transportation and circulation mitigation measures that we had were really involving Things that the city had control over like installation of a traffic light at the hoan avenue and frankett avenue intersection These we found could be mitigated to a to a level of less than significance We also had specific design guidelines that could be followed when Implementing the multi-use pathway and these are things again the city had control of and they could implement However, we did have a few significant unavoidable impacts And as I mentioned before the eir is a program level impact So with respect to air quality the findings of significant and unavoidable are more related to Not knowing the any project details construction level details And so the the finding of significant and unavoidable is conservative and it is only necessarily at the Program level it doesn't preclude an individual project from coming forward and demonstrating that it could be less than significant And with transportation and circulation The significant and unavoidable impacts that were found there were primarily due to The impact being outside of the city's jurisdiction For example, some of the mitigation measures that we suggested included Involvement from caltrans and so again, they're conservative findings That are typical at a program level when you have items that are outside of the city's control or you have you don't know enough of the project specific impacts And so we looked at alternatives to try to reduce those specific Significant impacts and we did look at four alternatives and they're they are identified here on the screen No project no commercial residential A project with no commercial at all and then we had just a blanket 50 reduction of the residential development And then looking at how these could reduce the impacts In general the concept of less development is less impact was concluded here, but um the same types of program level findings would generally be involved So it didn't necessarily completely eliminate say for example the air quality impacts again Because those are based on a program level finding where you don't know the details You still wouldn't know the details under one of these alternatives and the same would be true for the transportation impacts that we found While some of these were very similar to the proposed project They don't fully achieve the project objectives, which is one of the goals of alternatives under sequel And then the revised eir that jessica kind of walked through some of the process We got comments that really wanted to look at um What would happen if the project were to be built before the farmers lane extension improvement Or if the general plan achieved full build out before that so we called it without farmers lane extension But it really meant if the project got built before the farmers lane extension got built And so this is what the revised Eir looked at and we exactly is here and he can go over a little bit more of the conclusions of the without farmers lane extension project and and we can or we can wait and just see if we have questions on those But that was generally the the gist of it These slides are kind of available if we have questions about it It's just showing a little bit of the relationship between the project site itself and where the farmers lane extension project is And then I think this slide is up here also in case we have some specific questions about the future with Without but as I stated before the the conclusions were generally the same even even with looking at the The numbers change slightly but the overall conclusion doesn't change with the impact with the new analysis And with the new analysis looking at a different flow of of pattern Where the traffic would would go if we didn't have the farmers lane extension We had to also reduce some noise modeling to make sure that as the flow moved throughout different streets If those streets would create different noises for sensitive receptors And we found that none of the new roadway segments that might receive more of the traffic still did not exceed the three decibel level Which is basically the Level that's detectable by humans and outside environment And then this is just a slide this kind of demonstrating the number of of comments that we got and that the final Eir that you have before you did respond to the 51 letters received during the 21 17 draft EIR and the letters and emails on the revised draft EIR No changes even though we did conduct some new analysis. It didn't reveal any new substantial changes It didn't have any new information or any new impacts were involved And so no recirculation beyond what we already did was required And then because we do have the significant and unavoidable impacts for air quality and transportation and circulation This does require under sequel what's considered a statement of overriding considerations In which the council will have to decide if the project benefits outweigh the adverse environmental impacts And I believe the statement of overriding is in the in the report in front of you from south And if that does conclude the sequel portion of the presentation So i'm going to wrap up the presentation for you Just wanted to quickly go over the planning commission's action as I mentioned earlier They did review this project In a public meeting and took action on may 23rd of this year And they did unanimously Recommend that the city council certify the EIR and approve the project We did have numerous members of the public who spoke in both support and in opposition to the project Generally those who were opposed Their concerns related to potential increase in traffic impacts at the farmers lane intersection So notification for this process Has been widespread Specifically for tonight's meeting we did include a notice in the press democrat We posted at city hall on our project website We do have a specific website for the project itself which is plan the greenway.com We also have a southeast greenway portion on our Planning and economic development department website So it was posted in both of those locations and we sent it out through various city social media accounts We emailed it to our community advisory board as well as to the project distribution list that has been Created over the last several years Which includes about 950 email addresses We also sent a mailed notice with our new postcards that we've been implementing And that went out to properties Both tenants and property owners within 500 feet of the southeast greenway area. It's approximately 1800 addresses And then of course the southeast greenway campaign has been working very diligently to get the word out Which is evidenced by the the people that are in the room today So with that the recommendation by the planning and economic development department and the planning commission Is that the city council by resolution and we have three resolutions before you tonight The first is for certification of the eir The second is for adoption of the findings of fact related to the california environmental quality act As well as the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and the statement of overriding considerations that terry just mentioned And the third resolution is for adoption of the general plan text and land use amendments And then we have two ordinances before you It would be introduction of both of those The first would be adding zoning districts for the southeast greenway area that would implement the proposed land use amendments As well as an amendment to City code sections 20 dash 23 point zero three zero and 20 dash 26 point zero three zero We are available for any questions that you may have Thank you for walking us through that incredible voyage and you know, I do want to applaud the folks who have been following this Voyage since 2009. It's great to see this amount of community input and participation Before I go further mr. Alvarez any ex parte communications on this item All right bring it back to council any questions on the presentation Mr. Vice mayor Thank you. Mr. Mayor So adding these zoning districts Will that increase the value of the land? So as of right now there are no because the area was identified as a future extension of highway 12 If you look at our general plan land use map, it is a a white line So it does not currently have any general plan land use designation and therefore no zoning districts associated with it Without those land use designation and zoning districts. It is Impossible to determine a price for the land because it you don't know what can be built there So this process that we're going through now to establish general plan land use designations and zoning districts Will provide the information that appraisers need To determine a price for the land because it will tell them what could potentially be built there And that's exactly where my question was going to go is my understanding is that after this step Caltrans is going to go through the appraisal process and then to acquire the land it goes through a fair market value assessment And so my question was specifically by adding this zoning. Are we making it more expensive to acquire the land? And is it impossible to move forward without doing this anyway? Yeah, so I I think the answer to whether it's more expensive is that there isn't an answer because we don't know the price But yes, it will Provide us again with the information necessary to determine what that price will be Great. Thank you Any additional questions? Okay, I will then open the public hearing First up mic rayman followed by steve or binowish Mike rayman from san erosim I've been very concerned about the traffic and also the new possibility of us exceeding the emissions In the document in section 4 13 7 Overpass would reduce the traffic level from 23,000 cars a day at that intersection Down to 13,000 cars a day approximately 48 percent reduction and it would Greatly reduce the level of service right now the level of service Is going to go from an unacceptable level d to a level b also in the Section qa 3 and 6 the proposed project would Generate a substantial net increase in the emissions that exceeds the bay area Generated substantial net increases in the emissions So it will possibly exceed the emissions of the bay area quality board from what I understand In conclusion, um the south the southwest greenway projection will create Uh traffic backup issues at the intersection of farmers lane and highway 12 Along with the new environmental issues Emergency response time quality of life issues for commuters and the entire population of santa rosa will be affected for Decades to come we all know the terrible Traffic impact the inovado narrows has had for decades If this plan is approved has submitted you will be creating issues that will rival the inovado narrows For decades to come The eir is inadequate and should be revised as the impact on the intersection of farmers lane In highway 12 are far too significant not to be addressed as they are indeed avoidable. Thank you Thank you steve rvenowitz followed by wendy elliott Good evening mayor schwedhelm and council members. My name is steve rvenowitz And i'm speaking today representing the southeast greenway campaign I've been working with the campaign committee for almost 10 years as many of the people in the audience have I truly believe this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for our city The campaign has been a model community effort Aggressor roots group that invited neighborhood involvement Which worked with the community to create a vision for the greenway Which initiated a unique partnership With the city of santa rosa sonoma county regional parks the sonoma county water agency land paths and the sonoma land trust City staff have been instrumental in leading the planning effort for the greenway where we appreciate their work The partnership has already raised almost two million dollars for the acquisition of the greenway with help from the open space district the sonoma land trust The community foundation of sonoma county and donations by hundreds of individuals We are committed to raise the funds to purchase this property without asking the city for scarce public funds today's decision We'll provide a critical step in our effort to Create this project the next step will be appraisal of the property and negotiations for its purchase We plan to continue working with the city on the adoption of a parks master plan, which we hope can begin shortly after acquisition We're committed to continue fundraising efforts to construct the needed improvements bike paths walking trails community gardens public open space and environmental restoration I truly believe that one day we will look back at today's action by the council as a creation of a legacy project When the transforms our community Providing needed open space transportation connections Putting aside land for housing Benefiting our climate and contributing to the health of our citizens We all thank you very much for your continued support Thank you, uh, wendy elliott followed by alexa forester Good evening mayor Schwedhelm and members of the council My name is wendy elliott. I'm the conservation director for cinema land trust and I just have to say for the record That it's a tough act to follow steeper benefits It's been for me a real privilege working on the center as a greenway for the last four years Which is about how long the land trust has been involved I think what strikes me is the commitment of the city the professionalism of the city staff The strength of this I think really unique partnership and the vision Of a greenway through san rosa has been absolutely inspiring to me personally and I think for this community The plan before you sets the stage to transform this vacant caltrans right of way into an urban greenway and importantly for much needed housing We urge your approval of staff's recommendation On the yi our general plan amendment and zoning change With your approval we will begin working immediately and in fact we already have been With our partners and with caltrans to appraise and purchase the property and as steve indicated we already have two million dollars Raised and it has been relatively easy to raise money for this project. It is embraced by our funders When the acquisition process is completed and we're aiming perhaps ambitiously for 2020 The land trust looks forward to working to continue our continuing our work with the partners to plan and establish a greenway That has parks trails play areas community gardens links to a regional trail system and amenities for the The community I believe that future generations are going to thank you for your foresight and setting aside this Two-mile 57 acre piece of land for the purposes that have been described to you this evening Thank you very much. Thank you Alexa forester followed by kent gilfee Good evening council members. My name is alexa. Um, I teach at the jc and my family is here tonight My husband and my two sons live in the montgomery village area and I just wanted to give you sort of a more Concrete example of how this can improve our lives We've lived Within a mile and a half of two of the main entrances to spring lake park for six years But um, even though riding our bikes there would be our preferred transportation route We haven't done that because it's not neither nuonga or Montgomery drive are safe for little ones on bikes and so this would give us Access from our neighborhood directly into those amazing resources without having to get into our car And I know I speak for many of our family friends in the area who would also make such a decision also Our friends our kids have had friends on the south side of hoan avenue and we have had to drive them to those To those friends houses because it's not safe for them And if our son goes where we're planning to send him rink and valley middle school on the south side of hoan Getting safely to the south side of hoan will be a daily necessity for him and many of his friends And right now it seems Sad to me that Even though it's less than a mile away and they could easily physically ride their bikes there It doesn't feel safe to send them there. So we see the greenway is really providing an opportunity for mobility non-motorized transport And beyond this the greenways promise of play structures gardens green space active recreation environmental education opportunities It just really seems like a win win win win win win And so i'm really appreciate we all really appreciate your continued support of this project. Thank you. Thank you kent gilfee Good evening, mr. Mayor members of the council kent gilfee principal engineer with sonoma water I just can make a brief statement of support for tonight's recourse of actions Sonoma water is a participating member of the southeast greenway partnership We do support the greenway concept and any a future that allows these parcels of land to remain in the long term in the In the public's trust substantially as open space and parkland And support any, you know related opportunities provide multiple benefits for the public Including certain water management benefits Sonoma water has some particular interests Some existing interests with some infrastructure that we have within the greenway parcels three creeks that Traverse Traverse the parcel that are related to our stream maintenance program for flood control purposes As well as our spring creek Bypass infrastructure that have a nexus to our central sonoma watershed project Which is a federal partnership project that's been in place for some nearly 60 years providing substantial flood control for the city We also have planned a future water supply pipelines a reliability pipeline We've evaluated multiple Alignment opportunities for that pipeline and one of the most favorable is through the greenway parcel adding reliability to our water transmission system, which is of course a a source of water supply for the city as well as Significant other portions of our service area And it's also an alternative that would allow for lower impacts of that pipeline Into the future as opposed to other alignments that would have More adverse impacts in its eventual construction also attracted to Some of the potential stormwater management opportunities that the greenway would offer Particularly as it relates to potential flood control Groundwater sustainability and water quality. So just briefly a support for the greenway concept and tonight's requested actions. Thank you very much Thank you. Okay. This is public hearing Someone afraid to say this you don't have to fill out a card So if you want to speak we have two lecterns up there you can comment on Anyone else like to address the council on this item? Seeing no movement i'll close public hearing bring it back to council any questions for staff or any of the consultants Seeing none. Mr. Tibbets you have this item so if we make one motion If we get seconded we'll have comment and then if that passes we'll have a couple other uh votes Okay, so uh, it's my great pleasure To move a resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa Certifying the final environmental impact report for the southeast greenway general plan amendment rezoning project file numbers st14-003 Gpam 19-002 And rez 19-007 and wait for the reading of the text Okay, already done. Okay. Let's bring it back to council for any comments on the motion. Mr. Alvarez Do you have anything you'd like to say? Other than you wish you're a quick honor on the finger No, I I know this project has been We have been waiting for this project as it came in for a long time and we've had some Pauses along the way due to some disasters, but it's good to see That we've come to this point and I look forward to working with the community to see it come to fruition. So that's all I have Mr. Tibbets any comments? Yes. Thank you, mayor I just want to you know tip my hat in respect and appreciation to all of you in the audience One of the first community events I attended when I was running for this position two years ago was the montgomery high school Meeting that attracted 200 plus people And I remember walking into into that auditorium and just thinking wow I mean what a What an amazing movement of people who are actually accomplishing something quite significant And at the time to me seemed quite herculean I think admittedly I was a little bit doubtful that it would even reach this point But i'm just very glad that it has and and my deepest respect to all of you for really Being the model as mr. Rabinowitz said for civic engagement and what a group of people can do together And I also want to thank the staff jessica jones and her team for Defining I think what public service means, you know, this has been an interesting dynamic from my perspective It's been kind of the the advocates in their team kind of driving this forward and us providing You know crucial support to see it through and so thank you very much And that's my comments. Okay, miss swimming Thank you. I just want to Praise the greenway for their Really thorough. This is the way to do it. This is the way to get community engagement whether It's jim mcaddler bothering me in yoga class when I'm like had a baby two months ago I don't know who this guy is or you know, david petrits at my wedding Pulling my ear about this people have been bugging me in the oddest places about the greenway for the longest time And you guys have really created a movement and gotten the public engagement in a way that We rarely see and is quite admirable. So thank you very much for doing all this work Mr. Isomir Thank you, mr. Mayor I think we all have a story of sort of how we first Heard about the greenway and how we were involved for me It was a thea throwing me in her Prius and taking a tour of it. I think in 2014 or 2015 At the time I was asking how the legislative offices could help And her answer was basically get out of the way and let us do it So that was a great message in the now here being on council and listening to the comments Many of you were talking about what a great thing that the council would be doing For the future of santa rosa and I want to just turn that back around on you For those of you who've been working on this for a long time For those of us who have kids will have kids will have grandchildren You've really done such an incredible thing for santa rosa and for the future Here in this community. So thank you so much And I also it seems like we've made these comments each step along the way And it really was a true voyage, you know, I start working for the city in 1983 and as a young police officer having to explain What is all this open space? They're supposed to be a freeway. That just didn't make sense in 83 and thank gosh It doesn't make sense now But it has been a great voyage and the folks that have just been staying along with this It's really inspirational not only for this community, but I think for other communities to look at Well, how did santa rosa figure out how to make that work? It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and jessica applied to you and david the rest of your Staff that have carried us on this voyage because when you have those competing interests And I know some of the concerns we had with the tragedy of the fires Staff capacity was at the max, but we still figure out how to get it done So i'm so happy to just be a small part of this 10-year voyage And the important thing too for me is that we're not done So stick with it. I can't wait to see this a thriving thriving prince or southeast greenway So with that, I think we have all our comments Our magical vote cast please little drum roll And it passes unanimously So Council is going to take a quick 10 minute recess because i'm sure some members may want to exit the chamber and Oh, i'm sorry. We have to Mr. Mayor if I could that was one of three resolutions and we have two ordinances So I move they're all going to cheer that much for all three, right? I move a resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa adopting findings of fact mitigation monitoring and reporting program and statement of overriding considerations for the southeast greenway general plan amendment rezoning project file numbers st 14-003 gpam 19-002 and rez 19-007 and wait for the reading of the text second It appears we have the mover in a second in your votes, please And that passes unanimously It could be after the challenge mr. Tibbets I move a resolution of the city of santa rosa approving general plan text and land use diagram amendments for the southeast greenway general plan amendment In rezoning project file numbers st 14-003 gpam 19-002 and rez 19-007 and wait for the reading of the text It was seconded by mr. Oliver is nice try and your votes, please new technology And that also passes unanimously I move an ordinance of the council of the city of santa rosa approving a zoning code text amendment related to the southeast greenway general plan amendment In rezoning project file numbers st 14-003 gpam 19-002 and rez 19-007 and wait for the reading of the text And we have a second by mr. Rogers your votes, please And that also passes unanimously All right last one I move an ordinance of the council of the city of santa rosa adding zoning districts to the area within the southeast greenway boundaries A 1.9 linear mile area between farmers lane and highway 12 And spring lake regional park in southeast santa rosa file numbers st 14-003 gpam 19-002 and rez 19-007 and wait for the reading of the text second That's seconded by councilman plumbing your votes And then also passing unanimously Are we done? All right with that. Thank you very much. Thank you all for your attendance and enthusiasm. We will be taking a 10-minute break Okay, we'll come back to our meeting. Mr. City manager item 16.3 Item 16.3 public hearing appeal of denial of general plan amendment conditional use permit and tentative map for the proposed dutton meadows subdivision Located at 2650 2666 2684 dutton meadow 1112 and 1200 hern avenue santa rosa Assessor parcels numbers 043 dash 071 dash 007 dash 022 dash 023 and 043 dash 191 dash 016 dash 024 file number prj 18-039 c up 18-101 gpam 18-003 maj 18-006 Amy Nicholson city planner presenting Great. Let me first go walk through the process. We'll be following here So we'll first check with council for x party communications and disclosures And we'll have a staff presentation for five minutes then the chair of the planning commission who is here She'll make her presentation Then the appellant can have 10 minutes To make his presentation. We'll ask any questions. We'll open the public hearing close the public hearing Ask for any additional questions and then we'll seek a motion here So let's start with x party communications. Mr. Oliver's did you have any? None Mr. Sawyer um Quite some time ago met with the appellant and met with staff, but no new information Was provided that wasn't covered by the written materials. Thank you. Mr. Tivitz Uh, I met with the appellant yesterday Okay, miss women I met with the appellant twice and have talked with staff multiple times no new information Thank you, and I also have met with the appellant I think on at least two occasions Talk with staff on at least two occasions, but all the information is contained in all the public documents Please proceed Thank you mayor schwedhelm and members of the council The item before you is an appeal of three planning commission resolutions Which denied a general plan amendment conditional use permit and tentative map for the denton meadow subdivision The grounds for appeal stated by the appellant who is also the project applicant Is that the traffic study for the general plan amendment Demonstrated the proposal would meet or exceed city standards That the denial of the project prior to environmental review And conditions of approval was arbitrary and capricious and that the city has an urgent need for housing The denton meadow subdivision project consists of the subdivision of an 18.4 acre site, which would accommodate 130 detached single-family dwellings and 81 accessory dwelling units The project application originally proposed that 20 accessory dwelling units would be affordable and the appellant has since revised the proposal to include 32 affordable accessory dwelling units Improvements as a part of the subdivision include the extension of the north point parkway and street a lot specific and visitor parking spaces and landscaping throughout The entitlements before the council this evening and also That were denied by the planning commission include a general plan amendment to modify planned circulation for the area And a tentative map and conditional use permit for the 130 lot subdivision The project site is located in southwest santa rosa within the roseland area specific plan boundary And is in located at the southeast intersection of denton meadow and herne avenue This graphic shows the project site and surrounding area. The project site is primarily undeveloped There is one single-family unit fronting on herne avenue There is existing residential development north and south of the site and meadow view elementary school is located immediately west of the project site This is the western portion of the proposed tentative map denton meadow is along the left side of the screen so that is an existing street and then the two proposed streets which would provide access to the private streets and alleyways for the 130 lots are shown in the yellow orange color This is the eastern and northern portion of the proposed tentative map with herne avenue to the north The project includes all detached single-family dwellings and detached accessory dwelling units The garages are oriented away from public streets There are a total of four house plans proposed with three distinct architectural styles The general plan amendment is required for circulation changes That are included in both the general plan and the roseland area specific plan The approved or planned streets are shown here in the dark blue color And the streets proposed as a part of this project are shown in yellow In 2002 and 2003 The planning commission held a number of public hearings to discuss what was the denton meadow master plan This plan covered a 51 acre site, which includes the current project site And a large focus of those public hearings was the proposed circulation True mark homes the current project appellant was an applicant of the master plan In january of 2003 the planning commission directed The project applicant to address a number of issues with a detailed focus on circulation and the design of the north point parkway The applicant and city staff returned in january of 2006 and the planning commission approved the modified circulation presented Which was later recommended for approval to council and ultimately adopted In may and june of 2006 there were two tentative maps approved on the subject site before you Which included both an attached housing project and a detached single-family housing project Both maps have since expired In october of 2009 the city council adopted our current general plan The general plan that we have now incorporated the circulation elements from that denton meadow master plan As you know in october of 2016 the roseland area specific plan was adopted This plan includes circulation goals and policies and plan roadways for the area to not only improve connectivity But to alleviate congestion The specific plan also included a number of land use changes including to the subject site This was done at the work by the request From the applicant who wanted to reduce the density from medium to medium low And to remove the requirement for a mixed use development In march of 2018 city staff members met with the applicant team and held a pre-application meeting In june a neighborhood meeting was held for the proposed project And in later in june applications for the three entitlements were submitted to the city In september and october city staff members and the applicant team met on a number of occasions to discuss ongoing concerns Regarding the proposed circulation modifications and in december of 2018 city staff informed the applicant Now appellant that the proposed circulation could not be supported In february of 2019 the planning commission Went with staff's recommendation and denied the application for the general plan amendment use permit and tentative map With four commissioners voting yes to being absent and one voting no In march the applicant filed the timely appeal to the city clerk's office The general plan land use designation for the site is a mix of Medium low and low density residential This allows between two and 13 units per acre and the proposed development does fall within the range As required by the general plan, but it is at the very low end of that density range The project does meet a number of land use and housing goals and policies through providing both detached Single family units and also accessory dwelling units helping to meet the needs of all city residents While the proposed project meets general plan goals and policies by providing a diverse housing supply The proposed density is at the minimum of the required density range And the proposed roadway network for the project does not meet the overall intent of the general plan or the roseland specific plan In regard to transportation In addition the project proposes circulation changes that are directly in conflict with the specific improvements as outlined in the roseland area specific plan The project site has split zoning R16 which is for single family residential development and pd 0 6 0 0 1 which is a plan development for Medium to low density residential development Applications for general plan amendments must address four questions The appellant's responses to each of these questions is included as an attachment to the staff report The applicant is requesting a general plan amendment to the plan circulation to accommodate a certain Housing product, which is a detached single family housing product staff does agree with the assumption that it would be difficult to achieve The housing product type with the planned circulation However, there is the potential for a denser or attached housing Product that could possibly retain the adopted circulation plan and eliminate the need for the general plan amendment the general plan Guides future development through the year 2035 and beyond providing predictability and stability to members of the public and also to developers general plan amendments for specific projects are typically requested to change a land use or increase the density the proposed amendment before you is atypical in that it's requesting a Pretty significant modification to the transportation element with further reaching effects The applicants and appellants written narrative does not demonstrate that the proposed housing project outweighs the city's need to provide adequate regional circulation Even if the city were to approve the requested general plan amendment The applicant could decide to construct a different project or no project Leaving this area With what could be an inferior roadway alignment and no affordable housing This potential scenario highlights that Significant changes to area-wide circulation should be beneficial to the area with or without a development proposal City staff members also anticipate that the general plan amendment may be detrimental to the public interest and convenience By reducing the functionality of two plan connections Increasing congestion along a segment of her and avenue and introducing a high volume right turn at an active school crossing Traffic analysis provided by the appellant does demonstrate that intersections would continue to operate acceptably However, the overall impact to circulation Is anticipated to be negative and this is the reason why a more robust and higher level study is necessary The appellant has provided three grounds of appeal The first is that the proposed project advances important public interest And denial of the project prior to environmental review and conditions of approval was arbitrary and capricious The california environmental quality act does not apply to projects that an agency rejects or disapproves And and therefore the city is not required to complete environmental review Before choosing to reject a project Conditions of approval are drafted at the end of a typically pretty lengthy development review process where The issues have been worked out and planning staff and other city staff had not reached this point and were not able to draft those conditions of approval During the february planning commission public hearing the commission did provide the opportunity for the applicant to request a Continuance and return to the commission with a redesigned project for consideration At that time the applicant requested a full denial of the project to appeal to the council Another point by the appellant is that the proposed project addresses an urgent need for housing within the city City staff certainly recognizes this urgent need for housing The applicant's appeal and written narrative does not necessarily demonstrate that this proposed housing project outweighs the city's need for adequate regional circulation And as previously addressed approval of this general plan amendment does not guarantee this specific project The final grounds of appeal was that the proposed project appeared to be denied based on concerns that a modified street network would result in unanticipated impacts to future projects And that the traffic reports found that project roadways would still meet or exceed city standards As was previously discussed in the general plan section of this presentation And as I will briefly address in the issue section The circulation proposed for this subdivision is inconsistent with the overall intent of the general plan to provide For connectivity relief congestion and adequate circulation While the traffic analysis for the project does demonstrate that Intersections in the immediate project vicinity would continue to operate acceptably the impact of these modifications May be wider felt and there is a need for that Additional traffic analysis that would typically be done as a part of a general plan update or a specific plan public comments were received during a number of Points throughout the development review process including the neighborhood meeting A notice of application and the notice of the planning commission and city council public hearings Attending residents expressed their desire for the current proposal which Provides fewer units than what was approved in 2006 and does so at a two-story level versus a three-story level The majority of comments received In-person and writing by the phone have been about existing traffic issues within this area in particular along her and avenue and Dutton Meadow There's been general questions about the overall circulation plan for the southwest quadrant And concerns that there is not enough available parking in the area and that this residential project would exacerbate that issue this slide shows six projects that are Well, five of them have recently been approved and one is in the review process So the blue ones have recently been approved and the yellow one is currently under review. The project site is near the top of the screen and so the blue and yellow boxes on there total 318 residential units and the project site would include 211 and so A large consideration by city staff Is to really ensure that an adequate traffic and infrastructure analysis is done to modify any roads planned within this area as all of these development projects have Gone through their environmental analysis assuming specific infrastructure would be in place in the future as was previously mentioned This project has not been reviewed pursuant to the california environmental quality act in that it does not apply to a project that an agency rejects or disapproves The applicant did provide an addendum to an environmental impact report that has been included as an attachment to your staff report However, staff has not reviewed that document for adequacy I'd like to finish by recapping the issues related to the roadway alignment First and foremost Staff has found that it is inconsistent with the intent of the general plan not just the diagram But the goals to provide connectivity efficient circulation and reduced congestion And that this type of change requires a more broad Traffic and infrastructure analysis and public process The proposed modifications are anticipated to have impacts to the greater Roadway network in the southwest quadrant and as such the proposed Realignment needs to be considered as a part of the general plan update, which the city is currently embarking on Given that the proposed realignment and resulting impacts to the region Could include property dedications to roadway widenings or level of service impacts for people Who are not noticed within this project vicinity That general plan update is warranted versus a project specific level of review As was shown on a previous slide of the area There's a lot of undeveloped land in the southwest quadrant Particularly in the vicinity of the project site or pending development and much of this land Is not currently developed to general plan build out, which is important for the city to reach our housing targets Further the proposed Circulation changes encourage regional traffic to go through a residential neighborhood The street has been designed at the width of a transitional or collector street. However, it functions much like a Neighborhood street and many People trying to connect from the southern portion of the city might not understand that that could be a future connection point To her and into the freeway The planning commission and planning and economic development department recommend that the council deny the appeal And deny the general plan amendment tentative map and conditional use permit for the dutton meadow subdivision The council has many options one of which is staff's recommendation However, there's the option for staff to return with resolutions of approval and environmental analysis completed This would require that the council Make findings of fact to support the general plan amendment Another option would be for the item to be continued for the appellant to change specific Details relative to the project or provide additional information or analysis I'm happy to answer any questions and we also have rob sprinkles city traffic engineer and jason nut director transportation and public works Thank you. Okay. Thank you for that presentation council any questions for staff Go ahead jack Thank you, mayor So I want to to be clear about this the what we're doing is changing the zoning from eight to 13 or medium low to R16 which is six Units or less am I correct on that? You might be referencing General plan land use change that the project site went through as a part of the rosalina area specific plan So previously this site was designated for medium density residential development, which is I believe between eight and 13 and A portion actually I believe it was medium high which is 13 to 18 and then it was Reduced to between eight and 13 units per acre. So that was a Change that took place in 2016. So I'm sorry for my ignorance on this So today as we sit here in this moment the zoning allows for eight to 13 units per acre Yes, so there's actually two land use designations on the site But the majority of the site is between eight and 13 and then there's a portion of the site That's between two and eight units per acre. So what are we changing it to? So just to answer this specific question the proposal is not for a zoning change It's for a general plan amendment to change a roadway alignment And then the project has associated entitlements that were included as part of the package So because staff could not support the general plan amendment to change the roadway alignment Staff is also not supporting the project entitlements as well. Okay Um another question that I had and you So how will this affect the other 310 units those other three projects in the area? So by changing this Have those other projects been entitled and conducted e irs and gone through that process So all of those projects as they went through their entitlement process They were subject to environmental review and they were all dependent upon the roadway alignment as is currently indicated in the general plan so by changing the roadway today at the council were to uphold The appeal and approve the project Those other projects those other three are going to have to go through revisions of their e ir and that's going to be a How long of a process for them or no no they exist So those will remain but there was never an analysis done With the with the proposed alignment relative to those projects. So we don't have that information Okay, so we're not bottom line is we're not anticipating as a result of a potential action here today to change the general plan We're not expecting any changes to those projects coming to fruition So No changes to entitled projects. They have a right to develop as entitled But future projects so part of the analysis that staff is looking for was a regional based analysis. So Other future housing or other non residential projects in the area and how this general plan amendment would impact those other uses Those those uses that haven't come forward yet. Okay That's it. Thank you Other questions mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor So you mentioned that a lot of the input had been done I do want to make a point on to council member tibet's point those projects while they're entitled There is potentially impacts on those projects due to financing and other issues that come up based upon changes done here You know you you work through a process to develop property and there could be impacts There could be impacts that are out there I mean mine was more surrounding the eir process But if they're entitled see I didn't know if they were Entitled going through the entitlement process would sending them back to change the eir caused them delays But you bring up a good point. It's unknown what that Ultimately, that's why you would want a wider study in these conversations to just for future projects and for impacts on current projects So everybody understood what that was going to do to those types of projects Have we staff Talked to or talked to those other applicants. Excuse me entitled properties to see what this change would do to their projects So that's the one of the key issues Why staff is not supportive of this is because it's a project specific analysis Our area of noticing is limited If you do this through a general plan amendment, it's much broader So we have a 600 foot notice radius where if we do it as part of a general plan update It's a much broader discussion and that's the reason for staff recommending that approach Well, but so I'll just this is maybe more appropriate for the comment section But I would like to just throw it in now and that is you know I think my concern here and I mentioned this to the appellant yesterday when I met with him Is that is this 211 units going to jeopardize the Potentiation or the potential for 310 or more in that other vicinity Now I don't I think the general plan process is pretty long for an applicant to to go through Especially someone who has a project ready to go before the council Is there a reason why we can't look up who holds those parcels and give them a phone call? And see what a change This change would do to their financing and other structures putting their deals together It doesn't follow our our process So if the council gave us direction, we would certainly do that But I think the one of the concerns is Where do we stop because as we look at this? This is a regional potential Potentially a regional impact and so the boundary in our mind is broader than even just the projects that you see That are entitled in the near vicinity I mean, I I appreciate that and I think in a perfect world you're correct my only I mean But there's obviously a difference between an entitled project in the future You know and so I my concern really here today is with the entitled projects. That's it Thank you, mr. Mayor When you talk about the rosin area specific plan, my understanding is there was a reduction in the density requirement on this site Why was there not also the discussion about the realignment of the road at that time? The appellant did meet with city staff And requested the change in land use However, they did not request any changes to circulation at that time. So that was not analyzed or incorporated into the plan Okay, I'm going to ask the appellant the same thing or perhaps he can address it when when he gets his time as well Sue I'm going to ask you kind of a question about the spirit of our affordability Requirements in the city does the construction of this project with the ad use as potential affordable housing Does that meet that that spirit of affordable requirements? The project if it were to be approved would have to meet the half require the housing action plan requirements and I haven't done the analysis as to whether that particular number of affordable ad use would would satisfy those requirements But it again if they were approved they would have to meet those requirements either through construction of affordable units on site or Through the payment of in lieu fees So let me ask kind of a different way So once a unit is sold and a unit having the ad u that's attached to it That's the affordable could the homeowner then come to the city and ask the affordability requirement for that adu to be waived consistent with our adu policy not at this time if if the affordability was built into the project As a condition of approval it would have to remain affordable for the time period that's provided in the approval conditions okay If I may just add to that the adu policy it's universal to apply city-wide and these requirements apply to any project that that incorporates ad use so The owner occupancy and the affordability work hand in hand and they're a trade-off essentially so To be owner occupied then you can rent at a market rate for the adu To lift the owner occupancy then you have to make one of those Unaffordable units so that's part of the policy that the city council adopted. So if the Occupant the owner chose to live in the adu then the home would be subject to that affordability requirement Okay I think there there are two kind of separate issues one is the affordability provisions that mr. Rose is discussing which is The trade-off between affordability and the owner occupied requirement. That's one condition that the Project would have to meet the other is that all of the projects have to meet the housing Action plan I'm sorry allocation plan And have to provide a certain number of units as affordable or pay an in lieu fee so The the project could decide to Have the ad use with the owner occupancy requirement with no affordability restrictions They would then have to meet their affordability requirements By paying an in lieu fee. So those both of those Constraints will apply to the project both the number of affordable units or fee And the the linkage between either affordability or our occupancy It just to close out the contract that can be released by the city If the owner or a subsequent owner decides to be an owner occupant So it doesn't necessarily go on in perpetuity So I I guess That's sort of where my question is that is If the project gets approved based on an understanding of level of affordability that's in it And then the homes are sold Is there any guarantee that in perpetuity that affordable unit stays affordable Or can the owner once they take occupancy can they come to the city and have that requirement waived Or could they move into that affordable unit and keep their home as the market rate? So we anticipated this question and I'll just read what we Received today from our housing department The contract may be released by the city upon written evidence that the owner occupies a dwelling unit on the property In such an instance owner must occupy either the existing single family structure on the property Or the ad you or the junior ad you pursue it to the deed restriction So the answer is no If if I understand correctly The affordability contract With a current owner a subsequent owner if they choose to live in the one of the units then that contract can be Basically released by the city Right, so I want to be very clear because that's exactly what i'm asking is Once the project is approved with the level of affordability If the once the unit is sold if it is occupied by the owner they can have that affordability requirement waived That's correct it's correct in terms of the um ad you regulations As I understand it and I was just talking to director q and That the project itself As I mentioned before still has to comply with the housing allocation plan And so if they don't have the affordable units The I don't know offhand what the number of affordable units would would be required But if they don't have those Under a under an affordability agreement long term Then they'd have to pay the in-laws fees. So what director guin was just indicating to me Is that the project as it's currently configured? That staff and staff mr. Rose can correct me if i'm wrong Does not meet the housing allocation plan and so we'll have to pay separate affordable fees Once they've paid those fees Then the regulations that mr. Rose were talking about kick in and so the affordability That you can trade off as to the affordability or the owner occupied requirement right and so I guess The heart of my question is once the project is approved once it's built once it's sold The owner that occupies it can then waive the affordability requirement anyway regardless of if at this stage The developer paid the in-lu fee or built the unit Sorry, and I don't mean to belabor the point. I just want to make sure we're very clear on this I think it's a good question. So um the the What's being recommended? What's in the plan is to have a 30? I think 30 units of ad use as affordable your current city policy requires that if it's not owner occupants owner occupied What we're saying is that does not account for our housing allocation plan? It does not account for an affordable unit so typically a primary unit and The adu needs to be affordable locked into a long-term contract because the housing authority That gives you the right to not have to pay in-lu fees for the rest of the project if you get 15 percent of those units What they're recommending is not that they're recommending some of the adu's be affordable Which is already per your policy They have to be if the owner if the owners occupy the primary residence and your point your question Can it be reverted absolutely it can so if somebody buys that project sells at the next day They could move into that primary unit and release that affordability contract on the adu the way it's currently set up Okay, uh, thank you Other questions Yeah, can I uh keep you there mr. Hewn? um Just I have a number of questions, but I just wanted to finish up with vice mayor rogers Question around the affordability and locking into it in long term under does the appellant have a A timeline for how long these units would be deed restricted Or is the deed restriction just stay with them because they are adu's Yeah, so the adu's again this is doesn't isn't part of our housing allocation plan This is just a adu policy Our current adu policy requires that those are de-restricted While there's why there's not a primary resident in the in the primary units So i'm sorry de-restricted you have to be in the house somebody has to live there If somebody moves sells that property buys it an investment property Then the adu or one of those units has to be Locked into our affordability contract through the housing authority through the I think number of years. I believe it's 30 30 years 30 years is the contract For the affordability Okay, and is 30 30 years a standard per hour city regulations or our ordinance So adus are slightly different the um of housing allocation plan. I believe is 40 55 years So if if they were to say I want we want to get credit we want to do 50 percent affordable on-site Inclusionary affordable housing the primary unit and adu would be locked into an affordability contract for 55 years Okay, so that's what they are proposing is for 55 years the 55 years is actually for a density bonus So the housing allocation plan, which is for affordable housing is a 30 year term But with this project because they are adu's they're not the primary structures Then that term can be changed if a subsequent owner decides to live in one of the units So what i'm trying to get out here is it sounds like they do want to do affordable housing But that they're given our ordinance and given what their proposal is that Is there no actual enforcement mechanism? available to our city given this plan You know the the the current ordinance would enforce only if Somebody didn't live in the primary unit Okay, um, thank you so um What I wanted to do also I wanted this as a more general staff question Um, can you once again clarify are we voting on this project in particular? Are we voting for a general plan amendment? You would be voting on the projects in its entirety But much the focus has been on the general plan amendment because the real line circulation is Required in order for the subdivision to be possible as they've currently proposed it And given given that this That the appellants um proposal would impact already entitled projects and potentially future projects And we also do have a housing crisis and do want units built. Um, is there an A reasonable opportunity. Um, has there been or will there be a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to participate in a specific or general general plan amendment um going forward Yes, so as miss nickelson indicated, we're embarking upon our general plan update that will take several years another option and staff has Encouraged this for some time is to continue to work with the applicant to find a solution with this particular project As was also mentioned, it's rather uncommon to see a general plan amendment for a roadway alignment for a project A housing project that is at the low end of the density range Most frequently you see general plan amendments. They're asking to increase the density So staff has worked with the applicant for some time staff across all divisions And that is the true desire is to find a solution that works with the roadway alignment as it's proposed in the general plan So to answer the question. Yes through a general plan update It's a lengthy process as an alternative staff has been and continues to be Interested in working on a solution with this current proposal Okay, and i'll ask this question of the appellant as well but i'm curious to um when the rosaline area specific plan was conducted and Whether not you have any insight into the appellant's participation in that proceeding So the rosaline area specific plan was adopted by the council in october of 2016 And as a part of the outreach City staff did meet with true mark homes They did request a decrease in residential density on their project site They did not mention any desire to change circulation And was the circulation as put forth by our tpw staff the same as it is now as it was in october of 2016 Or has anything changed on the city side of it? Has the city changed its circulation plan since 2016? No, it has not Okay, and so it is the case that the appellant did not Request a change of circulation at that time Correct. Okay. Thank you And that opportunity would have allowed that broader scope of analysis And also the broader public conversation that needs to couple with An amendment to a regional circulation route like this Mr. Tewits, yeah, thank you I'm out of city attorney Recognizing that the adu policy currently governs these 30 adu units in the proposed project Is there anything if the council decides to move forward tonight? With this project to condition that those Fall underneath I guess the app versus the adu policy and we restrict them for 30 55 years No, you're the housing allocation plan will still apply and my understanding is they'll pay a fee for that Rather than building on site. That's my understanding But I I guess there's some dispute about that they would like to get the credit for these But under our adu policy the property owner does retain the option of either living in the house and and not being restricted to affordability or Or keeping it one of the units As affordable if they want to get credit for the housing allocation plan as well Both the primary and the adu would have to be affordable. So the the simple answer I've got to Pull out vice mayor rogers here for my clarity The answer is no we cannot condition the the title or the deed to keep those units special No not under not Not under the Adu policy the adu policy gives the property under that option early up here say we'll move you forward But you've got to have 55 years on those adus. We can't do that. No, okay And just to add to that a general plan amendment cannot be conditioned And so as we've indicated the project and the general plan amendment are not coupled Together so the general plan amendment that changes the roadway That will stay with us the project may or may not get built And so there's no way to condition that amendment to go with the project Mr. Vice mayor I apologize. I forgot one other question And I also because I was away from the dais at the start of the conversation I do need to do my my ex parte and disclose. I met with the applicant multiple times I met with multiple planning commissioners watched the planning commission meeting And nothing outside of the publicly available information was learned I did want to ask specifically about the transportation element This is three years in on council for me now This is the first time i've seen a change to the transportation element. How common are they and do we have a history of approving Changes outside the scope of a full general plan or specific plan redesign I'll defer to mr. Nutt, but I can say that in my time here 12 years now. I can't recall a Development project that has proposed a land use change relative to the the circulation It's not to say it hasn't happened, but I can't recall that I'm seeing nodding heads from the director. Thank you Council any other questions for staff Okay, mr. Scho, would you like to uh Let us know about the planning commission process Good evening mayor and council members. Um I'm going to start a little bit differently tonight I usually finish with what our vote was but I want to start with that tonight so that It's really clear what the vote was and what it meant We had five commissioners present Four of us after the staff report applicant presentation and public hearing Were really concerned about We wanted to deny the general plan amendment for reasons which i'll go into later That we could not make the findings for the general plan amendment We really wanted to Keep the housing in our realm and ask the applicant to Allow a continuance to come back because we saw the option the possibility that well Maybe not this particular product that could be a mixture of products of attached and detached But we really want to make clear to the council that the commissioners want the housing And we really are concerned about your council goals about getting housing the uh the applicant uh had started As part of their presentation they indicated that what they wanted us to do What they wanted the planning commission to do was to not make a decision But rather to kick it up to city council To have you guys take charge of this decision Recommend to staffs that they bring forward approval documents and do the sequel work the loan No vote of the commission commission Was in accordance with that it was not a vote To approve the general plan amendment and the project it was simply a vote acknowledging the request By the applicant and that commissioner was stating concerns about the perception in the city of Santa Rosa being difficult to develop So I just want to make sure that it's understood that that vote was not for approval of the general plan amendment and To make sure that we all understand The commission really wanted the housing and wanted to keep the opportunity to keep working with the applicant As it sounds like staff also does to Bring some housing to fruition in that area I'm just going to hit the highlights of what we what we heard in making our decision about the general plan amendment from staff That just as we just heard the general plan amendment proposal for a transportation circulation element is extremely unusual Just not not done For a lot of the reasons why we're seeing That mostly we would see general plan amendments for a land use change Typically an increase in density as opposed to a decrease in density We heard that this particular pro proposal has regional impacts that are unstudied Unnoticed in in terms of the individuals and Landowners that that may be impacted by this change We heard about the history of the modification of the north point parkway back in 2002 The the Dutton metal master plan of which the applicant was a huge part in creating That particular Transportation circulation that north point parkway area They we worked very hard as a planning commission because of that realignment at that time We wanted it to be done correctly And so it took some time to to get that done in in 2006 when the master plan was done And that the applicant brought forward their project in accordance with that alignment and later it was embodied in our general plan As you've heard we were concerned about potential impacts to already approved Projects or projects in the pipeline Potential impacts just to the regional circulation all of the the planning efforts that have gone into effect at this point And and key is just because a project is being brought forward with a general plan amendment If we approve the general plan amendment that stands, but the project may or may not be built As we saw with the applicant's original proposal back in 2006 Was not built Some of the points that we heard from the applicant Really were About the housing crisis and about the need for housing Their history with their land there in terms of having come forward with A three-story attached product and with the downturn in the economy and also just generally Currently that kind of product is just really not very feasible It's not really saleable and no one had an argument with that They did mention that they had come into Aped several times to try to talk with staff about Lowering the height of their existing project or modifying it in some way And that they were met with a strong no that they did can get did not get any cooperation from staff until recently and As chair I was not willing to let that comment go out in the public airways unchecked Or unchallenged and so I had staff Make a statement about Whether and they did not specifically recall applicant coming in over those years with other ideas But definitely describe that there would have been pathways offered You know, you know, how hard everybody here works to try to get a solution to get things moving forward So I really didn't want that perception out there and I wanted that corrected which we did The applicant Did participate And did work with staff as part of the roseland area specific plan process They worked with staff in a way to get their density reduced And we specifically asked the question which i'm glad you intend to ask again Why did you not bring this particular proposal forward at that time to to change the realignment if what you were doing was Having some kind of project in mind and reducing the density and the response that we got from the The appellant was they did not have a good answer for that question um one of the They were really highlighting their housing and their prod their project. They're very proud of the product type And their their ad use One of the things that that we had received As part of our packet early on was a map that showed an even dispersal of the affordable ad use And then at the time of the meeting that had that map had been changed and we had and I think it's in your packet There's a map that shows all of the below market rates with the ad use up against clustered up together against the street and so we asked about that change and Basically the appellant said well we're flexible on that So In our discussion, we were really taking up the first question You know is there a need to change the general plan and for the reasons that that you've heard and and that I'm trying to highlight We couldn't make the findings that there was that there was there was going to be tremendous sort of untested impacts And in favor of one project and that particular project was only looking at those traffic impacts in isolation to a piece of property as opposed to a regional Look and that we all felt that a Certainly it's always worth looking at our our circulation And land uses, but this would be better taken up In a more regional type of process like the roseland specific plan like a general plan update And so um, we hope that that happens So That was really our process and a lot of the details of of why we could not make the findings I think you know staff and then certainly Ms. Nicholson has been very thorough about about that So and then our vote came down to we really were hoping that the The appellant would allow us to continue They did not want to do that they asked for a straight up and down to get up to council And so that was where we came to our 401 vote Okay, thank you for your presentation council questions for the planning commission chair Then thank you so much for that presentation All right the applicant appellant opportunity to provide us information Let's wait till you get live if you can introduce yourself and then I think they'll load your presentation Wonderful, uh, great. Uh, hello. My name is Garrett Heinz. I'm the director of architecture with true mark homes True mark is a local home builder and based in san ramon, california We've been developing residential communities for over three decades throughout the greater bay area In 2018 true mark won the national master plan community of the year award for the fifth year in a row We were also named the 2018 national professional builder magazine home builder of the year I bring this up because it proves that true mark cares about the communities we work with in the homes we build True mark is here tonight because planning commission denied our request for a general plan amendment Based on fears and in our humble opinion and with all due respect assumptions presented by staff not facts Staff's denial presentation reports often use words even tonight such as could anticipated and potentially I am here to provide facts and testimony based on professional evaluations and real traffic models that will clearly unveil the realities and impacts of development In and around the dutton meadows master plan True mark has a significant history with the dutton meadows master plan as mentioned We took it through entitlements for 500 medium density three story homes in 2005 Christofferson homes was going to build our first phase The recession hit they had to drop out. It destroyed the economy destroyed the opportunity for that density The master plan which was approved. Oh, and we also created a 100 acre goby mitigation bank, which has been uh Mitigating cts rare plants and wetlands for this and other major developments in the southwest center rosa The master plan included a four-acre central park, which we already helped dedicate To the city in 2007 with an irrevocable offer of dedication The master plan also includes a 90 000 square foot grocery center Which we all knew wouldn't be feasible until all the once you hold up just one sec. We just lost the sure presentation Yep The yeah, sorry The 90 000 square foot grocery center was supposed to be the destination for this area not Providing a cut through for traffic In that particular area Amorosa village is the only portion of the master plan built over the past 14 years shown there in the red square It is a fully subsidized 100 affordable project by burbank housing providing roughly 160 affordable homes Already within this 500 home master plan Go ahead and skip to slide eight, please As shown tonight again, and we were asking for 211 new housing units 130 traditional two-story family oriented homes All within walking distance to the meadowview elementary school the southwest community park and the future Dutton meadow neighborhood park and a future grocery center 81 of the 130 homes comes with the one bedroom apartment above the rear detached garage an ad u Separate from the main house for a total of 211 diverse housing units for your community We're ready to build these right now. We have all our mitigations in place. We're ready to go staff no longer no longer Sorry, we submitted a formal tentative map application last june and have spent the past year working back and forth with staff Who completely reviewed the project providing numerous comments and directions followed by many plan revisions report revisions to the tune of $500,000 Staff was in support of the proposal guiding us through a positive neighborhood meeting and the site plan Including traffic department comments until late 2018 Staff no longer supported the project due to one thing a street alignment A street alignment supported by staff shown here in a green dashed line That cuts a 45 degree angle through the southwest santa rosa Staff a staff supported street alignment Shown Hold on That requires eminent domain and public funding to occur for 24 property owners A staff supported regional alignment already abandoned to the north of our site A staff supported street alignment that expert traffic consultants now conclude through our studies That is no better than our alignment a staff supported street alignment that creates an unsafe condition By putting a 45 mile an hour arterial in front of an elementary school Let's compare staff's alignment shown on the left in yellow with ours true marks on the right We're only talking about the yellow sections all the green connections will stay intact True marks alignment is three things better for your city Experts here tonight conclude it creates a safer elementary school situation by maintaining a 25 mile an hour street And a signalized easily controlled intersection in front of the men of u elementary school One intersection to handle parent pedestrian and bus circulation Staff's configuration on the left creates actually three points of conflict in front of the school not to mention a 45 mile an hour arterial True marks alignment allows 211 new homes Staff's alignment will result in no additional housing because the 45 degree angles created not only here on our site But all the other 24 properties on this north point parkway alignment Reduces the land efficient land efficiency by 24 5% Thirdly the city if truly interested in fulfilling its key land use and circulation plan for the roseland district Needs to do one thing it needs to build these connections What we are trying to do here is take a general plan from concept to reality And the reality is based on actual traffic modeling by two reputable bay area consultants True marks proposal street alignment performs better than staff's alignment and when completed will reduce traffic to acceptable levels If we cannot build a project that is financeable as presented without true mark no connecting roads that we built and traffic will only get worse We asked two qualified traffic engineers to independently study all the intersections in this in this scenario One is here tonight to provide testimony. They filled out a card for you The results that true marks plan is seven seconds faster in the morning and five seconds slower in the evening True marks plan moves traffic a net two seconds faster than staff's 45 degree north point parkway alignment The bottom line trade-off between the street alignments is the loss of 26 lots and 52 homes That is why we are here asking for your help to break the tie The loss of 52 homes turns a feasible project into an infeasible project In an infeasible project means none of us get anything we all lose This is an important concept for southwest hantarosa because as already pointed out staff has approved 318 new homes just to the south of dudden meadows and that rely on these connections Traffic modeling shows that these 318 homes without true mark adds 90 seconds of delay per car To the current miserable hern avenue traffic problem And takes the hern dudden meadow intersection shown here in the red circle from a d to an f with no relief in sight The street connections through dudden meadows will not occur as shown on your general plan without allowing true mark to be the catalyst For master plan development and build out The street connections that staff has been counting on for these 318 homes will not be built unless true mark has a project It can finance and build Until we have a project we can finance and build traffic on dudden meadows and hern will only worsen To unacceptable f levels But the true mark street alignment as presented will get bank financing and lead to the traffic relief We are all searching for And the new rooftops will be the catalyst for the remaining phases the street connections and the grocery center to develop Per the traffic reports submitted these blue sections go one more will you uh, there you go the blue sections there Ah Let me find my spot The blue sections when complete turn the surrounding signals on hern from fs to bs and c's For better or worse True mark in our 19 acres is the hub of this circulation plan without a feasible development your circulation plan cannot be built for True mark is providing a roadway solution that performs equal to the city's design But with a project that can be financed thus the homes and streets get built True mark is proposing a win-win solution. I believe the residents in southwest center doesn't want a solution Let's look at tonight's decision another way go a couple more with you Here you go If you deny true mark's appeal you get zero homes zero bmr's zero street connections No fees and 300 no 18 homes in the pipeline become at risk Versus if you approve true mark's appeal you get 211 needed homes 32 bmr's that can be deed restricted we can get into that in a minute And the needed connecting streets and 11 million dollars in fees Our request tonight as it's clear We'd like you to ask staff to come back with draft findings and conditions of approval based on what we've submitted Approve the proposed general plan amendment draft resolutions necessary to approve our vesting tentative map as submitted And adopt an addendum to the 2005 Dutton Meadows eir In closing we all know that traffic engineers focus on traffic arborist focus on trees public works focus on utilities your constituents focus on housing And so on You as decision makers must balance it all for what overall is best for the community Not just one issue To me the obvious question that you as decision makers must ask tonight final sentence If you say no to true mark, what is your plan to make these connections across the true mark property ever happen? Thank you Thank you for your presentation council questions for the appellant Mr. Tivis, thank you, mayor you know I One question that I had that you know was news to me and I think a question that merits asking is Why was there the decision to do the reduction in density? So you were you went higher up in no six Was it just the the softening of the housing market was anticipated? Although I think my memories served times were pretty good. No six. I don't know what you were looking at at the time um, you know Can you shed some light on that? Absolutely. So 2006 2007 is when we were approved at that time true mark Didn't build as many homes as we do now And christofferson homes was your best builder in the area at that time and they were online to buy the project The recession was starting to come. They saw it coming and they dropped the project Then the recession really hit and from then on three-story housing in southwest center rosa unless it's subsidized Like bourbon housing gets it's impossible to finance It's way more expensive to build and the revenues on the homes go are lower It's a it's a no win. So again, we have come in since about 2010 My business partner and I have come in and talked to claire hartman more than once and asked Can we please reduce the density and we returned away to build just normal two-story homes like everyone else in that area We were turned away until 2017. We came back in and we were pretty much met with open arms Okay, let's talk now. And so well, I guess it was 2016 when we submitted our application or agreed to support the push in 2016 to Lower the density for exactly what we wanted and we had hoped at the time that we could accommodate the existing street configuration We've tried and we're here telling you we cannot It's not a bluff. We need this many homes and we can do it and maintain your street circulation But it did pencil in 06, you know 6 the three-story townhomes pencil I think I had another question here Oh, and this is something that I think is to your benefit But this property was a cts habitat the required mitigation banking on your part correct the whole 50 acre master plan So I will say that to the to the council that you know, that's a difficult thing for most folks to be able to accommodate Those are those are my two questions for now. I do have a question for staff. Is this not the appropriate time? Is it related to the applicant's presentation it is yes, please go ahead The the question that I wanted to ask is pertaining to the their claim that we would have to perform eminent domain To connect those arterial streets for the specific area plan Are those 24 properties owned by folks other than The applicant and what is our what is our strategy to bring it to fruition? Good evening mayor council members Jason that director of transportation and public works The city is not currently on the right of way through a majority of those properties And would need to acquire them similar to what we've done here through Development activity or if we get to a point where there are a few remaining properties We may have to acquire those through our eminent domain process Okay, thanks mr. Nutt That's all my questions mayor, okay as long as you have questions Yeah, thank you very much gentlemen I wanted to give you the opportunity to answer the same question that I asked chair cisco Regarding the roseland area specific plan in 2016 And i'm hopeful that you can shed some light on why you didn't make this request for circulation at that time We've been focusing for six years on reducing the density That was our main focus that the three-story townhomes attached product in southwest santa rosa was not feasible We had hoped that we could maintain the street system the way we knew it was on the general plan and Since 2016 we've tried and we can't make it work We can't we can't that street system costs us 52 homes 26 lots And that makes the project infeasible Okay, thank you Mr. Ice mayor I also wanted to follow up on one of the comments that was made about the planning commission meeting Can you address why the affordable units were all clustered around the the street rather than Diffused as in prior It was just a diagram. They can they can go anywhere. We can disperse them however you'd like And uh our experience lately with ad use has been very successful Especially because just the general size of the units makes them by design affordable And we've been able to deed restrict them for 30 55 years That is not a problem and it doesn't change with ownership We we can work all through that they can be deed restricted the ad use As long as you'd like And then a question for staff. Have you had a chance to review the traffic plans Obviously, there seems to be a dispute here What staff believes the impact will be on the other six projects versus What the applicant believes will be the impact on the other six projects Good evening and rob sprinkle city traffic engineer um The analysis of the intersections is more than just looking at the level of service which Does meet our criteria for operations. It really does need to look at the regional impacts which which this doesn't do um The way the street layout is being proposed It does put more traffic onto the herna avenue, which is one of the um Direct items in the rosin specific plan that we're trying to avoid The plan that that is in there in the rosin specific plan um Does divert the traffic away from her which accomplishes what we're trying to accomplish here So I'm hoping i'm answering your question with that answer Yes, sort of So obviously we heard about the levels of service For for me in particular and i'm sure for other council members One of the key questions is whether or not approval of the realignment of the road will Have a negative impact on the other six projects that are in the pipeline there as well Understanding from the city manager's previous comments that some of that is unknown I'm wondering from a traffic Flow perspective if you've had a chance to look at the reports done by independent folks if you had a response to it Or or or was it just about the uh the timing? No, I have I have looked at the traffic reports. There's one actually sent recently. Um, I believe towards the end of last week um And there's there's some clarification we need from those traffic reports. Um is specifically the one that was sent last week There are some assumptions in there that I don't agree with in their level of services and um And how they're and what they're including in their About trying to get too specific but just in without including Some of the movements are including in the different intersections um again really just pulling back a little bit Making such a big change too and it may seem like a little change But making the change in how the drivers are going to go through these intersections Is is pretty significant in as far as the overall region is going to uh be impacted All right, thank you Any other questions While you're here mr. Sprinkle if you could just comment or mr. Knight, um, we we heard from the appellant Comments about the speed in front of the schools based on different alignments Can you share me this perspective on the general plan alignment So I wanted to if I could just follow up on sure Vice mayor roger's comments So so we've spent a lot of time talking about the six properties six six proposal or uh projects that are working on Dutton meadow when we think regional we're actually still talking about the airport area We're talking about the corporate center parkway area All of those areas were components and substantial components of the alignment that was being considered during the roseland specific plan And the prior general plan And so I we need to think well beyond what's occurring on dutton meadow And that's really the area of concern that staff has had is when we think about the types of developments That could be going on in the corporate center area And the businesses and and that type of development that we want to occur It was this alignment on north point parkway that was to bring the type of activity the commercial activity In and in and out of that that space And so while we are building residential in and around this portion of the southwest Area there is this substantial commercial district That we've been trying to foster for a couple of decades that relies exclusively on this connection And so that's just something that that when we talk about wanting to expand or needing to expand The scope of the study here It really goes beyond these six other Projects that exist on dutton meadow. It's just something larger Thank you. And then director guen if I can just ask you I know we've talked a lot about housing being a priority for the city obviously the insinuation is Approve get these units disapprove don't get any units. Can you talk a little bit about what we are actually doing or what has been approved recently in san rosa? Yeah, and I think that's a good point. We're We've spent the past couple years with a housing priority with as council put forth We have a number multi-family units. I believe the number I sent an email out last night I believe is over 500 units that have been approved over the past four months four to five months A majority of those are multi-family We are seeing a number of three-story walk-up type apartment complexes around the city Spread around which is a good thing. So that market is strong is what we're seeing Um, we are looking for higher density. We're looking for multi-family. We're looking for near transit Trying to figure out how to bring connectivity through bike lanes and walkways And so all that's coming into play. So one of the things we've we've been pushing is we need housing We need housing more than anything But but we not at not at the expense of other things The character of the community how things are connected and as director not mentioned are how we connect industrial Zones to commercial zones to residential zones to our highway network So that's something we need to look at and keep focus on while we produce this housing But the we are seeing a lot of housing come through as I mentioned Over over about 500 units in this past four to five months We still have another six to 700 units that are close to approvals that are moving through the process So I can go to the question about school safety in the traffic comparing the two absolutely The 45 mile an hour speed limit that was Shown on the slide is is definitely arbitrary Just to give an example her avenue currently is Posted 30 miles an hour speed limit school zones by state are required to have 25 mile an hour or lower down to 15 mile an hour school speed zones with a engineering traffic survey support The design speed of the When I say proposed I'm meaning the rosin specific plan alignment The design seats for the curves is at 35 miles an hour. So this street would never be posted at 45 miles an hour Thank you, mr. Chalets Thank you, mayor. I have two follow-up questions based on my colleague's input You know, where does the her and avenue interchange play into all this will that be a traffic alleviator? Yes, her and avenue will help alleviate the traffic on on her to the approach, but It's it's more localized and it will accommodate the backups that are currently existing there that go Approximately to the train tracks Okay, the second question is a question for the true mark folks. How did you Deed restrict those units where where you were and are you basically here to commit to that tonight? Yes on the commitment and I'd like to clarify Some of the comments that staff had made about the deed restrictions to clarify what we were proposing Sir if I could just Guide you first if you can identify yourself Sorry robin miller true mark home, sir So you had your presentation if you could just answer the questions that council is asking of you, please sure Yes, we are willing to deed restrict the homes. I was just trying to clarify the deed restriction Okay, I'd like you to clarify the deed restriction Thank you, sir So there staff has been absolutely correct. There is two layers one for the ad use where There is a deed restriction that will say if you are not owner occupied then you are going to Have an affordable component to the property The unit that needs to be the unit of rent needs to be Rented out as affordable Beyond that we were committing to Deed restricting For the the 30 year or the 55 year if the council prefers The 80 the ad use On 32 proper on 32 lots For affordable rate for below market rate. We were deed restricting those specific units Not just if it's owner occupied Just straight up deed restricted below market rate So I just wanted to make that clear that 32 units guaranteed regardless Those are going to be affordable And and so sue is a follow-up we what i'm what i'm inferring based on his comments in yours is He can voluntarily do that when he's issued the title But we have no way of Forcing it. Is that is that correct? We can't you know make it a contingency of our planning department staff To only issue a building permit pending that development um If if the project applicant commits voluntarily offers that up as part of the project itself so the 30 two 32 25 Deed restricted units that then is incorporated into the project description And it's that particular project description that is approved And and will be binding on on the applicant So we could not independently require the applicant to do to provide those units But the applicant can decide voluntarily to offer that up and commit to it And building permits can be held up until the the deed restrictions are in place Okay, thank you. Those are all my questions. Thank you, sir All right any other questions for the applicant All right, thank you gentlemen All right, I am now going to open the public hearing we have currently have two cards the first speaker GP radich followed by chris kenzel Go ahead to your life. Thank you My name is gp radich. Thank you for Hearing my comments mayor and council members First of all, I want to clarify something that I heard tonight that The speed limit on her and avenue has never been 35. It's always been 30 I got a ticket for speeding at 35 I know from personal experience Moving right along The traffic I've been studying the traffic since I've lived there and it's been 20 Years, so I've had a personal study of it because I use those roadways etc etc as they are right now they need help If if more trap if more houses a higher density comes before Roadway adjustment. I mean her her and avenue has already been widened Once and it's still inadequate all of the keep clear Paint on the roadways indicate that there's a lot of people And they're all bogged down at the smart train crossing too and that wasn't shown in any of the Illustrations so that would be a traffic signal as well So it's it's alignment is being discussed but not volume of traffic and My request is just designed for the reality of the area It's a service sector and how I define service sector is that these are people that use their vehicles to get to the non-service sector, which is um all the unaffordable houses to put it politely And so these people can't use public transit. I can't take my chainsaw On a bus. I mean I could But I don't know how that would go over According to the bus driver or the smart train and from there I have to get to my job site so these are the people that live in that area and lots of cars for every one of the houses that are being built Every adult has at least one car. So it's 211 Proposed houses. You double that it's 422 new cars and that's just for the adults then the teenagers want to start driving Those cars have to be accommodated by the roads and also parked when they're not being in use So those are some of the points that I wanted to bring up and I thank you so much for Being here so late. Everyone gets an espresso next time Thank you. Thank you Chris Kinzel followed by thomas ells Good evening mayor and council. My name is chris kinsle. I'm a traffic engineer with tj cam transportation consultants We were asked by the developer to review the previous study that had been done by W trans and but to to look at it in a fairly specific manner and that is our our starting point was at the Diagonal roadway proposed under the general plan alignment was not feasible. So what can we do? Alternative to that and and how does it work and how does it compare? So I think we we concluded was that both alignments provide Adequate service both now and in the future. I think what we did find was in absent of this Development and and the street running through the development Then the approved projects that the 300 plus approved projects will need to Continue up Dutton meadows and make a right turn at her and that intersection then becomes failed In the long term when all the street connections are built that are planned on the general plan The conditions are going to be acceptable What we found was that the One of the one of the points that's been made tonight is that the We don't want to run through traffic through the residential neighborhood And you know when you think about it when you put these two Streets up side by side They're both running the traffic through the residential neighborhood One of them does it with higher speeds and and and and has this similar Impact in terms of how the levels of service work and so on but in terms of Attracting through traffic to the neighborhood at a higher speed And we're told tonight that maybe it's there's going to be more traffic someday Running through the single-family neighborhood. I'm not sure that's a positive thing or is in keeping with the general plan We also noted that the diagonal roadway when it lands near the school presents I realize that the design is not finalized But there's some driveways there the main entrance to the school is a northern driveway and this is right at the end of the curve and The alignment will provide require all the traffic on Dutton meadows to make this jog through the intersection make a left turn We're going right up the street and the end of that curve Then is the main entrance to the elementary school So, uh, there's That issue as as well So I wanted to make the point that it seemed to me that both roadways do the job And one of them provides for traffic and enough capacity Through the neighborhoods at a lower speed. Thank you. Thank you. Thomas ells Thank you for the opportunity to speak and Thank you for staying here and considering this Going back many many years now I met with a planner who did the design of these roads At that time That was already going through the master plan process had just gone through the master plan process And he was approving the golf course driving range and And we spoke that day but more to the point it was the intent of All of the design effort to bring traffic from the northwest to the southeast To shunt it away from What is the corby over crossing and and her and avenue? Because it can't take the traffic of having all that commercial area over by the airport if I point and using north and Normally rather than when I'm facing but and and as well as the commercial area that that replaced the the Hotel that was there on santa rosa avenue for the raiders and all that I forget what it's called now But the point is is it to put that commercial in over there? You couldn't have all the traffic going over her and all that commercial. We couldn't have both of those Because hers can't handle it and even with the with the new design it can't handle it. So That is that is proposed yet. So if all that traffic is going to her You're really going to end up with a supermass worse than it is now Actually worse than it is now That's why that traffic had to go from the from the northwest to the southeast on those kind of jogging alignments like that Um, that that was the purpose otherwise that it would have to you would have to have at her You would probably have to have a runner park expressway Right there Okay, that's the kind of traffic that you would have and that's the kind of design That's why at runner park expressway. They had to redo it three times. They rebuilt that three times Why didn't he why didn't he why didn't he uh in order to accomplish that? I think I don't anyway Um, I can't explain that but but that's what it it was and that's what would have to happen at her And that's why that traffic goes like that And it probably needs to and I'm really sorry about that for that project because um We need that project and we need and and we need those roads and the circulars but It's been this way for that entire time for since 1994 1995 Sorry, thank you Thank you, Thomas. Those are all the cards I have you don't have to fill one out If you'd like to address the council on this item, would anyone like to make any additional comments? Seeing no one rise I will close the public hearing Council any questions Madam city attorney, do you have something? Uh, mr. Mayor? I would like to take a moment and clarify Some other some additional layers to the proposal the applicant's proposal of the 32 affordable ad us I do want to clarify Yes, the applicant can make that commitment that can become part of the project and would be enforceable by the city That being said, I'm not making a commitment as to whether those 32 ad you limited Affordable units would satisfy the requirements of the housing allocation plan In general the housing allocation plan does require that the units that are affordable be comparable to the other units In the project. They're generally rental units. There are provisions in the housing allocation plan for some flexibility and innovation so it's There's no commitment at this point as to whether those Would satisfy the requirements of the housing allocation plan the second point is as was mentioned earlier The general plan amendment does stand on its own and if approved There is no assurance that the project ever gets built. So It does stand alone and and and would survive Even if a different plan was put in place Thank you for the additional information council any other questions for staff mr. Davis I have a follow-up question on what you just said sue. Um, just as a point of clarification So what i'm reading into that is that they can voluntarily Deed restrict the units we can require it in the project description in order to be issued a building permit So there's that enforceability component still there Correct, but what we're i'm also hearing is that they would basically also have to pay the in-loop fee potentially They may or may not that would be an analysis that would be done by staff looking at does it meet the The standard requirements of the housing allocation plan Does it provide as an alternative some innovation? That might be acceptable Those analyses haven't been done because this proposal is very late in the process It's also part of the conditional use permit That's a That has not been as much of the focus as the general plan amendment the circulation plan Okay, thank you Any other questions Okay, could I ask someone to Provide the council once again, what are our options here before I asked mr. Sawyer to Take us to the next step um, so and it's also in our presentation, but um, the first option is to go with staff recommendation Which is to deny the appeal based on how it's presented and how the project has Been analyzed to date Another option is to uphold the appeal support that general plan amendment, which is the fundamental any even An option to go as far as approving or provide direction to approve the project which would We wouldn't be able to do that tonight, but we would take Direction staff would take direction and then Continue to process the project as proposed which will require staff analysis Um, and a complete environmental review and then bring it back To your attention We could also Continue the item So one option that is put forth through this discussion is that The fundamental issue with the proposed general plan amendment is the scope of review is so narrow It's neighborhood focused and what staff is asking for is is simply that it be a broader focus Which will allow for broader analysis, but also broader public communication about the impacts But in an informed way um That information could be brought back to the council, but as an alteration it could also be sent back Direct staff to work with the applicant to do that work that analysis that public conversation And you have the authority to send it back to planning commission if you'd like instead of coming straight back to council Uh, and then another option that's come up, but we all acknowledge It's not timely and and housing is urgent is the option to fold the general plan amendment into the general plan update process That's always an option, but as we acknowledge That's not staff's preference necessarily because it's longer term and we do need housing and the applicant's ready to produce housing Great, thank you for that option update. Mr. Sawyer, I believe you have this item to start our conversation I do mayor. Thank you and for conversation I will introduce the resolution of the council the city santa rosa Denying the appeal and upholding the planning commission's denial of a conditional use permit for dudden meadow subdivision Located at 2650 2666 2684 dudden meadow and 1112 and 1200 herna avidu file number c up 18 dash 101 Wait for the reading So we have a motion and a second We'll put it up for comments Mr. Tibbets I'm actually going to start with a question Following up on what you said miss harbin How long would The broader analysis take let's say we continue the item We run the broader analysis. What time impact is that going to have on the applicant? Ball parks are fine Yeah, I I uh, I may defer to my counterparts here because one of the Things that we would have to look at is what's the scope of environmental review that would be required Whether it's an environmental impact report because we project or anticipate through initial scoping that there would be a potential for a significant impact So if there is then that's a path and as you know, those could take you know, 12 months Even if it's focused Otherwise, if it's through initial scoping it even with the wider analysis that it would be a Potential impact that could be mitigated to less insignificant. We could make use of a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration and that's greatly reduces the the time, but it's still probably a six month process That's so as a follow-up then you also mentioned that, you know, I recognize we're here tonight to change the road potentially But the project still has to go through the process at which time we can require the project description to lock in deed restrictions on the ad use We could potentially increase the number work with the applicant to increase the number of density. Am I correct in my assumption? But that's how and then it the project would be I mean approved at that point Well, the one thing that's not before you tonight is that the density specifically you can certainly Make a statement as a counsel of what your interests are in terms of future iterations of project revisions But there is a land use That does that is in place now that has been approved through that specific Plan process that has that reduced density. So that is current policy And the applicants have a right to build to that current policy There's a range and they're at the lower end of the range. So there's little room without changing the land use designation but that can certainly be Forwarding comments by the applicant. Should they be asked to go back and revise their their approach? Thank you Any of the comments before no No, no now would be the time. Yeah, please You know this one for me. I actually when I had heard that we Potentially couldn't bind the ad use to affordability The project lost a lot of cachet for me, but now that it sounds like there's a pathway forward for that to occur Um, I'm looking at it more favorably But I recognize that we're here today to talk mostly about the road and the impact of the road And it's difficult because when we go through the specific planning process We have experts that we hire and we rely on to give us their best analysis What I haven't heard tonight and if staff wants to make comments on it after I comment That's fine. I welcome that but What we have here is a very difficult piece of land to work with, you know, it's rare that I actually Hear or meet developers who want to come in build in southwest santa rosa Which is a priority area for us that have the capacity and the time To do mitigation banking pay those credits and do mitigation banking I mean, I believe it can be a two to five year process with fishing game last time I heard um So my concern is that If the traffic if the acute traffic impacts in that area Are not significant And this developer then decides, you know, we're we're out of here. We're moving on It's going to be a long time before we find somebody else to take their place pay those mitigation credits and go through the process with fishing game and We're not going to have the specific plan roads in that amount of time not to mention the eminent domain hurdles that are potentially facing us I just if traffic is bad now I'm actually what I am reading into this and I'm no expert Is that we actually might be able to lessen traffic impacts with this Not as good roadway and a potential her and avenue interchange So that's kind of what i'm thinking at this time and that and that this this plan Um is good to move forward, but I see jason here who's probably going to correct some of my assumptions No, actually council member. I won't correct assumptions I just want to do some additional clarifications and and if you thought about if you if you look back to the image that That the appellant um put on the screen originally from their 2006 Proposal they adequately They adequately identified what north point parkway was which is a parkway Its intention was not to be a residential street with front on housing to be a 25 mile per hour street It was intended to move traffic through the quadrant of town And they they they found a way of putting a developable products that had back on to that parkway Like we've done with stony point road in most cases like we've done with uh fountainville parkway Other streets that were intended to be regionally Or are significant in that quadrant of town. That's what north point parkway was intended to be Not a residential street with 25 mile per hour speed limits and front on Front on housing. Um, and so um, it was just the reason I wanted to come up and make that statement was was I think there are um potential places where we could go as staff to work with a developer to talk about what those values are For that particular uh for that particular property But it really comes down to from what I've heard is it's it's a it's an identification of what that street was intended to be What the general plan intends it to be and how we should be utilizing it in the future Thank you director nut assistant city manager nut Just let me any comment you'd like to make Uh, I just want to um appreciate both true mark homes and our city staff for It sounds like a whole bunch of work that everybody's done trying to get to a place of agreement And I know that it's uh painful for everybody when we can't all have what we want at the same time I am um Reluctant to pass up the opportunity for additional housing, but I believe that the case for Dealing with our circulation issues can be adequately addressed during the The general plan amendment and um and our upcoming review in 2020. Um, so With that, I won't be uh, I'll be supporting staff recommendation and won't be supporting um our appellant tonight But I am hopeful that they are able to break ground eventually Mr. Alvarez Mr. Sawyer Well the the appellant was pretty clear with the planning commission as far as how they wanted to move forward Is the appellant, um, would they consider Continuing discussion analysis on this project So at at this point just just to to I assume I can ask whether or not a um a continuation Or to continue this item would be an appropriate path this evening And I think that given it's one of our three choices That it would be my my hope is that there we could continue the conversation Um because I have I do have concerns about traffic in the future and I don't want um The grandchildren of the future to look back and say what were they thinking when they created this What our experts are suggesting it could be a mess Um not just today and tomorrow but years down the road when we're built out Um that traffic patterns and the use and the flow um Will be much different than it is today And it's that and that is what i'm thinking about and there's a lot that has been a lot of time and energy put into designing Our roadways and circulation patterns to to accommodate and to address future future housing so um Given that there the the applicant is willing to um And assuming the council may be and I could change my my motion If I could just offer we have two more folks on the council make comments and then after you hear from all of us If you want to change your motion, you okay with that? Absolutely. Okay, mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor I think for me what this really hinges on is the decoupling of the general plan amendment from the project approval and I think that As we have already seen with this site You can have a project that gets approved and then it doesn't end up getting built and not understanding the full impact On how the realignment of the road is going to take place In the broader scheme of things It it feels difficult for me to make that change Knowing that this project might not end up being the the final product that comes before us I would agree with councilmember soyer About continuing the item my request would be to continue it back at the planning commission Because from looking at this project there is no way that this comes back to this council In a substantively similar form It still gets approval without this change without this general plan change of the of the road And our planning commissioners do provide a lot of value in terms of making projects better So that would be my request is that uh before it comes back to us and perhaps An agreement is struck and the planning commission is good with it And it doesn't end up needing to be appealed to us ultimately I'd ask that it goes back to the planning commission And I would like to echo the vice mayor's comments because this is one of the things that What can we all agree on? We need more housing. How do we get it done? Well this path if It sounds like we still have more work to do and what I heard from chair sisco and other planning commissioners Is that that that sounded something that they had an interest in let's do some more work on it Because that ultimate goal for all of us is more housing. This one does not work for me specific project based general plan amendments I really appreciate director nets or assistant city manager Nets comments about its original approach We can't look at the small little just this project. We have to look at the bigger issue So again, I would be very supportive of hopefully continuing this to let's find a way to get this done I appreciate that Mr. Sorer, thank you mayor and This council has has shown Definitely an appetite for building more housing and there's a lot to like about this project And it is hope that the moving it back to the planning commission Um And with their expertise and and help To guide this project and the staff and then we can come not back to us But can move directly into being built because we would only see it on appeal unless there was a A general plan which I would hope would not be requested. So in that case I'm so sorry to interrupt you, but I do want to make a point of clarification Should the commission can consider new information and approve the The project it would be Subject to the general plan amendment, which is a recommendation by the commission and actual action by the council So even if it's favorably received by the commission, the general plan amendment itself will be finalized at the council So you would see that okay So To simplify this this motion Move to continue this item I think you have to first If you would rescind your former Motion, yes withdraw your form yet withdraw your former motion and does the second have to be rescinded as well That needs to be clarified No, it's enough that the mover So I was the motion the form of motion and and move that we continue This item to allow for applicant to change project or provide additional information and analysis to send it back to the planning commission Is that adequate One clarification is the direction with your motion To send it back to the commission with a broader analysis for the general plan amendment Which includes the roadway realignment or is it to go back to the planning commission with a project redesign Under the current roadway alignment. So in that case there would be no need Potentially for a general plan amendment that was my intention was to Um Retain our staff's recommendation on the alignment I think the request should be both so that we have as many options to explore because again The analysis might lead us to support There, you know get we want to have options. We don't want to be restricted in the approach We just want a more thorough analysis. And so we would like both things under consideration So both the current Configuration I actually think as it's written up there is is is adequate is adequate So I don't have to I don't have to call out the general plan amendment. No Okay So everyone's comfortable with that I'm afraid to ask you to restate that As per written I've moved to continue the item to allow for applicant to change project or provide additional information And analysis and waive further reading and send it back to the planning commission And that's all the reading Second second We need cue cards out there. Are there any additional comments based on that new motion? Seeing none, I ask for your votes and that passes with six i's Thank you very much from both the applicants appellants and for staff and for you mr. Sawyer Um item 17 was written communication Any questions? Seeing none Any additional public comments? We do have one Agenda item 18 tony geraldie Thank you for sticking with us tony Wait a sec. All right you live Okay Good evening. May I show at home? Vice mayor roger's distinguished members of the city council. My name is tony geraldie proud 30-year resident 680 elsa drive Laptime resident snowman county Here before you as a representative supervisor james gore appointed who appointed me to the snowman county fair board of directors To extend an invitation to our upcoming 80 30 annual snowman county fair The fair takes place august 1st through august 11th The theme of this year's fair is really exciting Back to our roots and cowboy boots, which is Kind of a throwback to the days of Country western and that's it's a great theme and it's going to continue on with the hall of flowers I took a peek at the hall of flowers today. It's coming along really nice We're going to have one of the best hall of flowers in Many years. I know that's a favorite of fair goers and that's really really exciting I want to thank council and the city staff on the really exciting Cali drive that will take place on sunday morning Sunday the fourth at 10 a.m. Let's throw back to our sunday 5th snowman county fair eight years ago. Yeah, and so that's it's going to be really exciting. It's going to be a hoot so and Along with all the new stuff that I just discussed Where you've got nightly entertainment. We've got a lone star the average white band Bands every single night returning favorites Events during the fair we've got our norcal brew fest the junior livestock auction 4h and ffa kids proudly displaying their animals throughout the fair We've got great fair food We'll have the lobster corn dogs and the crispy cream cheeseburgers The great carnival rides The rodeo demolition derby. We've got three nights of monster trucks Santa Rosa Day is thursday august 8th and if We'd love to have you in the winter circle race three that is the santa rosa horse race Again, that's thursday august 8th come for lunch Enjoy the fair. I'll see you at the winter circle I know fair staff or i'm sorry city staff is most likely to receive materials to Help you thoroughly enjoy the fair And we look forward to having having everyone come out and look forward to seeing you at the fair. Thank you Thank you, tony. You're the first public commenter at this hour that actually generated hoots from the city council So congratulations tony and with that meeting adjourn