 Okay, we'll call to order the June 25th meeting of the Santa Rosa City Council Announcement a roll call madam city clerk or deputy city clerk Let the record show that all council members are present Thank you Madam city attorney closed session report out Yes, the council met in closed session this afternoon on item 2.1 and gave direction to staff Great. Thank you. No proclamations Mr.. City manager. Do we have a staff briefing? No staff briefing this evening. Okay, Mr.. City manager. Do you have a report this evening? I do not have a report this evening. Madam city attorney. What about you? I do not either. Thank you rolling through it council any statements of abstentia? seen Mr.. Sorry Mary if there is a decision on the after the interviews this afternoon I'll be abstaining from that decision. There will not be we have more interviews on July 16th. I believe okay. Thank you See none. Okay Mayor council members reports Anyone have any information they'd like to share Mr.. Tibbets I do. Thank you. Mr.. Mayor. I just have a quick update on the renewal enterprise district I will be serving as the vice chair on that body Representing the city and I'm looking forward to that The other thing going on is we are currently in the process of selecting an executive director To run that jpa and hopefully there'll be announcement Over the course of the next couple of weeks The other request I want to make here today is a as a request for consideration of a future agenda item And I brought it up here before during the budget process and that was surrounding Contracting with a local entity to provide a homeless service attorney In my line of work. I'm coming across a lot of people in our community who are clearly Eligible for social security disability benefits who also And if they had legal assistance They would be able to actually get those benefits and go through the appeals process that sometimes I can prematurely Shut them down So I was hoping that somebody would be willing to second it we could have a discussion about it And it's not necessarily for this year's budget But at least making sure that it it's in that what do we call it the tier four consideration For going forward. I also think it'll really complement our efforts around housing first nicely May I ask a question Through the mayor Is this funding for another entity? For example, we might have funded legal aid for this or is this to have someone in house This would I mean I I prefer contracting outside of The city. I think legal aid would be an excellent and eligible Non-profit to be able to provide that service just like our housing services attorney But it could be that could be part of the discussion. I just think that we should really investigate the merits of having this position Any other questions or someone is there someone who'd like to second that I'll give you the second Okay, we have motion a second and then we'll get that on a future agenda for further discussion. Thank you Any else mr. Tibbetts Okay, any other council member reports mr. Reiss mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor. Uh yesterday the Measure m reauthorization ad hoc committee met for Sonoma county transportation authority As this council knows, uh, that entity is exploring the options of going for re-approval in november of 2020 The initial numbers for that from the registrar's office Is that it'll cost to have that item on the agenda or on the uh ballot for folks countywide somewhere between $559,000 and $879,000 Which would mean if we do move forward and the measure lost again at the measure lost The cost to Santa Rosa could be as much as almost $200,000. So it's something that we're keeping an eye on as we explore We completed the rfp to put out there for polling And some Issue work from a consultant That'll be going out a little bit later this month and i'll keep everybody Focused on that. We also looked at a summary of road pavement backlog that we have Around Sonoma county based on getting to an 85 pc i As you all know, we actually do 75 for this county, but 85 is the number from MTC for Santa Rosa We are looking at about a 308 million dollar backlog Which is at least not the billion dollar backlog that the county of Sonoma has as well So i'll keep everybody posted that moves forward, but just you know that the rfp Has gone out. We'll be hearing those proposals and you'll hear a lot more about this measure in the coming months Great. Thank you. Anyone else have anything to report? Seeing none Item 12 approval minutes. We have none consent item. Mr. McGlynn Yes Item 13.1 resolution agreement between the city of santa rosa and sonoma water to continue the creek stewardship program Through fiscal year 24 2024 2025 item 13.2 resolution appropriations Limit fiscal year 2019 20 Item 13.3 resolution approved purchase order 159 531 prefabricated restroom madden industrial craftsmen incorporated Item 13.4 resolution adoption of memorandum of understanding unit 5 police officers represented by the police The santa rosa police officer association effective july 1 2019 through june 30 2020 Item 13.5 resolution approval pavement restoration funding agreement within the tubs fire burn area item 13.6 resolution contract award to Care evaluators ink to provide functional assessments to determine eligible Eligibility for 88 pair of transit services item 13.7 resolution interagency operations agreement with sonoma county junior college district Council any questions for staff on the consent calendar? Mr. Allbares Thank you. We're not a question just a comment related to 13.3 related to the portal loo Just for clarification. This is not a decision on where it's going to go This was only a decision on the purchase. I believe that was allocated Before and this is only the purchase. I don't know some questions from the public and this is only related to the purchase That is correct. Thank you Any other questions for staff Seeing then we have two cards item 13.3 georgia bear tea Yeah, I try to make this one as quick as I can I got a lot of cards up there with you know, um I just I feel like this is an absolute no-brainer You know, I mean whether or not we should have a public restroom You know absolutely and uh and unequivocally I think we should Um, I think that it just fulfills a very very basic human need for people And I just want to come up here. You all are considering it. You want input from the public? That's me That's a lot of people in this room and I for one I represent. I think a very substantial portion of Of the sentiment of santa rosa that absolutely wants you to do this. Please do it I agree. Thank you and georgia also there for a 13.4 on the mo you Reset me there on that guy Yeah, go ahead reset. Thank you Um, yeah, so this is uh, this is the mo for the for the police department Right now. I think uh, I think police take a lot of flak You know, they get a lot of flak in the news. They get a lot of flak in santa rosa For their treatment. They get a lot of flak for me, you know, uh for their treatment of homeless in the past I found it, you know, when they when they're forced to clean up encampments You know, it's a human rights violation and someone's gotta violate those human rights And it ends up being police officers, but I have been thinking about it Because that's what you do when you're in a democracy and I don't know if it's fair for the police to take that flak You know, they've got a job to do right now the job the police do Is uh is catch criminals, you know, that's what they're equipped to do Right and they get about a third of our general fund To do it now if you get about a third of the general fund Then we're probably going to expect you to do about a third of the work Of uh of keeping our city together, right now if your job is to catch criminals And the third of the available work that they're involved in running the city Is not of that nature Then we're asking you to do something that you don't have the tools to do and then getting angry with you when you fail Now that doesn't seem like a situation that a city that is, you know, ensure that's what a government does It creates a set of circumstances that are possible to succeed in And then expects that of the people that it puts in those circumstances Now we're expecting the police to do something that they don't have the tools to do Right that they don't have the tools to accomplish and not only that I'm looking at this memorandum of understanding and in article 11 It says the city reserves, retains and invests with any management rights not expressly granted to the association by the By this agreement right now these rights include a Ability to determine and modify the organization of the city government and its constituent units The right to determine the nature standard levels and mode of delivery of city services Right and the right to determine the methods means number and kinds of personnel By which services are provided So if we have a homeless problem and every single piece of available literature Every single study that you all personally have put together including in 2014 a policymaker's guide to ending homelessness in Sonoma county Every single one of those studies says in absolutely unequivocal language that using law enforcement to break up home and encampments Is not effective and should not be done breaks the law Breaks the the conditions under which you are given funding to solve homelessness and you're still asking it of these people And you have every right every tool and every method at your disposal to change Who you're asking to do this job? What they have all of the funding you can take Different people you can give this to a different job Right, you can give this to somebody with the tools to fix it and you don't do that Right, the police don't like it and neither do we Thank you director and seeley item 13.3 Good afternoon mayor and council And seeley representing concerned citizens for santa rosa Item 13.3 about the so-called portland lou Is one of the most humane things that's been on your agenda in recent months We have been looking for some kind of relief for The homeless population for the downtown shoppers for The police For for business owners in Having some place where people can use a bathroom. I do hope you support this. Thank you very much Thank you, ann Those are all the cards we have for today. Uh, mr. Rice mayor. You have this item I will move items 13.1 through 13.7 and wave further reading of the text second We have a motion to second any additional discussion seeing none your votes, please And that passes unanimously. Thank you Not yet being five o'clock. We'll skip to item 15.1. Mr. McGlynn 15.1 report amendment to measure o implementation plan for all programs to align with the fiscal year 2019-20 adopted budget chuck mcbride chief financial officer presenting Good evening honorable mayor vice mayor and members of the council This is the measure o implementation plan for fiscal year 1920 So currently A little bit of history of this and implementation plan was created for measure o in 2004 To ally the funding for the three measure programs police fire and violence prevention The plan shows measure programs with the current year budget We also give you a forecast out through 24 25, which is the expiration of the measure o quarter cent sales tax Any changes to the plan and implementation of this plan requires six affirmative votes by the by the city council Give me that a little closer here so we can hear a little bit. Absolutely there. Is that better? Proposed for tonight. There are no significant changes to measure o from the from the current fiscal year Most of it is going to be escalators that you're going to see in major items Very similar to what you saw with the annual budget for the city The expenditures have been updated to reflect the adopted 1920 budget and current forecast assumptions So we'll talk about the individual departments starting with fire fire department Supports 10 full-time equivalent firefighters under under measure o And they also provide some of the paramedic incentives for 15 fds within this within the fire department So salaries for the fire department. It's a very similar story to what you saw In the city wide budget salaries up by about 17 percent three hundred seven thousand dollars That's primarily due to waiver negotiations that we conducted with the bargaining units that had been out of Out of contract for for a number of years So this is kind of a catch up and resetting that baseline It's mostly what's driving that increase in salaries. The benefits did not go up. They stayed basically flat And part of that again was some benefit that the city got out of the negotiations In some positive movements that we saw in the calvars health care used by the firefighters Services and supplies stayed relatively flat minor increase and that was due primarily to additional costs that we saw in vehicle repair and replacement And then that administration cost that you will see in each of those That's a general admin overhead that we talked about during the budget process And that's what we charge out to departments for general fund services And then you see that final item there is the transfer out for debt and that's uh, that's debt service on fire station five police department again Primarily a status quo budget with escalators. This budget supports 19 fte officers From mezzurro salaries for the officers went up marginally went up by about four percent So there's a modest bump in in their salaries that they're more in line with what we saw with the rest of the city Benefits went up a little bit under three percent Um Services and supplies are up modestly by twelve thousand dollars. That's again Same common as the fire department. That's primarily due to Costs for vehicle replacement and repair Administration fee went down a bit and then the radio upgrade That's that was one time money that the that the council had Had affirmed for the police department for the new radio upgrade that they'll be conducting There was also some other monies put into that program for mother funding sources during the budget adoption Finally, we have violence prevention. Uh, this this supports nine full-time equivalent positions Salaries went up modestly a little bit under four percent again same experience that we're seeing citywide Benefits went up a little bit About 17 percent, but what we see here benefits with a small small group like that This is primarily people moving from uh from single to a family health plan So there's an additional cost with that services and supplies. Uh, basically stayed Stayed level We did have a hundred and fifty thousand dollar increase in measure o funding for the choice grant program Some of that is due to some additional revenue bump that we saw in measure o this year And they're also using some of their fund balance to increase To increase an increasing need for those choice grants and then the administration cost that we talked about those Stayed basically flat for violence prevention So our recommendation tonight, uh, is is the measure o citizen oversight committee has reviewed and approved the measure o Implementation plan on april 25th and recommends that the uh, that the plan be adopted I also have the subject matter experts here tonight the fire chief the police chief jason carter here Is as well as net miners sitting next to me who's the vice chair for the committee And I believe we have a couple other measure o committee members. Uh, that are that are here in the chambers. So Uh, this point, um, I will ask for questions from councils Thank you for the presentation that did you want to say anything about the oversight and what your conversations were like My name is event minor And I am the vice chair of the measure o citizens oversight committee The mission of the oversight committee is to ensure that all revenue received from the vote approved Transaction and use tax are only spent on permissible uses as outlined ordinance 3680 Today i'm here on the behalf of the committee to first say thank you city council for your hard work to ensure that our city Is safe fund and enjoyable place to live Second thank you to all the city departments that are providing the public safety services and programs funded by measure o Their hard work and due diligence is well appreciating three Thank you to the voters for passing the sales tax measure for these services And I just want to remind everyone that the public and the measure o sunset due date is 2025 and the services and programs that is provided by measure o Will no longer be funded. So please reinstate and keep us in mind as you're moving forward. Thank you Thank you vic council. Do you have any questions for any staff? Miss comes my first question is I notice in the report that it The slides don't specifically say above or below the baseline For each of the departments funding level I'm assuming none of them are below the baseline, but can you explain to me above or below baseline for each of the departments? Yeah, so so the baselines are Are delineated I think by the ordinance for each of the departments. So if you think back to we did the budget last week We actually did a computation all fire and police were well above their baselines And what was the percentage above baseline that fire was? I do not recall top my head Excuse me. I don't recall if top my head how far above it. They were okay, so When this comes it's good for us to see that again. I think that's my opinion. So I'd like to have that again Just because that sort of keeps it in the front of my mind Where we are with relation to baseline if we're close cutting it closer if we've got some room to wiggle With regard to the oversight committee if I may Ms. Meyer, thank you so much for your service and thank you for being here Can the people who are with you the subcommittee who are here today also like raise their hand so we can see who they are Thank you very much for your service and for being here. I really appreciate it In the context of the report you have given us Is this only a review of the dollars or did you also do a review of the programs? We took a look at the paperwork that was sent to us by each entity and we asked questions in regards to We had a little more in-depth conversation about the changes and Departments they did answer our questions. So we looked at a little bit of both Okay Did you look at or evaluate in any way the successes of the program? Did they give you data on? Weather programs for example in the violence prevention program did they give you data? Yes, they did the success great Did they did you have for them any comments for improvement or comments on the programs? No, we just asked our questions in relation to the information that we had okay Um I will mention to you since you're here that if asked the council could give you broader authority to provide oversight over more aspects of this program So i'm wondering if you had any conversation about coming back to the council with regard to providing Um More oversight questions more Involvement in the direction of the programs. Did you have any conversations about that? Well, I I know that our chair did Ask each of us to try to get to know each department head and which I have done I've been meeting with each of the fire department and finding out a little bit more in relation to this particular thing And so the onus is on us and it's up to us to do it and so if you want to know more we can get more okay I'm also wondering we have had a change of name in the last few years for the violence prevention program Do you believe that the program Is targeted toward the most the aspects of violence in our community? Do you do believe did has anyone presented to you that this is where the most violence is for example the the program seems to target gang violence as opposed to say domestic violence or violence against women So i'm wondering if they discussed with you why it is targeted in the way it is since it is a general violence prevention And I appreciate these are not questions you got in advance. I Appreciate that. Well, I will definitely say I do other work in the community and based on the Gang prevention, I do know some of the work that they do in the community And I would have to say yes It does help and it does help prevent and it does direct Is it's programs to the necessary public? And so it does make a difference. So you feel that the gang aspect makes a difference Yes, I do. But do you feel that the violence in our community is predominantly gang violence? No, it depends on the area that you're in in the city So Take rolls in for example It's still gang violence over there and then also over we recently had the checkups part so Because of the aspects and where we are in our community it will help a great deal because they provide particular programs that are in those specific areas Thank you very much again. I want to thank you for your service It isn't easy to be on boards and commissions and to do the background work that it takes to develop the relationship So i'm grateful for you that you are doing that for us. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor. I actually I just wanted to quickly answer councilmember combs question I do happen to have my notes in front of me from the the budget session From from last week police was 0.9 million over the baseline at 34.3 of the budget fire was 2.8 million over their baseline at 23.7 and then violence prevention partnership was at its baseline making up 0.4 of the city budget Thank you very much for for having that information So we're well over a million dollars over two million dollars in one of the departments and nearly a million dollars over In one of the other departments. Is that what I heard you say? Thank you Any other questions mr. Alvarez? Thank mr. Mayor, mr. Mcbride During the budget process eliminating positions we eliminated. I think a halftime position in housing Community outreach specialists. I think that was dedicated to the former nrp And I think that was major all funded question is where was that? Savings allocated within the measure old budget Yeah, and to my memory we had eliminated the half of that position that was general fund Funded so I I understand the elimination was general fund not measure old fund Yeah, and I think the measure measure of dollars are still in this budget So if they wanted to hire that halftime position that's remaining in measure of they could Did you have something to add jason? No, okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you Any other questions miss flummy Thank you, mr. Mayor I'm curious if we could state for the the purpose of the public and it might be mr. Carter Might be needed down here. I'm wondering if we can state what the purpose of measure o Is as specifically as it pertains to the violence prevention partnership Mayor schwadhelm vice mayor rogers council members jason carter with the office of a community engagement, excuse me So the measure allocation is for our grant program Administration and also supports our gang prevention. We're just month in parent engagement month What is just for clarification. What is the mission of the violence prevention partnership? So we've had some evolution here be when it first started in 2003. It was mainly the preventative piece uh, excuse me the intervention piece but as uh The port of Sonoma was released in the early 2000s or late 2000s There was more of a public health approach to violence prevention. And so we adopted the community safety scorecard which has four Domains and 17 public health indicators And so we still do the intervention piece. We fund street outreach programs, etc But now we're all focusing on school readiness Student engagement and truancy prevention as well All right Great. Thank you. And can you describe your work with the measure oversight committee on selecting programs such as the scorecard And how you incorporate evidence-based Practice in making sure that our taxpayers are getting the most prevention and violence reduction for their their dollar so we are actually We haven't involved the citizens oversight committee in that process itself Uh from what we've been directed they approve our budget. And so moving forward We do have if you look in the implementation plan, we have a community safety scorecard update in fiscal year 2021 and what we'll be doing is Looking at different groups like the citizen oversight committee our policy committee operational teams Our neighborhood groups residents to inform us on what is a true healthy community So instead of just uh pigeonholing it to uh, just youth and gang violence We want to incorporate the youth and gang violence piece but spread that to what is a true healthy community in in the city, santa rosa And then additionally and i'm not sure if this Question is better for you or for mr. Mcbride, but it says on slide number seven the measure of citizen oversight committee reviewed and improved Measure o implementation plan on april 25th And i'm wondering if you could for the benefit of the public just quickly Summarize what that change is I think um, I think the only really changed that this stuck out in this budget was the increase in the choice grants Like I said at the beginning everything else that we saw on that was either approved by council before like that The increase for the radio infrastructure. Uh, the rest of it was was primarily just um Just the same changes that you saw within the city-wide budget. Thanks for the clarification Ms. Collins Thank you for the allowing the follow-up um And thank you for coming down to answer specific questions I'm sure that you are very well aware that I have a concern about one of the particular programs that is funded um it is a Recommendation of the american pediatric association that children under the age of 14 not be engaged in sparring They can do other activities related to boxing, but that we have a boxing program I understand that uh in the past our monies are in some way separated, but the sparring is not Has not been stopped. It's simply Using other monies to fund the sparring for children under the age of 14 I have significant concerns about our involvement in a program that can lead to head injury And i'm asking you if the citizens oversight board expressed if you asked them if they supported Having children under the age of 14 engaged in a sparring boxing program Was that were they engaged in that conversation? No, uh, not specifically, but we will be host Facilitating our grant review team made up of multiple stakeholders in our new cycle We'll begin january 1st of this upcoming calendar year For cycle 10. Okay, so I need to ask the city attorney if she can advise me In the course of this vote if I approve this item or or move this forward Does is there implicit in this my support of the boxing program Because I am approving the funding breakdown as it is My understanding is you will be approving the the funding for the remainder of the the calendar year Which would include the current Grant programs So I will repeat that I have significant concerns regarding The use of boxing sparring processes for anyone under the age of 14 that we have spoken with the Applicant who is funded for the boxing program and that while they are not directly using our money They are continuing to engage 14 year olds and under in sparring and that I cannot Approve at least part of this program's budget I don't know if it's possible to pull it out or not so that I can have a separate yes or no vote But I would not vote to move To move the budget forward as it stands because I cannot support Funding children under the age of 14 for head injury. Thank you any other questions Do we have any cards on this item? Mr. Sorier you have this item I do thank you, mayor I'll introduce a resolution of the council of the city santa rosa I'm ending the transaction and use tax and implementation plan for police fire and gang prevention intervention services and way further meeting of the text a second Any additional comments? Would you consider a friendly amendment to vote separately on the boxing program? All right your votes, please And that passes with six eyes one no councilmember combs voting. No. Thank you Item 15.2 mr. McGlynn Item 15.2 report award of professional services agreement with coastland civil engineering incorporated to perform fire code plan review and inspection technical assistance services ean heartage assistant fire marshal presenting Good evening mayor schwedhelm and council members. Thank you for uh, letting us present this to you tonight There it is So with the increased workloads and the new the increased new development that we continue to see in the in the city of santa rosa We at the fire department have had an increase in workload that we have had to find unique ways to offset impacts To our current staffing levels Which had brought us to a similar RFP for assistance that the building department Uses and works very well. We reached out and did the same kind of thing To try to maintain our commitments to turnaround times also to the The increased large significant projects such as high rises and future Cannabis industry with their new technologies and processes and requirements for Injuring service oversight on that. So we reached out after Our long-term plans exam are retired in 2018 to try to fill a fire protection engineer within the city And we were unsuccessful in finding qualified candidates so we underfilled that position with a plans exam or again and Are seeking fire protection engineering services for plan review Through this contract over the next five years allocating up to $800,000 for those services Those services we receive, you know through that RFP receive five applicants and through a weighted evaluation Coastal and came out on top We we gave priorities to experience and local knowledge as the higher weighted criteria that we were evaluating Um those candidates that we received So now so therefore Here we are today with an approved Contract with coastline to do that and we're here seeking approval for allocating $800,000 Over the next five years and i'm here to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you and counsel questions Seeing and do we have any cards on this item? This comes you have this item i am delighted to move this item I'm sorry. We don't have someone in-house, but i'm thrilled that we are doing it this way if we need to Um, and I think we need to so thank you for bringing this to us Uh resolution of the council the city of santa rosa approving a professional services agreement with coastline civil engineering incorporated For fire code plan review and inspection Technical assistance services and way further reading of the text second The motion is second any additional comments seeing none your votes, please And that passes unanimously. Thank you Tony is this two items no comments. Wow pretty good Mr. City manager 15.3 You're really you're gonna voice that item 15.3 Report amend urgency ordinance's resilient city rc combining district bill rose supervising plan are presenting Good evening. Mr. Mayor members of the council the item before the council this evening is an urgency ordinance And this is related to noise specifically Related to construction impacts in the rc combining districts the fire damaged areas As we all know in october of 2017 the city sustained significant damage to numerous residential and commercial structures due to wildfire Later that month october of 2017 the council promptly acted and adopted a number of ordinances The resilient city combining district These ordinances included numerous regulations all with the intent of expediting the rapid rebuild of the fire damaged area The city regulates noise in several guidance documents Chapter 17 in the municipal code limits the ambient noise levels in various zoning districts The general plan also has guidance it provides typical noise levels for construction And as I mentioned the resilient city Zoning ordinances also have noise regulations and the proposal tonight is to amend those zoning ordinances We're going to do kind of a team effort here I'm joined with by gabe osburn from the engineering development services department as well as bob oller And so at this point i'm going to turn it over to gabe Good afternoon mayor members of the council Excuse me as mr. Rose mentioned There i'm provided a little background and there are really two documents that govern noise in general And specifically as it's produced by construction activities And we have really two sections of the city code that pertain to this the first section is 17-16-030 And that really sets the ambient levels that occur in different zoning districts and the ambient level is essentially the background noise And then section 17-16-120 addresses the amount of noise that can go above and beyond the ambient level So we don't actually have a section that specifically addresses construction activity We do have a section that addresses machinery equipment pumps fans air conditioning apparatuses Those often have a tendency to run long term where construction is more of a short term noise But the city code does state that that cannot produce a noise at a property line that exceeds five decibels over the ambient level So the next chart was taken directly out of our zoning code As we can see r1 r2 those are your typical residential zoning areas. That's really in the rebuild area The bulk of activity has a tendency to occur which increases the ambient level at 7 a.m to 7 p.m And then as we can see the code section has the ambient level dropping from 7 p.m to 10 p.m And then it gets quieter at that point from 10 p.m to 7 a.m The general plan also addresses noise and it provides a little more detail about the construction activities And it determines construction activities to be a less than significant impact Mainly based on the fact that the noise is sporadic that construction is needed to meet a general goal And they're often governed by conditions of approval So typically when we have developments outside of the rebuild area Those go through some level of an entitlement process and we place conditions that control the hours in which the operation can occur from a construction standpoint So these tables actually come out of the general plan and they address some of the noise production that comes from various construction activities So as we can see here excavation foundation Erection and finishing there's equipment that goes into that a variety different equipment types that can produce those noise levels So as we were seeing ambient levels that were in the 50 to 60 range in the previous chart We can see that the construction activity actually produces noise levels that are well above and beyond that The general plan also gets into specific equipment And as we can see once again, we're getting in some situations all the way up to 100 decibels So we're really well above and what this really highlights is some inconsistencies unfortunately in the general plan in the city code Even from seven to seven under the normal working hours to do normal construction activities that are critical to the rebuild They are exceeding if we focus on the machinery section of the city code the ambient levels and they potentially could be looking at enforcement over that So what we wanted to do is actually proof this a bit and make sure that the general plan was consistent to what we're seeing in the field So i'd like to introduce bob oller. Bob oller is our quality control associate and he actually handles most of the coordination In the right-of-way side for the rebuild efforts and he'll talk a little bit about a study we performed as part of this process Great, thank you. Gabe. Good afternoon, mayor and council members in march of this year The engineering division Conducted a construction noise survey within the rc overlay district sampling various construction activities The noise level survey included the same type of construction equipment activities referenced in the city's general plan on the chart shown below The nearly 100 noise level samples of different construction activities were collected at different times of day To produce the typical noise level table shown on page 10 of the presentation In some samples ambient noise levels at 5 a.m Which is pre-construction time in coffee park were very near or exceeded the current city code requirements Noise level samples were typically taken at 50 feet from the construction activity So what we're looking at right here are the results of the survey that we took Those results fall in line with what the general plan noise level decibels are that were mentioned in the chart before What we have is is that equipment producing the highest noise levels were backup alarms that are associated with all types of equipment industrial lift trucks dump trucks excavators and delivery trucks some of the other larger Noise level equipment were construction trucks with line booby line or boom pumps Which are typically used in the early morning prior to the heat setting in on the day In prior to traffic building up on 101 Concrete trucks cannot sit With concrete in them for a very long period of time. So most of that work is done early morning um industrial lift trucks Produced high levels of noise as well as generators and pneumatic equipment In summary the noise levels of rebuilding activities are consistent with the general plan But higher than thresholds presented in the city code The decibel readings taking during during our noise study are consistent with industry standards associated with equipment used in the rebuild operations So what we did is part of the process and I think what we framed is the we do have the issue with basically the noise being produced For items that are really critical to the rebuild are exceeding the noise. So we basically knew we had to address this But when developing a policy we wanted to take a very comprehensive approach To ensure that we didn't get really too generous or too restrictive in certain areas So we really started this process probably about october of last year To really engage the community and better understand some of the concerns and to really look at some of the solutions That the community would want to see as part of this process So we typically we meet with the coffee strong block captain group on a monthly basis We meet with the fountain grove a block captain group for a period of time every other week And there was also a dedicated meeting in november 18 of 2018 That was held by mr. Corsi the mayor at the time to discuss sound and noise specifically with the fountain grove area So we really got a lot of good data out of that And although a lot of people understood that the construction was needed to facilitate the rebuild and they wanted to see that happen in a rapid fashion There was also some sensitivity that I want to get back to normal when I get into my home And I want to make sure that there are we can lessen the impacts and they were looking at creative ways Where we could potentially lessen those impacts, but not actually really pinch down on the rebuild and allow it to occur in a rapid fashion So what we actually found as part of that community engagement Or as most of the noise concerns were a product of some construction activity that happened towards the end of the construction Season of last year and that's typically around september of october So at that point there were a lot of permits that were in the system and a lot of permits that were under construction And we had an issue with foundation pours So typically one needs to pour their foundation prior to the rain And if they don't it can be more weather dependent and they're susceptible to longer delays So at that time there was a bit of a pinch on concrete delivery So concrete is one of the items that must be locally sourced It can't be brought in from out of the area and as mr. Oller mentioned they need Basically predictable delivery times So what we were running into is people were actually taking concrete deliveries very early in the morning in some situations 4 a.m To avoid significant three to four week delays in the pouring of their foundation to be able to meet those windows And the concrete pour does require a continuous running pump and it also has backup alarms So it has a tendency to impact people in the surrounding area So based on that we wanted to Basically develop a program that allows some flexibility in the time to account for those events that could determine to have a Significant impact to the overall construction of a unit So the program we developed was to essentially exempt the rebuild activities from enforcement under the noise ordinance And that's mainly because we have a problem with the code section We understand that that will have to be fixed outside of the rebuild area We'll probably use the general praying process to dive into that a bit deeper And we want to basically overlap the exemption with specific hours of operation So we're essentially saying construction should be commencing from 7 a.m. To 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday And if we determine and it actually is the city manager his or her designee makes the determination That a certain event can basically cause a significant delay and we're not talking about hours or days We're talking about weeks and that certain event may be allowed within those windows of basically 5 a.m To 7 a.m. Or the window of 7 p.m. To 9 p.m So I do want to stress that it is only going to be certain activities It won't be anything that supports the rebuild And for those activities are determined. There'll be a healthy amount of outreach to the construction community the residents in the area so they understand what those items are In addition if it occurs early because that was some of the problems from the neighboring community A lot of what we've heard is that I'd be okay with it if I was notified So we are layering on a noticing requirement How that will look? We'll allow that to morph over time. It's going to have to be adaptive to different situations We typically go with 150 foot radius of occupied lots adjacent to the construction noise We have talked about sandwich boards. We have talked about door hangers We want to basically create a self certification process So the contractor will have to show that they perform the appropriate notification 48 hours in advance We'll expect photographic evidence of that email to us and that will be the date stamp And we are proposing some level of enforcement and that typically takes the form of Re-inspection fees and they're typically small. They're in the $50 range We will be if we have repeat issues We can potentially exempt contractors from performing early and they're essentially taken out of the queue We hope that that doesn't happen or we're not envisioning that What we're finding is that the rebuild processes are really drilled down. We're getting more coordination And not as many things are happening in that So the purpose of this just to stress again is to correct the issues in the code So we're not enforcing but also be nimble enough to that if we experience problems towards at the end of this year When people are on the two-year mark from an insurance issue to rebuild We want to make sure we have flexibility to give a little more time to do that So at this point I will hand the presentation back over to mr. Rose He will talk about the sequel exemptions and bring it to a closure Thank you game So as a discretionary action this project is subject to the california environmental quality act or sequa sequa provides for several exemptions. They're all related to Working on projects that are a result of a disaster or a declared emergency. And so these are indicated on this slide With regard to the benefits The proposal will allow additional flexibility in the rebuild of the fire damage homes It is also intended to allow for a quicker rebuild. So the idea being that whereas you will have Some additional noise on a day-to-day basis The overall construction time will be decreased because you can get essentially more hours in the day And then lastly it will alleviate staff time dedicated to noise complaints So in conclusion the planning and economic development department recommends that the council amend section 20-28 point 1 0 0 resilient city combining district to exempt construction activities associated with the rebuilding efforts from adherence to the city's noise ordinance as described in chapter 17-16 of the city code And establish specific construction hours that may be modified by the city manager when needed to support a timely rebuilding process For those parts of the city of santa rosa most severely impacted by the tubs and nuns fire fires of october 2017 That concludes the staff presentation. We'd be happy to answer any questions Great. Thank you for that presentation. I just want to start out by complimenting specifically bob and gabe having attended many of those community conversations about this topic, you know, clearly it's not a Black and white issue, but the way you've engaged with members specifically most my Involvement has been through the coffee park, but actually talking listen and brainstorming. It's not telling I really appreciate your methodology and that fact that you're there and you've been there from the beginning So thank you so much Questions from council mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor if you could go back to slide 13 just for a second I want to make sure i'm translating here and understanding correctly No one will be will be permitted To do construction activities between 9 p.m. And 5 a.m period And if they choose to do it if they're approved to do it between 5 a.m. And 7 Or 7 p.m. And 9 they have to do the 48 hour noticing. Is that correct? That is correct and just to differentiate between Exterior construction activities in interior because what's important to note Is that the sound is produced typically by exterior construction activities? So when a home is closed in and someone is basically laying tile inside and it doesn't impact a neighbor That's really exempted out of this So typically roofing framing things of that nature, but you're absolutely correct That is the that is the requirement of notification in those windows and we're not allowing it from 9 p.m To 5 a.m. I appreciate that and then the Enforcibility you talked a little bit about you mentioned the fee Is that fee on the reoccupant of the home? You said it's about 50 dollars It is yes, and it typically applies to the contractor So what we deal with in in right-of-way violations in general We do have a fine enforcement as part of that And then typically our next level of progressive enforcement would be stop work Because the action was already done So what we're hoping is yes, the fee gets attention We don't want it high enough that that fee is then transferred over to the property owner And we're very transparent with the property owners about the fact that there is a fine in this particular situation And once again that was a desire on there And so the contractor has to pay that and then as I mentioned before the bill We would have the ability to essentially say on a site by site You're really not eligible to perform that work because you're not coordinating with the neighboring Property owners well And I really appreciate that that was going to be my next question was whether or not that fee was potentially passed through To the person who's trying to reconstruct their home I appreciate the clarification that it actually would end up on Hopefully end up on the contractor who created the offense. Thank you Other questions council mr. Tibbetz Thank you, mayor Gabe quick question. I you know in reading the ordinance. I didn't see a an expiration date on this Does that am I to assume that this expires with the expiration of the rc combining district? If I recall that has an expiration date or we renew it And when is that that is correct? So basically what we're trying to do is anything associated with the rebuild We're trying to attach that to the rc overlay The the need for that to extend likely will exist We'll track that as it goes along with the development of activity and what we need to extend at some point Likely at that point you get into a discussion about what should stay and what can come off Something like this will likely stay as long as the construction activity stays That's our general desire to see that actually be applied to the last home that's built if needed We get to a point where the impact doesn't necessarily exist in the same way because of the volume drops So that will be analyzed as we move along, but did you know off the top of your head? And it's okay if you don't but when is the that expiration or renewal? I should say Uh, it's expected to come forward Not sure that's all right. The reason why I bring it up is because it's my understanding and it could be wrong But a lot of the times foundation laying is really big in the kind of the summer dry months It's not a big wet month thing and what i'm kind of Reading into this is that we're really trying to accommodate concrete yes other things as well, but The reason why I ask about expiration is You know, I think you know how loud it may make sense to look at some of these Regulations going into the school year when it's also rainy people are Maybe a little bit more Uptight because work school, etc. And we're not laying concrete anyways I might be interested in seeing that i'm not saying that We need to do that just yet. I just air it out here for my colleagues to hear and for you as well I think you know and the what it really boils down to here is that You know One person's inconvenience should not extend the timeline of somebody else's crisis And I think it gets all too often easy to forget that people rebuilding are still going through their own crisis in some fashion But I will want us to to track this significantly because I think it is going to have a very Strong negative impact on residents who have moved back in or who are in homes there currently And mr. Mayor do have that time. It's 2020 october 9th 2020 Great. Thank you. Ms. Fleming Thank you, mr. Mayor, and thank you gentlemen. Um, I'm wondering if you can clarify the The designee or the city manager I'm imagining that if somebody is experiencing a noise violation at 4 30 in the morning that Sean wiglin, you don't want us to call you So I was hoping that you could elaborate on that because a lot of people really are oh, you do want them to call you There there will be some clarity around who the number to call is but again It will have a complaint system the complaint system works as it normally is That's that's an enforcement Capability and we get those to bob and his team get that out right away. So mr. Aller will be Coordinating the complaints the group the crescent will coming from me to me or my designee will be about The opportunity to extend and what are the circumstances creating the potential window to extend So the extension will happen through the city manager or designee the complaint process will happen through bob and his team Okay, thank you. So we won't be complaining directly to you, but it will be made clear And they are welcome to complain directly to the city manager though. Well, I do regularly but I meant about this so But we'll we'll make it clear And also i'm wondering if In in your estimation a warning first and then a 50 dollar fine Is going to be significant enough because what we're not hoping for we don't really want 50 dollars What we really want it's like a parking ticket. We really want Our contractors not to to do it So i'm wondering if you if you it's your belief that this will be a deterrent Well, I think what we'll have to see is like like anything else in the rebuild will have to try and be nimble enough to correct What we've seen on other fronts is the fine does correct So we typically enforce right of way lumber in the right of way material storage in the right of way And the fine as they add up has a tendency 50 dollars can turn into three dollars to get some attention What we've seen is the problem is not nearly as bad as it was last year So the industry as itself has kind of corrected a little bit There's more courtesy The reason we're pushing this forward now is we're really going to have more occupancies than we've had thus far So we're going to have more people that are a bit more concerned about noise What we're willing to do is try it if it doesn't will correct And we'll figure out a way to then elevate that enforcement from a progressive standpoint that then ends up in the result Because you're absolutely correct. We don't want to charge a fine. We just actually want to ensure that that courtesy exists and that people are properly notified Great. Thank you miss gomes I I appreciate the work you've done on this and the outreach that you've done I am surprised we are doing it in this way So if you don't mind I'd like to sort of explore where you explored and how we ended up at this proposal Is Since we are looking at specific or certain events for example placing concrete Why would we not Do this on a case by case basis and have there be for example a waiver process that we authorized the department to approve with notice Rather than do an ordinance where we changed the policy to 5 a.m. In this sort of wholesale manner Well, so one of the challenges is from an enforcement standpoint how the city code is worded right now is that we can enforce from the construction noises That we're seeing in the middle of the day because they are exceeding the ambient levels And that's not a situation We want to put the contractors in because that is needed So we needed to take that piece out of it and that was really highlighted by the community because we were saying from a noise ordinance standpoint They'd have to adhere to it. So it's really correcting that enforcement issue. So that's one piece. That's one piece Yeah, so the other piece that we were really trying to tackle is exactly that how do you kind of put a variance process in place For the issues that are really presented today that we know are going to be an issue tomorrow And that's really what we do and from a community outreach standpoint I think I failed to mention that we actually deal with the builders exchange and the contractors on a monthly basis So what we're trying to gauge is not don't let me know it's an issue tomorrow Let's see if we can game plan it out and figure out what's going to be an issue in the future So the variance process really is essentially what we're attempting to give to the city manager His or her designee to essentially say not really on a case by case But does this activity constitute something that would need to happen early to not delay the overall rebuild Because typically what we're seeing is it isn't really a case by case It's a it's a problem with concrete and affects everyone It just doesn't affect one lot and we didn't necessarily want to create that for someone that just got behind Because that's part of it too We wanted just to be a real issue that and we knew existed and we wanted to create a mechanism for it Because many people are very sensitive about that time frame. Can can we be clear that this is about concrete only? So basically our our plan moving forward is to basically give The ability to make the determination and then once that determination is made It's going to be based on a variety of different outreach channels. So we need to understand there's an issue We're going to deal with the community regarding that we're going to deal with the builder community regarding that So there has to be a determination that's made and then once there is there has to be a way to outreach that So people need to clearly know that it's only about concrete pours So they need to understand that up front. So in most of the community engagement because that is a very good question And that did come up. So how do we know that that activity is approved to do it? So we are continually Meeting with the neighborhood groups. We're going to continually have those discussions We're going to use our normal outreach channel So they're well aware of that decision prior to running in a situation where they're questioning that that individual can do it next to them But we are looking for some flexibility because things are discoverable as we go through this journey together And then we're you know, we're struggling sometimes to find time and bandwidth to get this in front of the council to remedy a situation That needs remedied really quickly. So we are asking some flexibility. So it's not just concrete pours It says we're able to identify a particular sorts of circumstance that have A a trend associated with them and be nimble enough to address those issues in the field instead of We know our posting requirements getting them in front of council getting the staff report together It allows us some flexibility to address those issues as they arise Can I guess this is a city attorney real relative question? Can we differentiate between homeowner rebuilds And speculative housing or new construction in this area So could we Word this in such a way that we are facilitating rebuilds But that it does not apply to new construction in the areas From a legal to do right from a legal perspective, you know, is there a rational basis to to distinguish between owner builder and a A developer that does not have a buyer in in hand Um, I'm not I think that's a little bit difficult to make that distinction. Uh, it's it may be possible The question I would ask would be that an owner builder is going to have to live with their neighbors But a speculative housing builder doesn't have to live in the neighborhood So that to me is a significant distinction when you're when you're doing something that affects your neighbors, right? And and uh, also depending on I don't know the percentages of construction between owner builders and And when I use the term owner builder, I I understand that that's a different term when you're actually getting a permit versus I'm using it more generically that if if the um If the owner has either building himself or has hired the contractor I don't know what the percentages are. So I don't know what the difference would be in terms of the impact Overall, we would need to if that would be the council's request We would need to table the item and come back with a more full report on on on that particular option We we That's not been the task at hand the task at hand had been approaching rebuild We haven't had that conversation But if council so wished us to go back and follow up and and look at that particular item We're happy to do so. Can you also clarify for me does this apply only to single family residences? Actually what we're targeting is any redevelopment within the RC area. So there are multi-family units in that continues that also concerns me I'm having yeah If I can just add maybe a little additional information I think Gabe mentioned this but when we do discretionary projects like subdivisions and remember we're Basically rebuilding subdivisions one lot at a time or with some builders multiple lots But essentially it's one at a time when we do those larger scale subdivisions We can control these conditions because we have discretion and we don't have that in this case. These are ministerial permits. So This is not an unusual activity to condition projects like this It's just that in these instances unless we have discretion. We have no mechanism to do it I am eager to give you discretion to do this I am not eager to give you discretion to do this Whole sale throughout the area for anybody who wants to build anything there It concerns me to not prioritize homeowners rebuilds And I would really like to see that be an element of this Again if if if council wants us to take this back where we can we can look at that particular issue and amend What kind of delay do you think that would I can't we I mean we're looking at a different set of data and we'd have to analyze that data and understand that So I'm hearing that we want to Talk about enforcement My personal Sitting here my personal experience with our noise enforcement is that it is not very effective And so I'm trying to sort out How we ensure that we More effectively enforce the noise ordinance than we did for example with boating Where noise ordinance violations continued and continued and continued, but we we said they had violations They said they had violations work did not ever stop So it really concerns me that we're loosening a noise ordinance that we don't seem to me to enforce very effectively Can you address for me how we Uh why you think That this would be different that somebody wouldn't just order Concrete when they wanted it and let it happen at $50 doesn't seem to me to be a particular deterrent It feels it feels I mean, I don't know you know houses cost an awful lot We have people come in here and argue about a thousand dollars, but we don't ever have anybody come in here and argue about 50 So to address the concern concerns about the noise enforcement. It is challenging And essentially From a decibel standpoint you have to have a decibel meter and you have to make a determination that it is exceeding the ambient noise So as part of this process we researched what a lot of jurisdictions do on the construction side And it's fairly typical in a noise ordinance to exempt construction and then overlap it with hours of operation Hours of operation are much easier to inspect So if we're saying that you can't perform construction activities, we can conduct inspections and we can witness that It gets us out of the argument over the level of sound being performed by the construction activity So we do think that that will be easier to enforce And once again, I will reinforce we have not seen the concrete pours outside of the pinch that occurred last year occur early on So we're not hearing those same concerns from the community I think there's a lot of reasons for that the development community like everyone else had to get a program that They could get running and they have and it is able to work into the normal working hours So once again, we just want to be nimble enough that this comes up and we can handle in the in basically a comprehensive fashion We want a solution that it lets us react to that for whatever reason And it could very well be that it becomes framing and it becomes framing in the heat So that's the reason for allowing people to go a little later So those are some of the components that we've we've thought about in the future that might be a problem And we just want to make sure that there's a solution in place to address them I'm having more trouble with the 5 a.m. To 7 a.m. Time than I am with the time 10 9 p.m That may be a reflection of my own hours I I have one other question and I'm trying to locate where it is on my sheet because I knew I had it And it was a question for the city attorney I'm going to have to go Do you believe that The resolution as stated is clear about The linkage So that there is a timeout that it has to be extended past I'm concerned that the expiration is very unclear The I thought that the ordinance that we're attaching to goes for five years So i'm trying to figure out In terms of the expiration of the entire rc zoning That this is in fact tied to the entire rc in a way that this expires when the rc expires Yes, you're comfortable with that. Yes. Okay. Thank you very much I hope I will listen to comment I have a lot of questions about for for I'm very curious to hear what the public has to say I know that we meet with builders and that you hear from builders regularly I hear from people who are upset about noise regularly Um, so we we don't all hear from the same same groups Um, I am very interested in how we differentiate between homeowner rebuilds and speculative housing On this one, so I will be interested in hearing that from the public and also from my colleagues Council any additional questions for staff? Okay, we have a couple cards here first card george uberte followed by reginald peombo So I just want to say I think I probably could have built a house in the time it took you all to discuss that We declared a municipal emergency in 2016 Regarding homelessness 2016 I don't know what the word emergency means to you But to everyone who's in a state of emergency It means that the priorities Regarding that emergency go to the top of their list Immediately now municipal declarations allow you to go circumvent municipal codes Right now that emergency has been in effect without interruption Since it was declared meaning everything that those guys just said was pointless and unnecessary There was absolutely no reason to go through any of that You already empowered yourself to circumvent these cones. All right, homelessness And homes are the same problem Right, you're all big big kids. You know that. All right, you know that all of that was unnecessary There's absolutely no reason for you to add another four weeks to the construction of homes because some Person doesn't like it's too bad Your this is an emergency situation that we are in All right, people's houses burnt down. All right, and we were in a state of emergency before that ever happened There's absolutely no excuse For that entire study to have even happened All right, now you want community input you can get it. All right people are going to come up here And they're going to tell you about what they want if they're unhappy You you don't know there's an emergency. I don't believe you Right, you're bad at playing dumb You're bad at it Why continue to fail? At being stupid. It's a dumb problem to have Right, it's an unnecessary one Right There was absolutely no reason for any of that All right now Emergencies are things you take seriously Take your job seriously and do it All right build homes Okay, 7 a.m. To 7 p.m. Really really I mean, I'm not the one who needs to break All right, the people with nowhere to live are the people in a state of emergency Need that emergency to be over. You're comfortable declaring it But you're not comfortable doing anything about it You know, I mean you're comfortable sitting there and listen to these guys talk about something that didn't need to happen I don't know why all right do your job That was ridiculous and it was pointless Absolutely, no reason for it to happen. It's crime stop it All right, grow up Thank you, george Reginald Pionbo followed by john allen ladies and gentlemen of the jury My name is reginald d. Pionbo I just made a fool of myself If you want to lift the microphone up we can barely hear you sir I know what this town really needs. Thank you, sir John allen followed by ron fiori Good afternoon, mr. Mayor and distinguished members of council My name is john allen chief operations officer of apm homes and a santa rosa resident Today before you is a revision to our current noise ordinance I urge you to pass and adopt the proposed noise ordinances. It relates to the fire rebuilds In the past year and a half since the 2017 tubs fire our communities both in santa rosa and sonoma county have recovered Additionally, we've been working hard to make sure that our communities are functioning professionally well With the two-year anniversary coming up this october it is imperative that we do all that we can to support fire survivors in the construction industry We need to get these homes completed And people back in their homes While it may be an inconvenience for some It is an inconvenience to our entire community Not to have our community members back in their homes and moving on to that last phase of recovery which is rebuilding their lives With an anticipated hot summer The temperatures will cause issues with concrete needing to be poured early in the mornings and evenings when temperatures are cool With high heat stress affecting workers Midday shutdowns may require the industry to start early and return in the afternoon When temperatures are acceptable for work With the rebuild being an urgency matter. I insist that extended work hours be an urgency as well I have personally met with the building community and the fire survivors Uh, I know that staff has done the same They've met with both building industry and fire survivors to get input on this And I believe that a mass consensus is that we want our homes Built back. Thank you very much Thank you, john Ron fiori followed by bob hanson um, I wasn't really expecting to speak but I'm a homeowner up in bound grove And I've been you know living up there throughout this entire time So I'd like to give a little bit of input I'm not really opposed to an extended time or for it. Um, just to give a little input about You know my experience I haven't really complained about people up there doing stuff. Um, and it seems like that Um, nobody really even follows the hourly time that's supposed to be put up there in the first place So I haven't seen you know a lot of Complaints at least that I know about or people following the rules Um, and then one thing I wanted to say about the concrete. It seems like the concrete is not even an issue It's not really a super loud process It only takes most of the time a day or two. So I think it's more of other things that I would like to not see is like nail guns Roofing hammers and stuff like that, you know with the early hours. I'm not too concerned about late times I'm just like Julie was talking about Mainly just like I think the most inconvenience is like heavy hammering or heavy equipment or banging on the ground or wood chippers which nobody's talked about wood chippers going Even on Sundays in late hours all the time. So And then the other thing is the 150 foot notice, you know like In found grab 150 feet is nothing you could hear 2,000 feet away. So Um, I don't know if something could be done. Maybe a little further about that. So That's all Anyways, I am looking forward to you know Moving along with the process too. So I'm just send input. So thank you. Thank you. Bob Hanson followed by Thomas Ells Good afternoon. It's my understanding the work day is sunrise to sunset Anything other than that is in the printer on my lights to feed my family Thank you Thank you. Bob Thomas Ells Honey, thank you. I just thought I would address a little bit about the distinctions between contracting Essentially, there's different parts one one part is owner builder who takes capital gains deduction When they occupy for two years or less and they pretty much know who that they're they know they're going to do that And there's contractors who build eight or more homes a year and there's contractors who build eight or less homes a year So there's kind of like three areas right there. You can kind of find some differentiation there if you wanted But mostly I want to step up because these these things pass by so quickly So sydney australia is in a climate emergency They had fruit on their trees That caught on fire and burned That's weird Actual fruit on the trees caught on fire and burned So we have funds that we're going to make available Not really for fire stuff yet Highway 37 three billion dollars eight hundred and eighty million dollars for the three and a half miles between 101 and And that bridge that's over by Over by the river over by the Sonoma era pedal pedal in the river sonoma river Pedal in the river. I think thank you eight hundred eighty million dollars. It's Three hundred seventy eight dollars a square foot Approximately approximately for the eight hundred eighty million dollars for that three and a half miles And we're developing a fire fund like the governor of 21 billion dollars And i'm not sure what that's going to do is that just going to sit there because it doesn't sit there It's gets invested They don't funds don't just Lay around and evolve like gold They're invested somewhere And those could be directed Both for the prevention of the pgne caused fires, which some of them. I'm not saying all of them Some of them were and and it would it would prove them to utilize those in ways to provide infrastructure that prevents Or limits the damages caused by the fire and the results so that maybe can be borrowed from that fund or you know at a very Accommodating rate or something but there are there are a lot of funds available and we should direct those things to Those funds to the kinds of things that can help us Both prevent and recover From the next fire. Thank you Thank you for those all the courage we have on this item Okay, why don't we bring it back to the council and council member fleming if you want to make a motion I'll have additional discussion after we get a motion on the floor Thank you, mayor I move an urgency ordinance of the city of the council of the city of santa rosa amending title 20 of the santa rosa city code amending section 20 28 dot 100 resilient city rc combining district to exempt construction activities associated with the rebuilding efforts From adherence to the city's noise ordinance as described in chapter 17 dash 16 of the city code and establish the city excuse me City code and establish specific construction hours that may be modified by the city manager when needed to support a timely rebuilding process For those parts of the city of santa rosa most severely impacted by the tubs and nuns fire of 20 october 2017 and wait for the reading of the text Okay, we have a motion to second and can i get clarification from the city Madam city attorney because this is an urgency ordinance am i correct that we're going to need five votes to pass this Yes, it does require five affirmative votes. Okay. Um, now that we have a motion Open up for any comments Miss combs Thank you. I I have a couple of comments first. I I have absolutely no problem with Voting in favor of the exempting construction from Certain parts of the noise ordinance because it's clearly necessary We are setting people up to be in violation and we absolutely need to change that And it's probably been needed to be changed in other regions of the city as well um Is it possible for us? uh To pass it now and come back and revisit the um The penalty after we've seen how that goes Um As as staff said, that's uh Absolutely what we do we go through a process figure out if we need to make adjustments and That but we like to take an approach that we the team has worked on and been successful with in the past and in ensuring A positive behavior in the in the field Can the city the city attorney can the city manager? Differentiate or make distinctions about the hours based on the applicant or does he have to do a generalized Change of the hours based on this ordinance Based on this ordinance, he would not be permitted to distinguish based on the character of the applicant He would look at the circumstances Of the request but not the not who the applicant is can if the applicant was a repeat offender Can the city manager use that as a reason? Um Based on the way the ordinance is written now not as not based on the way the ordinance is written now, okay I want to approve this. I want this to go forward. I think we probably do need this Can it come back to us with language corrections allowing the city manager to have some judgment about repeat offenders and about the um differentiation about the The applicant who is rebuilding their own home versus someone who is doing Uh speculative construction because a speculator doesn't necessarily need the same time Our urgency that someone who is out of their house now If that's a follow-up direction, I'm happy to entertain that direction. Okay. Um, would you Uh accept that as a friendly amendment that Even even as we move this forward that we request staff to come back With specific language to Amend this at some point in the future I'm willing to be vague and open about when that point in the future is but as a friendly amendment to bring it back So that the city manager has discretion with regard to repeat offense and with regard to Prioritizing this kind of waiver for individuals who are rebuilding their home that that they want to occupy I appreciate the intention of this the the vague the vague nature of it and also I think it's fairly complicated So I'm I'm going to not accept the friendly amendment although I appreciate the intention And when I spoke with staff about this issue earlier in the day They're pretty clear that they have a wide range of discretion for taking repeat offenders out of the rotation They haven't said as much here, but I I feel fairly confident that if it does come up again I I would support you in in And I would give you a second in getting this agendized and and addressed If I may ask, um, I'm hearing staff answer The same question two different ways Does the city manager or do we as a city in some other mechanism Have a way to manage repeat offenders I would say yes that there are ways to address repeat offenders But it is not through this particular provision So essentially and it's really in the vein of we want to try it We're not seeing the same level of repeat offenders So it's really in the vein of a progressive enforcement action, which we have in a lot of different arenas So essentially you'll go from a warning to a fine And then there's a stiffer penalty that goes along with that and as I mentioned previously that typically can go to a stop work Which we have the ability because people are not being consistent with the codes and requirements in place That's more of a stringent decision And it has more of an impact and then there's usually a corrective measure So that's usually enforcement to get something fixed where this is a penalty for behavior that occurred in the past So what we'll look at as part of this and I think we can commit to basically addressing it and figuring out what's not working Engaging with the community on what potentially isn't working getting the consensus again and coming back And then that's really been the pattern. Um, a lot of these we do have to get a program on the ground We are a little concerned about the level of activity that's occurring and we want to make sure we stay ahead of that But I think we we can put forward that commitment to say if there's problems with that and we are seeing repeat offenders And we're running into challenges We'll bring forward a modification that can focus on that particular piece Thank you very much and I want to repeat that. I am not looking at Not moving forward today. I'm looking at how do we modify for improvement in the future. Thank you Mr. Tivis Thank you, mayor I'm prepared to move this forward today as presented, you know, we'd rely on you a lot to Bring us information. It seems to me that you've done a really good job of getting due diligence and community input Um, I I am going to make a request though and the the mover can choose to keep it or not keep it Of course, but just that we get an update on either the august 27th or september 3rd meeting as part of the fire recovery and rebuild update Just what's going on with This construction, you know answering some of the questions that councilwoman combs had and and I think that we all have which is How is this impacting some of the folks who who currently live there? Are we seeing repeat offenders and then we can make those necessary adjustments gave that? I appreciate you said which is we're government sometimes It's best to go in try things that we think are going to work and be willing to say We got it wrong. Here's how we can tweak it to make it better So so can can we just amend that we'll provide a quarterly report during our that's fine So I having heard from two of my colleagues. I move except move as is with the Accept accepting a friendly amendment That would include a quarterly report on the status of this Adjustment. Thank you Mr. Rogers, you get with that also Any additional questions Yeah question comments, so do you have one Actually happen if I come back to you this is your initial motion. You know the final word on this one Mr. Sorry Thank you, mayor, and and this may fall into the concept of Revisiting in the in the next quarter, but it's it speaks my question speaks to the comms made by the neighbor and the notification It's possible because of the nature of the way sound travels usually That even if we were to expand the the communication level Greatly that it would not necessarily Change the The response on the community That I I have to believe that the more people that know that something's going on that It's going to be limited that there would be fewer complaints Is that something that we could also revisit in a few months as far as I think I think I think just as What we're what was being cited was what we do in coffee park I think what also was cited is that we're looking at each circumstance and analyzing the circumstance So please don't although we cited 150 the team is actually looking at these circumstances and making a Determination working with everybody to say this is the appropriate way And if in it and again, they're also being extremely responsive if they're finding that there is a deficiency They're going out to address that so don't there's not what's not What I don't want to leave the room with is that there's like this set prescriptive way that we're doing Notification as the team said we're looking at circumstances and figuring that out There's there's a variety of ways as they said is it's not just sending notification to people's houses It's setting out sandwich boards so that as neighbors drive by they get There's a full array council member of Communication and I would also note that the ordinance itself provides that the radius may be adjusted by the city manager Or his desing me Any other additional comments Just my final comments that we're i'm very comfortable with because you have been very responsive In I'm sure even just hearing the comments from the gentleman living in fountain group Because then a bob you write that stuff down and the other thing is when we have the the standing homes meeting in coffee parks So that's the target audience those that are in there and as you had mentioned That population is going to be growing you've been very responsive in To what their concerns and issues are so I really do appreciate that Thank you mayor. Um, I just want to add that You know we we've issued hundreds of correction notices within the rebuild areas Over the last You know 16 18 months if not when we get into stormwater compliance Literally, we've issued thousands of correction notices for different types of right-of-way violations environmental violations We work with the building industry on a routine basis to more or less Dial in the construction activities so that they Are in compliance with what we need them to be in compliance With and I really got to say that the building industry Has cooperated and responded to our correction notices and our outreach with them to Help build best management practices for reconstructing homes in the fire rebuild area. So I really don't see this as as being Any different than any of the other correction work that we have been performing over the last 18 months We will dial it in and we will work with the builders to to get this Noise in control. Great. Thank you. Ms. Fleming final comments Yes, thank you, mr. Mayor. I wanted to say that um, I was really appreciative of all the outreach work that your team did and also appreciative of your time walking through the flexibility and the Tent that you'll be keeping a really clear and Consistent pulse on how things are going and making sure that we wrap the community back in Not just think keep things to 150 foot radius where noise is going to travel I really felt reassured that that the specifics of this plan will take into account community feedback and on the ground Experiences and I wanted to give a special. Thank you to you bob oller For your coming up with the idea of the construction industry doing their own time stamping and taking a picture and emailing it in I thought that was a great way to put the onus of responsibility on the construction And take it away from the city having to be proactive and divert resources that way It also allows our builders To have some of their own Skin in the game in terms of going through this process and not feeling like they're held up by our city staffing resources So again, thank you so much for that creative approach Thank you councilmember fleming. Um, it really is it's a it's a cooperative effort between the the homeowners The builders and the city and the collaboration is paramount In order to get this work done Um in the best interest of all the parties involved. Thank you. Thanks again to you and your team Great with that. We have a motion to second your votes, please In that passes unanimously. Thank you for the presentation Okay, we will go back to public comment on non agenda matters I have one card your george uberti try to be quick on this, uh I feel like i've given it to you pretty hard today You know, I mean, uh, I lay it on you about As hard as I can because I don't I don't think you do your jobs very well Um, but you know one thing that you might know about me is that I am not all talk as much as I do talk about it Uh, I was running for office until today when I realized that you know due to a moving thing I uh, I am outside my former district But as an extension of my run for office, which I I am not finished with I would like to extend to miss fleming who has conveniently left And really to anyone on this council an invitation to debate At the downtown santa rosa library Now, you know I talk a lot and I feel like you all do your best to act like it doesn't happen Right, um, but i'm not the elephant in the room Right the elephant in the room Is how you are Criminal you're not just doing a bad job Right, you're doing an illegal job Right ordering the police to clear out homeless encampments and lying about it to the public Right, uh failing to get, uh, a meaningful financial audits of the public funds that you are charged with administering Right, uh, these are things that I can't just keep coming up coming up here And informing these people that are happening and then you know have you go on like you've had a stroke or something And just act like it didn't happen All right, these are things that you need to answer for All right Now i'm working on a case right now that I plan on putting in federal court Uh against the sonoma county board of supervisors and the auditor controller treasure tax collector for the illegally Uh the illegal failures of administration and government funds right specifically as they relate to the government auditing standards All right now if you have Things you want to say about it if you feel like you're innocent if you have anything you want to say to me Right anything that you think you can bring in your defense That you have the courage to stand behind in front of somebody who can competently debate you about it Who is not afraid of you who knows what he's talking about Right and who will stand up for the people of this city and not allow you all to just Continue to play dumb Right, I invite you to come to the downtown santa rosa library at a time of your choosing And debate with me about it All right, I think you can I can do your job better than you Right, I think the people of santa rosa think that too All right, I'll be running for office not today not tomorrow, but I will be All right Debate me about it Do we have any additional cards? Nope. All right, we'll move Mayor should I help me I speak a I didn't have time to submit a card go ahead as I sat and see Lee As I sat at my seat in the lower part of the chamber. I looked across the street and saw an enormous Russet potato On a trailer and I know that mr. Sawyer you have a lot to do with the Burbank Gardens Foundation and support I wonder if you'd like to make an announcement about a celebration there Thank you. Thank you missy. Any other cards? We have one more It was with me on Oh, hi there A little a couple weeks ago. I forgot what I was talking about while I was talking to you and what it was is I was going to touch on the fact That the american government disparaged and Attacked other countries over ideologies They disparaged socialism and they disparaged communism And I'm not going to stand on behalf of communism although I I think a true communist state would not have a dictator over it But I've been a socialist all my life ever since I could think really And so funny because I was named elizabeth church alloyed at birth. I Was felt I must must must watch the evening news as a young teenager And so I was watching it one night and I had the thought What if we're the bad guys And you know what? I don't want to tell you but we might just be that I was just listening to a program on berkeley radio about the three big nuclear disasters to noble three-mile island and fukushima Yeah, it's pretty serious stuff and more pollution will just make it harder And it was interesting this gal head that was speaking has studied chernobyl for um for about two decades And she said the the evidence of what happened and how it affected people kept disappearing and Yeah, I forget any more of that, but let's see. I just wanted to sing a couple lines from one of the raging granny songs And it goes like this it's it's like We cultivate our image as we dominate the skies. Let's see if I can do it So we cultivate our image as we dominate the skies Not for human rights and val but big business Enter because I haven't done my 4h pledge for you in a long time. I'll I'll end with that You know, I pledge my head to clear thinking my heart to greater loyalty My hands to larger service and my health to better living For the entire world and my family too. So thanks a lot Thank you. It was all the cards we have for this item. Um, mr. Mclin. You want to introduce 16.1 item 16.1 public hearing continued from may 7th and may 28th 2019 regular year meeting Roseland village mixed use project appeal of planning commission action on the tentative map and density bonus For the planned roseland village mixed use project located at 665 and 883 sabastopol road santa rosa's assessor parcel numbers 125 dash 101 dash 031 and 125 dash 111 dash 037 file number prj 17 dash 075 m a j 1 7 dash is 0 0 6 db 19 dash is 001 All right. Thank you. Let me outline the order this meeting We will first ask for a council expert a communications and staff will do a presentation Then we have the chair of the planning commission will do a brief presentation Then the appellant presentation then the applicant presentation Then I will open the public hearing for any members of the public who would like to comment on that Close the public hearing questions from council Council has a motion and we move on from there So with that with the council members present Could I please hear of any expartee disclosures by council mr. Vice mayor? Thank you, mr. Mayor. I did have a chance to meet with the applicants and receive a number of emails on the project No information was presented that is not publicly available on the staff report Thank you, mr. Sawyer Thank you, mayor. I met with the appellant Quite some time ago before the appeal was Put into place and I did have a meeting with staff for an update on the on the current status No additional information mr. Aller's Thank you very I believe I've met with the applicant quite a while ago. Uh, no new information Thank you, and I've met with the applicant on two separate occasions over several months But again as the vice mayor mentioned all the information that was provided to me has been contained in all the public documents Madam said the attorney when our colleagues join us. Should we stop where we are to get their expartee communication at that point? Yes Okay, so for staff if they do come if give us a little breathing room to Hear from our colleagues about if they had any expartee communications. So staff presentation, please Thank you. Andy Gustafson senior planner Mr. Mayor and members of the council The matter before you is an appeal of a planning commission decision And let me get back to the start of the slideshow. There we go Of the roseland village tentative map and density bonus that project was appealed by mr. Nellison and the matter before you tonight Is a recommendation by staff and by the planning commission to deny the appeal and uphold the commission's action First let's just point out this project would provide for 175 units including 75 of those would be affordable units Towards our housing action plan goals The planning commission took two actions when it considered this matter It was a tentative map that basically sets the stage for the roseland village plan project in the future. It establishes Five parcels on a 7.41 acre lot It redevelops an existing site Of with infrastructure roads circulation And such and it also the commission at that same time Reviewed a requested density bonus which included three concessions that would allow for A 7 excuse me a 32 bonus Above the general plan density And they affirmed the project was in fact in compliance with the city's density bonus ordinance and provisions of state law the project is in At on sabbastopol avenue in the roseland village area indicated by the star It is a roseland village neighborhood center Shown in that shaded area This is an illustrative plan prepared by the project team. The applicant is Mid peninsula. They are the lead Contractor if you will in the project, they will be supported by urban mix a private Developer and then the underlying property owner is the sonoma county community development commission The project would develop a number of buildings on the site including two apartment structures One is commercial excuse me market rate 100 units and the other is 75 Affordable units there would be a one acre park A mercado store and also a future site for a future community library The proposed tentative map is displayed here and it shows lots would vary between 1.53 acres which would be the Lot one for the affordable housing site and then lot two is a 2.1 acres for the market rate units and then the other lots are allocated for The mercado number four number three is the Library site and then the one acre park is in the middle With any subdivision of this type there are a number of site improvements that are part of the Review of the city and when the city planning commission Looked at this project Before you see the circulation the green areas show public streets that would Extend into the project area or be developed by the subdivision Notably there would be an extension of west street nor through the project towards a undeveloped Excuse me area that Would have future access to surpassed apple avenue the brown or yellow arrows on the map indicate private circulation over lots these would be Driveways and accesses to parking areas on these individual lots I do also want to call your attention on the right hand side There's an arrow to a neighboring property The poulson property, which is the western half of the roseland village neighborhood center I'm sorry the eastern half of the roseland neighborhood the center The density bonus here is illustrated just to show you that um in a quick snapshot that 133 units would be allowed by the general plan land use designation there today The density bonus allows that number to go up to 175 And it's notable here that all of those Um 75 units would be affordable much more than the actual requested density Excuse me the the amount of affordability built into the project would qualify much for much more density than is being requested here There would be 28 affordable units that would be subject to a city housing agreement And the rest of the affordable units number 40 47 would be subject to affordability requirements through cdc the remaining 100 units are Are intended by urban mix the private property developer for workforce housing three concessions were reviewed and and accepted by the planning commission phase development of the affordable housing units after the market rate units separate apartment Affordable housing apartment and parcel lots one versus a lot two and then also reduced parking the phase development Was a technique that is proposed to allow for housing affordable housing low-income tax credit financing this is a involved process takes time and uncoupling or phasing That part of the project would allow That financing to be pursued and not delay the development of the market rate units Also the market rate lot Will be sold by cdc to urban mix and the proceeds of sales there would help finance the infrastructure improvements for the site And thus help to reduce the cost of affordable housing development on lot two And furthermore the separate lot for the affordable unit Or building will allow for long-term operational management by affordable housing entity mid-ten Whose experience and efficiencies will help to ensure that is a long-term maintained project site The second concession had to do with parking I'm sorry the third concession had to do with parking and The traffic study submitted for the project indicated that cumulative Conducted a cumulative parking demand analysis and established that peak parking demand On the property would result in the need for 323 spaces that is the amount of spaces that are Provided on the site what you see in the shaded green areas are shared parking areas which during the off-air During peak periods would be available to the public but during the off times would be available To residents to park so the remaining amount of parking for the public on site Is 148 lots or spaces and that amount is Allowing Fulfilling the complete parking needs for the entire site I should also add that the parking study showed That there would be no parking demand on the adjoining property or any other adjoining areas So the project appeal turns on the idea that this development harms a reciprocal easement between The two owners of the rosalind village shopping center cdc owns the western half which is The area in dashed line Enclosed area in blue And mr. Paulson owns the eastern part which is the area To the to the east and the easement itself is that brown line Which shows that it covers Virtually all of the cdc ownership as well as the paulson property and the concept there is there's a reciprocal access And parking historically when this subdivision or excuse me shopping center was built The center relied on Parking on both sides of that blue line and allowed for circulation across it as well Um the appeal was filed asserting that the Tentative map violates this shared access easement the project ignores the easements use restriction and that the The tentative map violates Also a concurrent the concurrent affordable housing construction requirement of the density bonus chapter And furthermore that it eliminates over 270 shared parking spaces With regard to the points each of these i i will say that um The parking shared access easement Really it doesn't define any particular alignment or spaces of parking Spots available to each and that um functionally they were Undefined truly open and reciprocal The driveway alignment Was not defined the green arrow there shows the main circulation across the property from east to west and The subdivision which Is proposed Maintains that circulation access recall they I pointed out the one arrow that Uh crossed across the subdivision or outside the subdivision to the neighboring lot That continues to provide that east west crossing into and between poulsen and the cdc property The second point um We're with regard to uh youth restrictions on the property and that the proposed tentative map might set up development for an improper use The tentative map does not specify use but it certainly contemplates plan development of the rosalind village mixed-use project and that use That would come forward As a minor design review in the future Is completely consistent And um implements the sabastable urban vision plan the general plan land use designations It is a uh highly anticipated Project for the rosalind community and it's built With a mix of uses at an intensity that is consistent with the general plan The third issue has to do with affordable, you know the vial Violating the concurrent affordable housing construction requirement um One of the concessions as I mentioned by the the applicant was to relax that requirement as permitted when um it is found that a Standard or requirement of the city's code would Result or increase the cost of affordable housing in the project the applicant was able to demonstrate that To require a concurrent development of the affordable housing units with the market rate units would increase the costs of affordable units by potentially Delaying the sale of the market rate unit until financing of the affordable housing tax income credit Project or work is done that's Is a cumbersome and and a long-term process and would delay start of construction and thus Suppress the value of the land that would be up for sale So in that regard and also it would not allow the Midpen to use the financing from the procedure sale to underwrite the cost of subdivision Development so for that reason the concession was properly granted by the planning commission And does not violate the Intent or the express purpose of the density bonus ordinance Finally, the project does eliminate 270 The project is asserted to eliminate 270 shared parking spaces Once again, the recorded easement does not Require or specify a certain number of parking spaces on the lot and The parking analysis was able to show and I Must point out a correction to a number there That it's not 108, but it's 148 Uh parking spaces on site that are available to the public including any patron of this of the Property of the palsum property businesses So in that regard This tentative map does not harm or Constrain the easement between the parties nor does it conflict with or Is a contradictory with a city develop parking standard The project when it was Acted on by the planning commission was found to comply to fulfill two sequoia exemptions First it's consistent with the specific plan general plan in the area the Impacts associated with land use development on that site as contemplated by the specific plan Were fully fully analyzed the the potential effects that this project will have and thus there's no Change or increase of magnitude of impacts that Could occur here that have not been previously analyzed and there are no particular Things that have emerged or information new information that's emerged About this particular project site that would render the analysis that was conducted with those with a specific plan and the general plan EIRs that would warrant additional analysis here. This is an urban lot There are no special habitat areas or endangered species located here And there have been no unanalyzed impacts that Or I should say any potential adverse impacts that would Not be mitigated or reduced to a level that's insignificant And when we can apply uniform rules from our development code so with with the findings that the planning commission made with respect to compliance with the subdivision ordinance and the Sequa review Staff is recommending that the council deny the appeal uphold or affirm the planning commission's action and approve the tentative map and Find that the project qualifies for the density bonus and concessions Okay, thank you for the presentation before we give the questions Councilmembers, could we any ex parte communications? Mr. Tivitz? No, I think I spoke with midpen about a year ago briefly on this project. It was a long time ago But I have not spoken with anybody else Miss lemme midpen and cdc approached me a few weeks ago and nothing was disclosed that has not been Shared with the public. Thank you in miss combs. I've met with midpen and I've received a number of emails I don't think anything is in addition to the information that we have now great. Thank you Council any questions on the presentation? Seeing none, we have our planning commissioner here Miss Cisco, we'd like to make some comments about the planning commission's process Good evening mayor and councilmembers. I'm here tonight to Tell you our process on this project Which as mr. Gustafson said it was for a tentative map and a density bonus with three concessions There were five of us present two absent that evening Um We heard as you just did what the three concessions were and that that there would be no concurrent construction the dispersal Was going to not happen. It was going to be all located in one building and the parking reduction staff explained to us what the findings would need to be made that the financial basis to aid the Building of the affordable housing had to be one of the findings and That it wouldn't be of harm to the environment. So in supporting those concessions. That's what we were going to be listening to The applicant team Came forward and gave a lot of explanations complicated explanations, which i'm sure you will hear About why those concessions are necessary and about how we could Successfully make the findings to grant those concessions They also in their presentation explain the the very lengthy community outreach on this project the their efforts to make sure that the site remains activated during construction with the plaza temporal a number of Sort of interesting ways to keep the site which Frankly has always been active Legally or illegally But that they're really taking care to do that And that they would be having different architects for each building so that the designs wouldn't just be like one massive architecture Our public hearing was just a little bit over an hour. We did hear from the applicant and his attorney with some of the appeal Comments that you see up there with mr. Paulson concerned about his easements the terrible traffic in general the under parking and While it wasn't specifically brought up the The parking easement wasn't specifically brought up. We did have in our materials county council's letter explaining that The building or approval of this project would not interfere with the reciprocal easements that are on file So we had that in front of us and in our discussions. We did call on our city attorney to Comment on that letter and to confirm that that was The case that we wouldn't be approving something that was going to be interfering with those easements Um With our public hearing we heard a lot from the youth about the meaning of the boys and girls girls club to them and Again a midpen addressed those concerns about Trying to find an interim plan for both the library and for the the youth there which Was great to hear When it came to our discussion Again, I think we found that we could make the findings for the concessions. I think we were generally very favorable towards the project and While ideally we would have the affordable housing disperse we could appreciate and understand the reasons for the concession And so with that we approved the project with five eyes and two of us absent So If you have any questions, I'm available Great. Thank you for sharing counseling questions for chair sisco Mr. Tibbets Thank you, mayor Thank you chair sisco for that good play by play You said something at the very end that I wanted to touch on and try to understand more deeply and that was about The separation of the affordable housing from the market rate housing And the reason for why that had to be so because a lot of us up here Definitely had conversations about this the benefits of mixed income housing, you know, where you can't distinguish A deed restricted door from a market rate door and there's clearly a delineation here Can you elaborate on that? Well, I certainly can't elaborate on the complexities of the financing. Definitely you will hear that from from midpen But we were satisfied that those Those financing conditions existed We certainly were assured by midpen that the The building itself It would not look like An affordable housing project in the middle of market rate housing that there would be efforts made to make sure that it's integrated well But as to the the financing Complexities all I can tell you is they explain them. I couldn't repeat But that they do exist in that um that concession was necessary to uh to grant So did you hear any comments uh in this regard from members of the community? No, not at all. That was not a concern for the members of the community again. The concerns were really about traffic uh parking Housing that dense in general Those were the negative comments and and there were certainly a lot of favorable comments about the you know, the community's been waiting for This area to be developed forever and have been participating in planning with it, uh forever So the main concerns were really the youth and the displacement and again, I think the the planning commission was uh appreciative of this particular applicants uh Awareness of that and trying to work with the city the library and the youth to make sure that Everybody's got a place to go while the construction is happening And in particular that the community continued to have a place to go with the plaza temporel while while it's Being built. Okay. Thanks so much mayor. If it's all right with you When mid pen does their piece of the presentation? I'll ask the question absolutely love time for more questions Any other questions for chair cisco? Well, we done mr. Divits with that with chair cisco in the absence. Thank you Miss combs almost, okay As the planning commission i'm looking at the tentative map on on Slide six that might help As the planning commission looked at the tentative map I'm assuming you also saw a u-shaped building in an l-shaped building We did they called it a c-shaped building in an l-shaped building. Okay, i'm standing in the wrong place for the c Yes Yes Was did anyone ask or was It's gone any reason given for why One of the wings of the c Couldn't be swapped with one of the wings of the l so that Some affordable could be on each side of the road rather than there be a wrong side of the road Was that ever discussed at the planning commission? We did not discuss that We did discuss some of the circulation and some of the crossings of Gerber dota trail and west avenue, but we didn't talk about moving the buildings around Okay, or any of the elements of the building. No, okay Does does staff know did the design review board discuss that? Have they discussed that? The I can't be certain what was discussed with the design review board But at the meeting with regard to The separation of the affordable and the market rate units by parcel The rationale was the parcel and the building Of the market rate units would not be encumbered by the more lengthy complicated low-income tax credit process Um, if they were blended whether they were mixed door-to-door or Two separate buildings on the same parcel. They would be the market rate unit Financing would be slowed down As a result Are we not Creating the parcels Uh, I mean have the parcels already been created or I thought we were in the process of creating these parcels That's correct the parcel. So it would be possible to create a parcel That was One of the wings of one of the buildings So that it was a separated parcel even if it was Adjacent to the other wings God, I understand you're okay. So these aren't these parcels are not Pre-existing set in stone parcels. They are being discussed today If I may ask the city attorney Um Can we have this conversation with regard to The layout of the parcels or the segregation of the affordable housing or can we only rule today on the denial of the Appeal or to deny or not to deny the appeal No on appeal the entire project is before you and you may discuss all of the elements of the project So the whole project is before us. Yes. Thank you Any other questions for chair sisco Thank you for that presentation miss combs Do you have questions for staff that you wanted to about the original presentation? I think I snuck them in already if I have more I'll come back great Okay, we now have the appellant presentation And you'll have 10 minutes for your presentation. If you could please identify yourself Mr. Mayor Members of city council, my name is john Paulson I'm the owner of the rosland village shopping center 555 sabastopol road through six seven three sabastopol road I'm the neighbor directly east of the cdc midpen project approved by the planning department And I filed the appeal which is before you today The rosland village shopping center Was built in the mid 1950s by hugh cotting and my father vigo poulsen Since there were two separate owners in order to protect their investments Cotting and my father prepared signed and recorded reciprocal easements Not only are the easements affecting And maintaining shared parking circulation and limited development to commercial use only The easements are prescriptive having been in use and uninterrupted since the 1950s Well, thank you The easement was known to the cdc When they purchased the property from the baw family John haig from the cdc many years ago said to me that something needed to be done about the easement Before development could occur nothing has been done no Negotiations discussions discussions nothing Yet midpen with funding from the cdc went ahead with the plans that Were approved by the planning commission that totally ignore the shared parking circulation And commercial use only recorded easement Their plans reduced shared parking on their parcel from 270 spaces to I just saw it tonight 61 spaces The density bonus and reduced parking requirements approved by the planning department Will mean that extra cars of their tenants in their one two and three bedroom Apartments will park on my side of the shopping center eliminating parking for my retail tenant customers The first phase approved is for 100 market rate one two and three bedroom apartments This seems odd that cdc property meant for affordable housing is going for market rate additionally The location of the 100 market rate apartments Will completely block circulation of delivery trucks Who deliver to kamacho market as well as tenants of park behind the businesses and need access To the signalized intersection at west avenue County council has informed my attorney that an expert claims that 40 foot delivery trucks Can turn around in the back and exit the way they came in All the truck drivers. I spoke with said impossible At numerous meetings held by the cdc midpen Dent my issues of parking and circulation Have come up One meeting attendees were given colored pens And a site plan of both properties to draw what was important to them Red bean the most important I participated in that meeting The red color I drew circulation behind my property up to west avenue. This has been totally ignored I asked the city council to review the planning departments To reverse the planning department's approval of mid pens plans to allow 100 market rate apartments be built blocking my access of circulation Before any plans can be approved on the cdc property The recorded and prescriptive parking circulation and development easements must be resolved. Thank you Thank you, sir. Council. Any questions for the appellant? Is it a yes, mr. Tivitz or Anyone with any questions? No Thank you for that presentation Now we have a 10-minute applicant presentation Excuse me Mayor vice mayor city council members Thank you. I'm robert nellison representing roseland village corporation and john paulson For a hamburger today, I will gladly pay you tomorrow The oldest trick in the book in the city of santa rosa is falling for it The city of santa rosa needs mixed income housing Member tidbits correctly observed that mixed income housing is encouraged if not mandated by state law Yet surprised the proposed housing to be built as all I repeat all market rate for the benefit of all present and our press democrat reporters So they can honestly address the issue that only market rate housing is going to be built As we know from the covert admissions of mid pen When I say now, I mean funded Shovel ready in process. There's no consequence for failure to build mixed income housing No consequence whatsoever Roseland village roseland santa rosa Sonoma county all need mixed income housing. It is needed now It is not happening. You have no excuse for not requiring it now Was the city suckered or is it complicit? I hope the former in fear the latter Which is where the rub comes in roseland village Asks why give away to a south of bay developer of market rate housing extensive public funds and benefits And do so on the back of the taxpaying and impacted community with a high density bonus and a parking waiver Roseland village objects to the lack of transparency To the willingness of the county the city and mid pen to pretend that the recorded and prescriptive traffic and public easements Neither matter to nor impact on roseland village From the beginning john paulson tried to work with the cdc and mid pen to maintain the necessary and existing traffic access And parking easements and he has not only been ignored but even expressly threatened directly with financial ruin Who benefits from the failure to ensure mixed income housing from abandoning property density restrictions and parking requirements And giving away public funds Certainly not the city of santa rosa or sonoma county tax payers who will foot the bill I also ask why the city of santa rosa Encourages those with no interest in the property such as mid pen Which is not prepared to build any mixed income housing at this time And its own city of santa rosa staff to conceal the county's admitted communications That there are recorded and historical easements preventing the proposed market rate development But not the mixed income housing So until my time runs out i'm going to observe Number one you have the letters i'm sorry the emails from the attorneys for mid pen and Urban mix saying we have no interest in this property So we should not be included in the litigation to have a judicial determination That the easement says what it means I'm sorry the easement says what it says means what it means and the 50 years of use And I personally have observed that use since 1983 That use has been continuous on a daily basis and is destroyed by the proposed plan to mid pen Resisted at every stage making any modification of its plan to keep that access going mid pen Would not even talk to mr. Paulson about the easement which says this is going to remain commercial property And mr. Paulson's willingness and even And and even welcoming Some residential development to occur with the commercial development But it cannot occur at the expense of his traffic access And his access to west avenue and it cannot occur when it destroys his parking access Which is clearly in writing and clearly has been used and we have photographs going back many years for that So if you so unfortunately your um, uh as as pleasant as has been mr. Gustafson It does not have An accurate presentation. He's towing the county's party line on their desire to do away with By hoping that the city of santa rosa will ignore the clear recorded easements Have any of you viewed the written easement? You all know Hugh Cotting. He didn't give away something for nothing Or I think most of you knew him He and Vigil Paulson had an agreement that they put in writing. It was very clear It was very straightforward and it was used continuously for the last 50 years So to say that that means nothing I think flies in the face of anybody who ever understood or had any experience with even third hand Hugh Cotting and what was done with that shopping center We welcome And encourage the mixed income housing which should be built there Which can be built there which can be built there with the minimum amount of imagination And some cooperation attempts by mid pen, which as the attorney's emails say We have no interest in this. Why are you even entertaining as of course? And I'm asking the request by mid pen if they have no interest in the property All right. Thank you counsel any questions mr. Tibbets Thank you mayor mrs. Gallagher I had the chance to read the deputy county council's opinion on this issue And it states that the easement is not defined by a location because that was my initial question was If they had a location and the easement infringed upon The property line of the mid pen then we would have a problem We'd have to probably they could stop it or lead to settlement or something along those lines Have you had the chance to verify that there is no Boundary definition and do you think that's sufficient to avoid litigation that could delay this project into the future? I have we have confirmed that there is no location that's at issue and within the easement In terms of whether that Conclusion precludes litigation. I can't say that Fair enough they have the applicant has already filed suit Against the county so That litigation is ongoing at this point to my knowledge Okay, but we are confident that there is There does not exist an easement defining That's correct. The easement is not specific as to location. Okay. Thanks. Thanks Council any other questions Mr. Vice mayor Yes, sir You kept mentioning that mid pen doesn't have an interest in the property You I wanted to clarify or allow you to clarify You don't mean that they're not interested in the property You mean that they have no actual ownership stake in that property or instead Acting under the authority of the cdc, correct? Hold on one second. Let's get your microphone on for a second Thank you Their attorney put into exact words what their attorney said we have no interest in the property Now if what they mean an interest from a legal perspective Meaning ownership From a legal perspective You can have an option to purchase which gives you an interest in the property You can have a a memorandum of understanding which gives you an interest in the property I'm taking the attorney who knows how to use words at face value. They have no interest in the property That's why I gave you the some total of exactly what he said we have no interest in the property And I understand and I and I know you're not Intending to do it this way, but for example council members have to disclose when we have an interest In an issue and that's actually a clearly defined legal term to mean An economic interest so an economic whether we have part ownership we have derived A salary from it interest actually has a legal term I just wanted to make sure and clarify how you intended interest when you keep pointing out that they have no interest First I intended the council members to read the email from mid-pence attorney, which said quote We have no interest But you raise a very interesting point, which is What haven't they disclosed what they haven't disclosed, which they have admitted exists Are the communications from the county saying yes, there is an easement that is problematic I've been promised it It hasn't been provided. It was referenced before the planning commission I It hasn't been provided. I think it's in your interest to get exactly all the communications Which went back and forth from the county encouraging the city to do its bidding And and and and basically rubber stamp this application when as a mid-pen attorneys put in writing They have no interest and Somebody's trying to convince you that a written easement which has been in effect for 50 years Which by prescription establishes the usage Is meaningless It isn't meaningless and why the council is being asked to swallow this whole I don't understand but I was not given it and I was promised it. I assume you have not been given it You should ask for it and I appreciate that sir and I will ask the applicants to disclose if they have any interest As we understand it from a legal perspective to be understood in the property and just as a Helpful tip. I believe that the county should have provided the easement to you if you don't have the text You also have a public records act request you could file because that would be a public document And you would be entitled to it under that Normally when people promise they're going to do something I expect them to do it And we're under a short timeline. I've been promised the formal documents on or about august 23rd Okay, council any additional questions Miss combs Has our city attorney seen the document that's being referred to as an easement? Yes, we have I'm a little unclear at this point Exactly what he's referring to but we have seen the copy of the easement that's that issue In the litigation Can you clarify for me? I'm finding I'm a little confused generally an easement is like you can drive for I'm here to hear along this stretch of road, you know through through my property, you know the The water line can go here or another road could go there Does I'm what I'm hearing is this document doesn't say it that way That's that I must admit I haven't um, I have looked at the easement, but I haven't looked at in the last week or so and It is my recollection that it does not I know it doesn't specify specific parking spaces It does provide for reciprocal use and for access And I don't know if either staff is more familiar with this particulars of the easement or What does it mean when we say there's access? If it doesn't say you have access at this point Does that mean that there's access throughout the property? What does that mean? I just I'm just asking because I don't know Let me while while this proceeds on I'll pull up a copy of the easement and I'll be able to address those questions As we move forward. I may want to ask questions about that more. Sure. Thanks. Sure. Thank you Councilmember can I offer that I live in west county? I live on a private easement of a road as do Most of my neighbors if not half of west county and all it says is If it's in writing which mine wasn't until I moved there the bank required it for Almost a hundred years people simply drove on what was there with nothing recorded If a recorded easement says a 10 foot as mine does a 10 foot strip of land along the western boundary Do you think it goes directly along the western boundary and it makes a 90 degree angle? Which would make it impassable for trucks Or farm equipment because you can't make that 90 degree angle Everybody makes the you everybody knows you make the you Everybody knows if you've got a creek on one side, you're not actually going to be driving in the creek you're going to be driving Close to the creek but not in the creek even if the creek is the first four or five feet of the property line So you have a recorded easement which establishes there's an easement You better pay attention and you've got the actual use which defines the scope of that easement And if somebody's been driving up and down that easement for 50 years on a daily basis with farm trucks and residential Cars You don't suddenly say oh, we have no idea why you're driving on this piece of land All right. Thank you sir for that any other questions from council Okay, we'll then go to the applicant presentation From midpen and you will also have 10 minutes and then questions after Good evening, mr. Mayor honorable members of the council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you My name is ben wickham. I'm with the sonoma county community development commission and project lead for the roseland village project Back in 2007 the sabastopol road urban vision plan was adopted at which time the community and the neighborhood Envisioned this this location as a community commons In 2011 the development commission purchased this site using redevelopment agency dollars And has been spending Successor agency dollars to continue the work of of developing the site in 2016 We engaged in a robust competitive process Which saw multiple proposals from developers. We chose midpen housing as the most qualified Developer with the best proposal and over two years after that There was an extensive amount of community engagement to get an idea of what the community the roseland neighborhood wanted to see And since 2015 the development commission has provided free space for the roseland library and the boys and girls club To promote that amenity in the community in December 2017 the santa rosa design review board approved the initial design And then in february 2019 As you know, we received planning commission approval for our tentative map application And so for some additional information i'd like to introduce jan lindenthal with midpen housing Good evening My name is jan lindenthal. I'm the chief real estate development officer at midpen housing Midpen is a non-profit mission-based affordable housing developer We were founded in 1970 by a group of citizens who were concerned about affordable housing in the on the San Mateo county peninsula, which is where our name comes from of midpen. That's where we started Now 49 years later, we've built more than 8,000 homes In 10 counties from monterey to up in sonoma county here We also have offices in foster city oakland watsonville and right here in santa rosa As i mentioned, we've developed 8,000 homes over our 49 year history Over a hundred communities one Completed community is here in sonoma county. That's the fetters apartment in the springs There's an additional 40 unit senior community that's under construction right now and actually applications are available now for Qualified seniors who are interested and they'll be taken until july 9th In addition to building affordable homes midpen housing is also a property manager So we manage everything that we build ourselves with our own staff We also have our own resident services corporation. So we're providing services on site to our residents In family communities like what we're proposing here in roseland. That will include adult education classes after school programs a summer program And so we're we're very committed to providing those services on site this Project is a little different than a typical New development that includes market rate and affordable housing Midpen housing is the master developer of this community We selected urban mix and keith mccoy is here. He's the principal with urban mix We selected urban mix to be our partner and we designed this new community so that the two components the two housing components could proceed Independent of one another and not be dependent on one another to enable us to move as quickly as possible We really turned that concept of a traditional inclusionary housing community on its head By putting the nonprofit as the lead master developer. We brought in the the market rate partner on our terms If we can pause for just a second. We're having some technical difficulties. Do we do we need to reset the whole system? Okay, so if we can just pause break where you are now Let's take a 10 minute break and once we get because the microphones go out too So once we reset we'll pick up where you left off. Thank you Okay, folks. I think we're ready to start Suzanne, why don't you pick it up where you'd like to start off again? And then hopefully now we have a slideshow that corresponds with your comments Thank you. Um, I was mentioning that This project is a little different than other subdivisions in that midpen housing is the master developer and we selected urban mix to be our partner And we designed this community to be integrated But also for the individual components to be able to proceed independently So that we could build housing as quickly as possible We have done a lot of community outreach as you heard from staff and from the planning commission member We had four community meetings three design workshops over 260 community members participated What did we hear? We heard that people wanted a mix of homes both in terms of the affordability and the size of the homes People wanted an economic development opportunity Next slide They wanted to make sure that there's a feature on the site that would generate economic opportunity both in terms of jobs and Job opportunities as well as business opportunities People also wanted of course a vibrant public plaza for community gathering And we took a lot of input and had a design charrette to engage the community and actually developing the plan for the plaza A multi-use civic building was something that we heard about a lot That's an amenity that the roseland neighborhood doesn't have today A place where meetings could be held zumba classes things like that a brand new well appointed building People also wanted to see opportunities for public art and that's something that we will not only incorporate into the new community But that we're incorporating right now in that we are planning a mural by a local muralist on the hardware store building That will be painted this summer People also wanted to make sure that the plan Provided a sense of community and that it was safe and accessible next Our vision for roseland village is a master plan that is designed as a neighborhood With lots of opportunity for community connection both between the residential buildings where we'll share uses and amenity spaces As well as with the other uses on site where you could run into a neighbor at the plaza or at the marcado Or when you're visiting one of the other buildings We also are providing access to the joe radota trail and we also took care to design this New community to respect the existing reciprocal easement We met with mr. Paulson more than 12 times. We took input from him directly We actually asked him for a plan And incorporated that into our feedback as well as into our submission to the county And so just a review of kind of where we're at with this project once we receive Entitlement approval Then we'll go ahead go ahead to seek final map and improvement plan approval From the planning department. Hopefully that'll be early 2020 and immediately begin infrastructure improvements In the summer of 2020 and that's going to include building the the park or the plaza And the cdc will be responsible for maintaining that on into the future In addition The the portion that is going to go to urban mix will be they'll be paying market rate for that An appraised price for that parcel which will really subsidize the rest of the development So we hope to begin housing instruction in winter of 2020 or early 2021 But we have a plan to activate the site early with the plaza temporal that was mentioned As early as late summer early fall of this year And in addition we we've received a $2.5 million grant from the state water board to clean up the Environmental pollution that was left by the dry cleaner on the site So there's a lot of resources And energy that the county is putting into Improving the neighborhood By means of this site So this is a schematic of the plaza temporal that we're envisioning It's going to involve local food vendors local food and create a community gathering space That the community has been waiting for for many many years. So we're excited to deliver this early So I'll turn it back over to jen So this is one community that's designed as a neighborhood Although the individual residential buildings will be financed separately. They're designed to work together as a neighborhood the Housing to be developed by urban mix is affordable housing by design. It's multifamily rental housing That will serve the missing middle Which means people who make too much to qualify for traditional affordable housing programs But not enough to afford a brand new luxury apartment The mid-pen community Will provide Multifamily rental housing for large families one to three bedrooms serving a range of incomes from as low as 30 percent of Area median income up to 60 percent of area median income and that could be families earning as little as $12,000 Up to $65,000. So a very wide range The public funding that we intend to secure will allow us to provide that deep level of affordability As well as to provide more homes than what we could provide otherwise The time is now to build this affordable housing. I know that you all know that There are state sources available based on props one and two being passed last fall We have more than six billion dollars available at the state level that we can access to fund projects like this And this project is ready to go with your denial of the appeal tonight We can hit the ground running in securing those state sources Also, the affordable housing is not dependent upon the market rate housing to move forward. In fact, we expect that it will proceed First The cdc is also committed to building the infrastructure And that is something that is also isn't dependent upon the market rate housing And I hope we could have just another minute or two given the delay Just to finish our presentation. Yes. Thank you a couple more minutes. So finally mid pen is prepared to deliver on this We've raised over a billion dollars in debt inequity to finance affordable housing in the last five years alone We've secured more than 20 awards of tax credits. We know how to get this done We have the track record of being able to secure these precious state funding to be able to make this project a reality And just finally we're excited about the potential for the boys and girls club and Sonoma county library to share space in the civic building that's in vision. We're working hard with library and uh boys and girls club to make that a reality and uh, that's something again the community Desperately needs and wants so I just want to emphasize that for the development commission. This is really for us It's a flagship project We believe that It's it's something that we owe to the community and we're putting tremendous resources into it We And just as jan expressed we're determined to get this project Completed to deliver affordable housing workforce housing a library a boys and girls club a new park a mercado And and all the infrastructure that's involved in supporting that so we think it's a wonderful opportunity for for the residents Great. Thank you council questions for the applicant mr. Tibbetts Thank you, mayor. I've got a couple of questions For mid-tenant. I want to thank you all for the work that you do. I'm pretty familiar with your your nonprofit organization I actually remember when I first came back from college I used to work with economic development board as an intern and they would many times send me over there To be part of these community input gathering meetings that led to you getting getting the contract to move this thing for it I was there with mr. Suarez and others who I see in the audience But I do have some questions and these are some questions that I have and also some questions that my constituents have And they're not intended to be a reflection of the good work that you do But have you in the past one of the concerns that I've heard from constituents is you build the market rate housing piece And then it's it's difficult or you don't end up building the affordability piece Now you mentioned that you've done did I hear you say thousands of projects over the lineage of your organization? And have you ever had an instance where you were unable to build the affordable piece for whatever reason? No, we've built more than 8,000 units over our history 100 communities Um when we've had a master plan like this We have never had a situation where we haven't been able to build the affordable component In fact, we partnered with urban mix to build a master plan in foster city called foster square And in that case the city required the affordable housing to go first and we made it happen on schedule in this case As I mentioned earlier the those the two projects are not dependent on one another So we don't need the market rate to go forward The only thing that we need is the denial of this appeal and our ability to compete for state funding And then we can the the cdc to commit the infrastructure which they are committed to doing So that's really the gating issue for us not the market rate component Okay, let me follow up on that then so You mentioned you need to get your application. I assume this is for low-income housing tax credit and other funding funds available Uh, so if this if we were to uphold the appeal tonight and cause you a delay Would that? Negate you from being able to get in on time. Yes. Yeah, we couldn't move forward if our if the appeal was granted Okay, um, I I appreciate uh, you answering my questions and um, I think it's a good project Council other questions mr. Vice mayor Following up on council member tidbits question. You just mentioned that there have been instances Where uh in a master plan it was conditioned ahead of time that you would build the affordable units before you came back and did the market rate Are there any conditions that exists that would prevent you from being able to do the project at this council did that? Can I just sorry can I ask if you're just going to repeat that question? I'm not exactly sure what Let's ask The the information that was offered is that past projects This that have been done with cities have been conditioned to require the affordable units to be built first And then came back and did the market rate Is there anything in this project that would prevent you from moving forward if this council chose to do that as well? Well, it's it's It's hard to say for sure. You know, I think the cdc Has this is a unique project. It's something that probably won't be you won't see something like it or haven't seen anything like it because We are the owner of the property And so we're responsible for building the affordable housing by virtue of health and safety code as relates to the dollars We use to buy it and the dollars we've used so far almost 10 million total To do pre-development and and commit it to the infrastructure. So We are bound by california state law to build affordable housing on this site So I think placing an additional covenant on it I don't know that that would be necessary because our our commitment to affordable housing Is even separate from mid pens and we continue to be the title holder until they obtain their financing and take title under said thank you Any good miss flaming Can you just clarify for both myself and the public? Why it is the case that both the the market rate and the affordable units can't be built simultaneously Well, theoretically they could what we're saying is we're using we're using the We're selling the market rate parcel to the market rate developer For for market value. So that's roughly two million dollars that we're going to use to subsidize The infrastructure and the affordable housing. So I mean, we all know there's a terrible challenge with getting affordable housing built because there's not enough local money And that is that's that's one of the big Issues that's slowing down Affordable projects from being built in this county and in the city of santa rosa And so so the reason that as was explained, I think the reason the planning commission approved that is to Not only facilitate putting that money into the affordable project but also because the community needs housing period and By allowing that that market rate housing can can go forward at its own speed Okay, and following on with what the vice mayor said Around an additional covenant you said some if it's not That the cdc has a mandate to build affordable housing on this land Given that we see hiccups happen all the time and we have a potential softening of the market I'm wondering if Though not necessary to have an additional covenant if it would be problematic for you in any way Well, I don't if the if the city put a covenant on that parcel to require affordable housing to be built I don't know that that would be necessarily problematic This the the sonoma county has already put 2.5 million dollars Into the affordable housing development And so we are going to deed restrict that parcel as soon as midpen takes title to it And that deed restriction will go for 55 years if the city wanted to put Some kind of interim deed restriction On that parcel as part of the approval It it wouldn't It wouldn't cause a problem for us necessarily. I don't think that would be a big issue I think it's understood by all of us that we do need housing really, you know Marker rate housing and Affordable housing we need it all and so my question is is was there any discussion at the cdc about the Exclusionary nature of this type of housing and I'm wondering how you would address the fact that I'm not sure that You know recently my parents sold a house and the tract in in san liandra and with it It still has the original rules that you can't sell it to a person of color That still goes runs with the property in 2018 And I'm wondering how in 50 years if people are going to be looking at me like Did this not look like redlining and so I'm wondering what kinds of conversations you had at the cdc to address the potential civil rights issues Around economic discrimination and what we know to be the outcomes for children who grow up in segregated housing Well, I think again as jan pointed out we look at this seven acre development as one one community And the simple virtue of the economics of affordable housing make it Make it very very difficult to envision something other than One one apartment development on one side that's affordable funded with low-income housing tax credits And then the other side being affordable by design. I think The amenities that are going to be provided a new infrastructure a park Walking to stores and food a mercado The library the boys and girls club those amenities are going to be available to everyone living in this community The quality of development and construction is going to be the same so really By by making the 75 unit development that you saw in the tentative map affordable We're facilitating the financing of that so we really we can't build affordable housing at 60 percent and 30 percent without The millions and millions of dollars of low-income housing tax credit equity that's required And that's just the way that federal program is set up. It's designed to go into One one one development one building so we we feel like This is not an example of segregation. It's example of inclusion And giving everyone access to amenities. They probably would would not have access to if this is just I understand that the financing is difficult But not impossible and I also have the experience of having grown up in san liandro Just a block or two away from east oakland and the outcomes Even though they they had if you could walk to the same park that was in my neighborhood You could go to the same school the outcome for people Even in very close proximity with these types of things built in is In my experience and not just my experience is really difficult So what i'm trying to ask is not about the funding What i'm trying to ask and nobody here is in doubt that we need housing What i'm trying to ask is what kinds of conversations were had about the potential fallout from this type of discrimination And the proximity the fact is is that doesn't sway me much. I want to hear what are what was the thought process behind this Just besides getting the housing built Well, our thought process is that we have to work within the constraints of of what's possible In terms of delivering this project and what was envisioned back in 2007 so As much as you know, potentially we would we would say we'd love to develop to put forth 175 units of affordable housing Financially that's that's that's not Not not only is not feasible. It's not what the community asked for they asked for a mixed income development So in order to deliver units that are deeply affordable We have to bring in federal tax credits and and so that's part of the strategy is trying to address The full range of the housing continuum in in this project And if I might just add that There's there's a difference here with with the way that affordable housing is financed Today in the way the way that mid pen finances affordable housing that doesn't provide the same doesn't doesn't include the same kind of constraints and limitations that public housing used to Used to include For example, the families that move in to this community have to be income qualified on the day they move in After that their income can go up And their income does go up So although and we believe that even the 30 Percent to 60 percent, you know families earning as little as 12,000 up to 65,000 is already very integrated That the opportunity for those families to be able to improve their station in life to get a better job to go back to school To increase their economic potential What that means is that the community becomes even more integrated over time and that's what our history over 49 years has taught us So the this is not the kind of affordable housing community or or neighborhood that perhaps you experienced as a young person The other thing I would add is that this is well managed service rich housing So this is housing that's that's managed at the same standard as Or better than any other property in the city of san aroza And certainly equal to what our partner would be will be building What what this allows us to do is to produce more units that are more deeply affordable And that's the that's the choice that we're making. Otherwise we'd be producing Probably half as many or fewer affordable homes here and and we don't think that's we think this can be done in a way That's successful. That's vibrant That's that's really integrated in meaningful ways in terms of people knowing their neighbors and visiting with each other And and that economic upward mobility that we all want Um, so we we don't think that this design constrains that Thank you In the question miss combs Thank you. Can we have the circulation and access plan on the overhead it's It was given to us as part of the Part of the applicants package It looks Looks like this I don't know who's supposed to be running the show for the slides. We are Oh, thank you. Sorry about that. Just give us one minute here There it is. Thank you very much Okay, so I have a couple of questions First off we're throwing around some phrases and I want to make sure that we're using the same meanings for the same Phrases I've heard workforce. I've heard affordable. I've heard affordable by design and I've heard missing middle so It's my understanding that the c shaped complex is to be workforce housing Or missing middle housing. Yes. I mean the reason that I don't like the term workforce because Both of the communities are providing workforce housing There will be people working in local jobs living in the affordable as well So that's why I use missing middle. Yes, and missing middle has a number of meanings as well Is that 80 to 120 am I? It's unrestricted. It's unrestricted. So it is not 80 to 120 or 80 to 150 or 80 to 180 not from a restricted sense But it's designed to serve folks within that range, but you're not restricting it Correct. So that's basic market rate housing except that this is where the affordable by design comes in so these Units are smaller than what? A luxury market rate apartment builder would be doing typically Okay, I I hear you but they are not restricted. That's correct um And that's that's an exchange for what they're paying for the land and My understanding is that the L shaped building Is the 30 to 60 am I? That's correct. Okay, and the Two different buildings will have two different builders Is that correct or not That has not been determined yet Um, they certainly could have the same it will depend I think on the timing of when they're built Okay, so I'm maybe I'm confused my understanding was that one group was doing one and urban mix or Mid-pen housing is the developer An urban mix is the developer of the c-shaped building So they have two different developers correct, but it could be that they choose the same Younger contract they may not choose the same bill correct could be either way correct Okay If I'm hearing you correctly you are making a separate but equal argument You are telling me that you can build these two buildings to equal quality separately That's what I'm hearing. I should mention just as an aside that my sixth grade class Was the first integrated class in my city? Um, so I experienced having Uh, a city where on one side of the tracks there were One group of people and on another side of the tracks there was another group of people and at one point by mandate We were all bused to The school on one side of the tracks and everybody went to that school for a period of time That's how my school my city achieved integration Um, so I grew up in a segregated community. I grew up in a community with separated water fountains Let me tell you that just because there are two separate water fountains one at the front of the building And one at the back of the building does not mean that children play together in the adjacent park I've seen it. It doesn't happen that way um I have a lot of concern about The wrong side of the street When I look at how this is shaped the parking is is very clearly separated the c-shaped parking Is is within the arms of the c as well as some parking behind it The l shaped parking most of that parking is to the outside So these buildings actually back in a way to each other So when you pull in with your family in the car and go in the building There is not interaction at the doorways between the two sets of buildings and there is a main street between them I mean, it's not a big main street, but it's a substantial street between them um It really concerns me and I am having difficulty understanding why You aren't asking us for a variance on the distance between buildings at a lot line Because that's the variance. I'd have been happy to give you if you if you shaped the parcels So that for example the vertical parcel on the l Were swapped with the vertical parcel on the c I would be happy to grant you variances on the distances to the lot lines because you could draw those lots separately So why have you come before me and not at least integrated chunks of the buildings even though you You can't integrate door by door There's a couple comments on that first of all We're not talking about any kind of racial segregation. It's income segregation right now And as jan mentioned, there's income opportunities on on on both buildings for people's incomes to grow I think this this the grid structure of this This map is based on the city of santa rosa general plan Requirements the requirements the planning department and the engineering Put down upon us and so we built around those requirements the map looked different When it was being entitled under the county of sonoma And so we we work within the the structure that was provided So I heard 10 million dollars of public funds in one piece of the conversation and I heard 2.7 million also mentioned how much in public funds is in this Project in 2011 this the development commission purchased the seven acre parcel For 3.74 million dollars when it was still the redevelopment agency mm-hmm And there was a there were redevelopment funds in totaling 6.6 million that were committed to the project So now as the housing successor agency We are utilizing those funds to carry out pre development and infrastructure construction. So that's roughly Put to you at about 10 million dollars Okay, thank you and Um Council woman when I Might might I address your point as well around the separate but equal? You can try. Okay. Thank you So I've been involved in in building affordable housing for my entire career, which is over 25 years now We are deeply committed to the success of our residents And we believe that what we're able to do is build beautiful communities that Allow our residents to truly thrive And there are many many instances in fact you could look at any of the the affordable housing communities that your city has sponsored And it is a building in a neighborhood That's how it gets done typically. It's a building in a neighborhood. This is no different This is a building in a neighborhood. It's not a segregated neighborhood It's an affordable building that offers housing at a certain price point In an integrated neighborhood setting I I hear That we have had in the past to put one building in the middle of one neighborhood We have an opportunity here to do better than we have done before And i'm i'm sorry that we aren't Um, I have a question for staff related to this if it's okay to ask that now okay, so if we Want to request a condition for example that the affordability be Completed or at least substantially underway Before certificates of occupancy are granted for the other Unit. Is that possible? Yes, it's possible. Okay Because my other fear is while this agent this company may not have had the experience My understanding and correct me. Please. This is actually a question I think we've had at least two other property developments where the affordability Component was supposed to be built second But didn't get completed the way we had anticipated that it would be completed Like the company went out of business. So they just never did the affordability piece I think we've had that happen on two I'm remembering christopherson as one in tux horn is another Does that sound about right to you if we had more than two? I think courtside village might be another one of those. Okay, so there's a third So we have this problem that i'm unwilling to make that mistake again And and I need assistance from staff on how to not make that mistake again Because i'm very unwilling to do it a fourth time. It's like, you know fool me once shame on you fool me twice Fool me three times fool me four times. I can't do that So help me figure that out. I'm open to suggestions My first would be the conditional one my second thought would be some kind of a bond If there was a bond for the completion of the affordable sections Would it be large enough for us to do the completion of the buildings if they don't complete them? So I'm asking for staff to give us feedback on that surely we'd be happy to do that and I will present some draft language for the council's consideration to that point and then I'd also like to take a moment and just respond to The process the review process and how this project came to be And how city staff has reviewed this project working in conjunction with the applicant team And so before I do that though, I will give some draft language just for the the council's consideration so Something that we put together Based on some of these Sentiments is language that goes as follows the developer shall be in compliance with the housing allocation plan city code chapter 21-02 At the time of building permit issuance for the purpose of this project compliance shall mean compliance with chapter 20-31 and either Payment of in lieu fees for market rate units on lot two or commencement of construction of affordable units on lot one Can you repeat that so that I can hear it? The developer shall be in compliance with the housing allocation plan city code chapter 21-02 at the time of building permit issuance For the purpose of this project compliance shall mean one compliance with chapter 20-31 And two either payment of in lieu fees for market rate units On lot two or commencement of construction of affordable units on lot one So it ties a fee to that construction activity We have been discussing making modifications to that section chapter Will those changes occur in the near future? Are you bringing those before us soon? I I don't know. Okay, so it may not be in time if they apply I think we'd have to look at the calendar and lay that I'm not So it would be the old ones and less likely the new ones Yes, ma'am if I may I also wanted to give some explanation of that proposal and that is That the c building the market rate building Would be a permitted use and allowable As it is with it does not require any density bonus so What the concern was was that if the market rate housing could go ahead and be built and never realize The affordable construction They would still have to comply with the housing action plan Which would be they could fee out at that point So what that condition would allow is In the event that the c building goes forward first and reaches reaches the Final occupancy at that point if the Affordable units were not under construction. They would have to pay the affordable housing fees instead So it does not guarantee that the affordable housing Units are built But it addresses the affordable housing Contribution for those market rate units if we accept in-loop fees at I don't I'm not aware of us having in-loop fees that pay to build affordable units that they're really not substantial enough At this point to do that If I if I may Where's that coming from? Oh, sorry. Hi. My name is Aldo Mercado. I'm here. I represent the cdc and To I think the point that I we appreciate at least I know the cdc does in particular with The concerns about having the market rate go prior to or having a community that's partially built I think what we want to highlight that the cdc is the owner Is in a very very unique situation They as a successor agency to redevelopment have Acquired their interest in this property Have spent close to 10 million dollars in this property with strings attached on those monies Those monies require that the cdc is the owner build affordable housing That will then be implemented as it sells these lot the lot out to the subsequent owner So what I wanted to highlight was the concern about timing though may be very relevant in most projects where you have private for-profit or non-profits working together Here because the cdc is the successor agency is taking it already Bound by the health and safety code and the restrictions that it places as the owner There in essence is already a covenant requiring that the affordable housing be built So let me go back to my city attorney I understand that the cdc while they on the property has obligations When they sell the property does the new property owner have those same obligations And do we have any rights to tell them that they have to sell the property within any specific Language or any specific covenants on their sale? I would have to say that i'm not An expert on the community development commission and and their particular requirements Or indeed in the redevelopment agency as well That being and said I do understand that there are restrictions on how that money how those monies can be used How that translates to The property I would not be able to tell you The county council would be in a better position to address that Okay, and i'm seeing some nodding heads up there I'm just From my point of view is the city. We don't have any control over what the county property development What the county cdc does the only control we have is over our permitting process That's that's correct. I would want some kind of condition on our side Because we can't control what they do And I appreciate that They may think they have the ability to require something but when it comes to us we can't enforce The county if I've understood correctly the county has to enforce the county Would it be okay if I spoke to that I'd rather hear from my city attorney unless she yields to you That is correct Thank you on the On the getting down to an issue that we're actually talking about The other issue we're talking about is the circulation access and that's why this slide is up What I see is one circulation access point I'm looking there's little green lines. I'm not sure the public can see that but There's there's a little one little green line going from West to east on the on the map Based on on your reading of the easement is that a sufficient access to meet the criteria of the easement? and I do have a copy of the easement now and the easement simply provides For a non-exclusive easement to use And to allow the use of vehicular parking lots and driveways which presently exist or will be developed in the future Developed here after And so there is not a specific design that is required by the easement So I guess I I asked you to opine As to whether or not one access is sufficient to meet the criteria It sounds to me as if the the easement document says Or at least anticipates there might be development on the properties That is correct. So the existence of development is not a concern for me now which was earlier My now my concern now is whether or not one access point needs a criteria That would be a very factual determination and would be You know, you'd have to delve into kind of the history of the property how the properties are being used now You know one party might assert Against the other that there is an over burdens of the easement by Development on the site, but that would be a discussion between the two private Between the two property owners, and it would not be for us Or the city council to make that determination Okay, so when I read the two copies we have two resolutions on this item when I read the two resolutions As they're written They both specify denying the appeal and then they each say something else Is it possible to separate the denial of the appeal out from the other two pieces In other words, can we Deny the appeal but have a question about the tentative map as a council Or the bonus and concessions as a council because they're intermingled in these documents Yes, the Whether it's in one resolution or multiple resolutions, but what is before you tonight is the project Obviously, it's it's before you because of the appeal But under our city code You have the discretion to look at the at the project at the underline project and anything related to the appeal okay, and If how is it how is it that we would attach a condition as we're discussing Would we attach it to both resolutions or to only one or It depends on what the nature of the condition is as presented as a suggestion from staff if I may The condition is Modifying an existing condition 7 in exhibit a on the tentative map resolution It builds on a standard requirement to comply with Our Okay, so the first the first resolution mentions the tentative map the second does not that's correct. So it'd be on the first resolution I just wanted to understand what I might be doing in the future If we ask for the buildings to the tentative map to come back divided differently, and I'm not sure that I have The numbers to do that, but if we wanted to move The map in such a way that We had a more integrated although each individual building is segregated still we understand that's a state, you know Federal problem associated with tax law if we wanted to ask them to come back with that swap out How how would we do that is it possible to do that? How would we do that? because the the separation of the Market rate and the affordable units was part of the concession for the density bonus You would have to make certain findings You'd have to determine that That concession of the separation of the units does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions Relative to the affordable housing construction. There are other findings as well But I think that would be the one that you would want to focus on If you were to you would in effect be denying that con concession and then adding conditions to the to the map If we wanted to move forward Let me rephrase that I'm assuming that if we made a request for a change to the concessions That it would cause delays in the project coming back to us Based on how long things take for us to do because it takes us time government moves slowly If we were to do those delays would it cause them to miss the window for their application For their grant application would that cause a window to be missed? Yes, it would okay Don't want them to miss the window Okay, thank you very much. It's been very informative. I appreciate your help So again if we can just if there's any questions for the applicant mr. Tillett's and then mr. Reisman I just just had a quick one and this was following up on a point that councilmember combs brought up My memory serves we do we collect 15 000 per market rate unit created and in lu fees. Do you know what the the total is? The in lu fee for rental units is based on square footage and based on the map that they presented to the design review board I calculated an in lu fee for the entire for the hundred units at about approximately $85,000 $85,000, okay Mr. Reisman Thank you, mr. Mayor I wanted to give you a chance to answer the question that looked like you were going to answer about the transferability What was your answer on that? Well that the the again as aldo brought out by means of health and safety code we are required to deliver affordable housing We are we have in place a development agreement that will be executed as soon as sika is approved by this body That that document will restrict mid-pen housing to building affordable housing It will require them to do that so that'll be a binding legal document between the development commission and mid-pen housing and that's how the Sonoma County Community Development Commission will ensure that our responsibility to build affordable housing is met by mid-pen housing And in the event that those units are sold Would they still be affordable units? Yes Great. Yes, and then I thought I heard you say and I just want to make sure and clarify that part of the separation between the very low income and the market rate was a federal requirement that allows you to bring in Additional dollars if you do it like this I'm just saying in order to access the amount of equity that's needed to build a project like this and to get federal tax credits That's that's what meant, you know, that's what Causes the design to be this way great. Thank you Do you have a question for the app? I'd like to follow up with that answer if I may So my understanding is that the federal credit is based on the lot Have I misunderstood that can you clarify? The the federal tax credits are allocated based on the basis of the building right So it is how the base of the building is No, the the basis meaning meaning the cost to construct essentially the cost to develop is what the tax credits are based upon Okay Yeah, usually um I'm told Please correct me that It's the column of the building that The read otherwise you could mix the doors So why can't you mix the doors? It's not that we can't it's that to do so would would reduce the number of affordable homes And that's that's the issue and the the financing It the what the city attorney just talked about in terms of Reducing the cost that finding that the planning commission made is the crux of this that to To Design the design it differently such that the affordable buildings and market rate buildings are interspersed would increase the cost It would mean that the projects could no longer proceed entirely independently Which was one of our goals because we didn't want to be tied to the market rate developer schedule nor they to us We want to be able to proceed as quickly as we can And and it also complicates the it also adds to the cost of the project just in terms of the complexity of Having to put a condo map on the property as opposed to a typical subdivision map And then the way that it's financed And because we're bringing in tax credits that a private investor purchases They're a part owner in the project for the first 15 years and so that Requires a level of complexity because of their role as an owner that makes it more difficult To to build affordable housing projects in the way that you're suggesting So I I see a couple of ways one of them was mixing doors One of them was mixing floors And one of them was making Blocks of the building be set be integrated Right And what you're saying is all three of those are too expensive Yes, in this case your your suggestion of taking one wing and and putting it on the other building and vice versa Would mean that the two Projects could not proceed independently at that point. They would have to be constructed at the same time They're designed to function like one building it or it would require a complete redesign of the project But in any event it would mean that the two the market rate and the affordable component would have to proceed together And we don't want to be slowed down by the market rate project That's the fundamental, you know as the mark as the master developer our goal was how we can bring a market rate developer in In a way that doesn't impact our ability to deliver the affordable housing And this was our solution to that and also to maximize the number of homes And that this is our solution to that as well Okay, this is the first time i've heard that the affordable will come first And it would have been very nice to have heard that much earlier in this process just as an aside. Thank you Mr. Oliver's Thank you, mayor I think before I guess what i'm asking is before we start coming to conclusions and rewriting resolutions Just being a public here and being nice to hear from the public So I can better make some decisions myself. So I would ask you to open the public hearing Any other questions? Great. Okay. We are moving to the public hearing. So I will open the public hearing First up, uh, george uberte followed by ann hammond I want to be very clear about two things The first absolutely denied this appeal Parking is not important easements can be rearranged people need to live somewhere The second thing I want to be absolutely clear about is that we are talking about a segregated building All right, the line across which we segregated is significantly less important than the fact that we would be building a segregated community All right, think about what it would be like to live here You know which building the poor people building is It's not confusing and the impact it's going to have on the people that are going to have to live in those spaces Is absolutely know what segregation does to people and it's damage All right. Now secondly now the the third thing I want to be clear about is that in addition to that just being a fact The there are we're being very uh dishonest here about what we are actually being obligated to do In terms of our Responsibilities towards building affordable units. There's absolutely nothing that says that there needs to be a separated building All right, and in fact If you look at the uh in the first resolution Right here under provision c it says the subdivision complies with the city of santa rosa housing allocation plan By providing more than 15 allocated affordable units, right now. That's 15 total units It says absolutely nothing about them being in a totally separated building, right? Similarly, if you look at government code section 65915 right In the california government code, uh, it specifies that 10 of the total units of a housing development Right, um b for lord. So It seems to specify at least by my reading Um that a any building has to have 10 total units, right? Which I I think would be read as you have to not Segregate buildings they they wrote this law specifically to avoid the things that mrs. Combs talked about number one that we you know Say we're going to build a building that never actually gets built which has happened in the history of santa rosa And number two that we don't build segregated communities now what the people from midpen have said Is that it would be harder to do the right thing? It usually is But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. It means we should do it All right now if it would slow things down it probably would have been a lot faster by not designing a segregated living environment to begin with Right, uh, we need to get off the ground doing the right thing here Okay, so number one absolutely deny this appeal Right the fact that it's been around for 50 years is evidence. We should change it. All right We should build less segregated environments number two. Let's Build less segregated environments build this the right way You have the power to grant whatever easements and whatever Things you need to under this density bonus and I encourage you to use that power in a positive way. Thank you Ann Hammond followed by robert nellison Good evening mayors shred helm and the council members. I'm ann hammond. I'm the director of the sinoma county library And as you know, we recently signed a lease for a temporary roseland branch But a permanent home for the roseland community library is a very important goal for uh for this community in the past In the past year, we've had over 26,000 library users walk through the doors of the current roseland library and we have offered on average 26 library programs per month with many of those programs providing early literacy support which is vitally needed in this community We are excited to share the news that we will be increasing the number of Open hours for the roseland library before the end of this year The library has been closely following the roseland neighborhood village project We are encouraged and excited about the vision for the project, especially the civic building And we are pleased to see in your staff presentation a mention of a permanent library in roseland We know there are concerns about parking and other impacts But we believe that the neighborhood and the proponents can work together And in good faith to make this a win-win For roseland, we look forward to continued conversations with the city and the county In responding to the needs of the roseland community For a permanent neighborhood library. Thank you. Thank you. Robert nelson followed by john paulson. Excuse me They mr. Nelson Is part of the Appellant team and did speak earlier Um I don't know if there's a time where there's a rebuttal but In the course of the public hearing it would he's had his opportunity to do the presentation Sorry mr. Nelson and that'd be the same for john paulson. Okay, peter rumble followed by paul carol No, there'll be opportunity for additional questions from councillor, but you've already been given an opportunity to speak So thank you Peter peter rumble, please Go ahead mr. Rumble. Thank you, mr. Mayor Peter rumble from the san rosa metro chamber. I'll start by professionally saying that the san rosa Metro chambers in strong endorsement in favor of this project moving forward I'm not sure that there's much I can say from that professional perspective to or that organizational perspective to Change minds if they may be wavering Tonight, so I wanted to give a little bit of my own personal Story on this so I remember when the community came together when I was an analyst at the county administrator's office Before we purchased this property And the community saying that this is the type of development they wanted And then I remember as a depth as a director of health policy When I was able to complete the portrait of sonoma Data and reports saying that this is the type of community Development that should happen In the community. I remember as a deputy county administrator Responsible for community engagement and community affairs When the community was heartbroken as well as the county That redevelopment was dissolved and it jeopardized the viability and future of this project I remember as as Someone deeply concerned with the state of housing and the viability of Portions of our community that were left out of the city Both as a private citizen and then again as a deputy county administrator What would happen with this property? And now with the chamber. I see The community coming together to once again say that this is the project that it wants And so I'm not sure again what I can say to Again, maybe change minds that that may be swaying I will say that based on Over a decade of the community saying that they want this development I Uh, I worry that it's not plessy that we're replicating By this development. It might be plessy that we're replicating by not allowing this development. Thank you Thank you Paul carol followed by activio Diaz Paul carol I started working in housing in 1985 for the sametale county housing authority And then I spent 12 that was three years 12 years with the sonoma county community development commission Also working in housing And then I went to work for a labor union which allowed me to be a housing advocate For a period of time If This project had come up Back in say 2002 or 2003 Every housing advocate would be saying yes Let's do this This is what we need the fact that the affordable is 30 feet away from the market rate Doesn't matter It is not in terms of inclusionary zoning. It's not even remotely close to segregation to claim that Is specius at best and derides your credibility. So I would suggest you don't do it This area needs this Really bad And this can be a springboard For future development along sabastopol road and other areas of roseland that are badly needed So If you want to wait to get things perfect You're going to wait a really long time I currently work for community action partnership and we have two homeless shelters that we run We are in dire need of every unit that addresses 30 percent Of median income Every unit Because that will make the homeless problem Less critical So holding this up To try to get it perfect Is going to victimize A lot of people Thank you Thank you paul octavio followed by chris gravel Hello, good evening all mayor city council from santa rosa My name is Octavia Diaz. I'm a local entrepreneur in salama county started with agave hillsworth It's a small restaurant Our family prides ourselves and And Working very hard in this community and what I do see happening is What we call a broken window in a car in brooklyn or oakland. This is your broken window car in roseland and by Making this happen You will elevate the psychological way of Thinking of those people that live within five ten ten mile radius right away what that means is No garbage or less garbage. It would put pressure on other business owners To paint renovate Otherwise, this would not be happening. So please I am for you making this happen with the cdc Working with marco suarez at the economic development board To give some credit to effrancarrillo and alan herman I'm very impressed with how professional has this been handled To make this happen I am not doing this To make more money for my own pockets and go to the bahamas and see the business from my phone I am doing it because I believe in education in this community And it's as first generation latino From mexico in sonoma county. You don't know why we have in sonoma county But if this continues to happen, you are putting the brakes on something magical For for my family to continue to support Education, which is what we need in this community in this county me tote will be a An example Of educating not just the latino community, but everybody in roseland to come in and try something different To learn about the different cultures from different states of mexico, which is to enrich what's already there But to clean it up a little bit more to be a high standard place where people take pride in what's already there But enhance it even more So think about the car that's got the window broken. Nobody cares about In two hours that car would be vandalized and nobody cares about roseland Has been left out for many many years or who knows centuries You have the power tonight to make that change for the better I I am very involved in oakland I have a small restaurant in oakland And I can tell you this A lot of people that don't want to move forward with positive things They have nothing to offer They have nothing to offer They my job is to create jobs Pay taxes and that's all that we're trying to do in roseland. So please make the right decision. Thank you. Thank you Uh chris grayville followed by effin cabio Good evening I want to make a joke first and then I i'm gonna go hard on this i'm I'm pretty fed up with with the waiting and the perfection And what that means for the people who need housing and what it means historically in this town I'm ready for that the noise ordinance If we could take some of that noise and put it in roseland So that we can both have the hammer swinging there and the party to celebrate when it's finished I live two blocks away Show me the noise bring the noise come on My dad started working on this The advisory capacity in the planning phase This is 12 to 25 years. My dad died during the planning of this project. Let me just Let me just let that sit with you. Okay He worked on all affordable He worked on the ideas of inclusionary all these things if the financing mechanisms and the syndication And the regulatory framework was there to do inclusionary and to do it fast It would it would have been done and you would see it all over this town But then to say that that an all affordable development shouldn't happen because it's segregationist That is ridiculous and then we should should we not have any all affordable developments across the town because That's that's what you're saying. That's that is what is available to us to build Now and the alternative is mostly poor people of color commuting because they can't afford to live here or living four families in an apartment because they can't live here Commuting one to two hours not seeing their kids not being there to spend time with them for their entire working life essentially That is a huge deal and it's been a problem the best of intentions in this community have resulted in exclusionary outcomes Racist exclusionary outcomes and I say that racist because equity Is what needs to happen. It's not just another project Rosalinds. It's not just another area This is an underserved area that has been historically and systematically put on the back burner Equity means it's not just another project. It means it's a priority And you make it a priority and you show that the reason that we voted for you to build housing to do the best for our community That you're willing to do that And we'll keep working on better and better things, but i'm sorry it's The time to chop this up and whittle it away and take another 12 years This is an intergenerational project. Is my daughter gonna be up here next? I'm not kidding man. This is This is really frustrating And I spend most of my hours and most of my days and she knows she's like papa Is there another meeting? And i'm like yep, and she's like are we is it for housing? I say yep Please just Take some action We've been setting ourselves up as a city to be able to be in this position to start saying yes to really amazing things Si se puede Adelante, por favor Thank you, chris. Efren Carrillo followed by june grable You want to join me? Mayor schwedhelm esteam council members. Thank you for the opportunity Efren Carrillo Former sonoma county supervisor and also with burbank housing Um, we read a quote here the dream of turning a blighted shopping center in the heart of roseland into a prized neighborhood center southwest of santa rosa Is closer to reality than it has been in years? martin espinoza may 11th 2010 Alberson's departed the shopping center in 2003 16 years ago Residents called down to the county to do something which led to the spasible road urban vision plan in 2005 Which then led to a rezoning of mixed uses on the site? The silver lining of the departure of alphabeta luckies and albersons Was the rise of latino on mercados lola's market rancho mendosa la guadalupana camacho market Having gone to rosin elementary school in the late 80s I've seen the changes in rosland And the opportunity that the council has before you is wanted to continue to feed into that dream The rosin community has had for decades The county under now the now defunct redevelopment era initiated purpose purchase of the property to ignite the possibilities of realizing that dream Recognizing that under private ownership it was not In their control to move that forward That purchase alone turned a blighted privately owned property with little change or desire for anything but Into a public community asset It's a public community asset in midpen housing You have a non-profit affordable housing developer That is respected and reputable in every other city and county they have done work in And I say this is a sometimes competing affordable housing sister agency where we do compete for projects and we compete for funds And yet we recognize that it's important to have Folks that do this work in our community to ensure that we can do it better But midpen does not build buildings Like all non-profit affordable housing developers. We re-envision communities We provide opportunities for working class people to live in our communities About the housing mix. Let's just assume that you were looking solely at a for-profit development And what type of requirements would be instituted by the zoning and the rules and the regulations before you? In that construct If this were a private development, you would be considering a project that is proposing 42 Fully affordable inclusionary Homes or rentals as part of that project 42 percent if you look at the construct of what's being presented for you This will be a fully integrated community that is responding to the community's interest and desires for decades Rather than considering additional conditions For a now a non-profit housing partner and a county sister agency in an attempt to make things better Let's not burden an already complicated vision and process And deny the appeal and support the planning commission's decision And if anything, let's talk about what ourselves what we can do And what else the city can do to support this dream. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Thank you everyone. June graybill followed by ben terry Is something to say Say yes to housing Is she good there? Thank you Ben terry Hold on just there you go My name is ben terry president of the nacp in sonoma county I was listening to those two ladies and their Perspective on this is the same as mine and nacp You say there's separate No, this is one community How can it be one community when you got two different houses? It don't work I came out here. I've been out here ever since I was 18 years old. I lived in a segregated housing Sooner or later 10 years from now those low-income houses On be worth 10,000 and the other one on be worth 30,000 You can't do that And a lot of this money is coming from I think better government We oppose That money going into Housing that you guys don't make a lot of money on by separating the low income from the regular house And we oppose that So those two ladies They know what they're talking about. Thank you Thank you, mr. Cherry Thomas ells Well, thank you for the opportunity to speak and and this project has I think it really excites a lot of people. Um, it uh was part of the process Down there to look at that square and and what it would be. It's it's it's really amazing It's fantastic. There's a lot of really great things about it um I would I would say that there's probably about three parking spaces on there that if you If you do without those you might be able to compromise with the neighbor And allow the access of the trucks to come in from behind that from behind the market to come around and come out and You know irrespective of the mutuality of the park of the other parking I think you're going to run into a bit of a problem if you try to go ahead and and block that access That's my experience So I would just say do away with two or three three of those parking spaces Right here right now and save yourself a lot of heartache Make a compromise find a way there I I can't really say anything about about the Or the prefer not to say anything about the content of the housing over the mix but that I think it's apartments and it's not As I understand it. It's not individual ownerships. So people are not going to actually accrue Values that are different One one being different from the other one being You know a $10,000 house and a $30,000 house that are next to each other and and one's accruing an asset And and they're markedly different that If their apartment, that's not going to be the case. So They're not going to have that And so there's not a distinction there. So unfortunately, I mean from From that argument standpoint, but but as far as going forward I think I think it's imperative that you attempt To at least address that one question, which I think is going to cause a stalemate Thank you. Thank you, thomas Those are all the cards we have you don't have to fill out a card if you'd like to make comments on this item Is there anyone else in the audience marcos? thank you Good evening mayor shred home and council and everybody here present Marco suarez. I am I work for the county economic development board And we have the county I do work with the businesses there in rosin and also the community And we've been working on this project If actually even before I was there and but lately in the last four years in terms of the businesses the community and On friday there was an event at losia and latino leaders and noemi palomino who's a Mom and she's an advocate in rosin She actually stood up and and said that you know And expressed what the community is feeling for the many years that They've been waiting and waiting and waiting and uh, so I hope that today The only thing that that I can say on behalf of of the people in rosin is that you deny the appeal Allow this project to move forward and let's You know bring something to the community that it's going to be great I mean there's people that are involved that are going to incorporate Community local community there in rosin. So uh, you heard octavio you heard Mr. Carrillo. I mean everybody's we're all in I mean we're working with it. We're boots on the ground I mean chris grable. Where are you right here? You know great people. So I mean we're we're not going to let this one slip away I mean we're gonna we want we're gonna be there mid pan everybody there. They're committed CDC Ben Wickham. I mean we're we're right there. So Thank you for all the questions. I know that you know, there's there's been bad situations in the past and so but we We're really hopeful and we're we're positive on this one. So thank you again And I was here with Peter rumble and everybody working together. So let's let's make this happen. Thank you Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to address the council on this item? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing Running back to council. Are there any questions for the appellant or the applicant? Mr. Mayor Given some of the testimony that we've heard this evening staff is requesting a 10 minute recess So we can discuss some of this. Okay, that sounds great. We'll take a 10 minute recess Okay, we'll reconvene our meeting mr. Rose. Uh, would you like to provide some information to council? Yeah, surely. Thank you. So Some of the testimony that was given got staff's attention Specifically the sequencing of the construction and when the affordable units could or could not be built So that prompted the recess. We had a chance to discuss it internally as well as with the applicant team The applicant team would like to clarify some of those statements and also offer some additional information that We're hopeful is helpful for the discussion and the council's consideration Great. Thank you. Go ahead then There we go. So I just want to um kind of walk The council through how the project will go forward and that that will probably help clarify some things The development commission The first thing that we are going to do that we're required to do we need to build we say build the infrastructure That means we have to build all the streets utilities and that includes building out all of the lots So Right now we don't have enough money to do that Because the infrastructure costs are quite high So we build out the lots And the two million dollars That comes from selling the market rate lot comes back into the deal And and makes that budget whole So that's why that's so crucial And that the money from the the parcel that we are calling market rate Is going to go to subsidize The the infrastructure construction on the entire project. So that's a crucial piece and then i'll let um I'll let Keith from urban mix talk a little bit about why We can't link the market rate and the affordable parcel together why that's going to be a showstopper Good evening. Keith mccoy with urban mix development and as ben said This is a fairly unique project in that the market rate Project will help fund some of the infrastructure That's to the tune of about two million dollars. We can't actually purchase the site We don't have a fee interest In this project yet until the actual the parcel is created and there's infrastructure there There'll be an appraisal done and at that point And actually when we're ready to pull a building permit, we'll actually take ownership But if you condition this project And tying it to the affordable it will definitely hamstring our ability to get financing Is there any question about that? Well, is there any additional information that you'd like to provide or mr. Rose Is there any additional information because the next step in the process of the cf council after hearing from the public Here from the appellant the applicant staff any final questions before we go to yeah Well, I think the the item that got our attention was that There was a statement that the affordable housing could be built before the market rate housing And that's the clarification that we were seeking and if the applicant wishes they may want to clarify that further right now Yes, I can clarify that this is jam london thaw again with midpen housing What what um, we are prepared to move forward as quickly as possible That means our goal has been to not link the affordable and the market rate projects so that both could proceed as quickly as possible that Manifested itself in terms of how we designed it so they could be constructed separately and also in terms of the financing We're prepared to submit our application to the state In august for funding that will help make up the financing gap and prepare us to to Secure our tax credits if all that comes to pass We'll be ready to start construction as soon as the cdc's finish the infrastructure That may very well be ahead of Keith's schedule. Maybe not maybe It will be but my point is that we're not dependent on their on their development happening And so we can proceed on our own schedule and that's what we've Designed and and our financing plan has been designed to facilitate But just to add on I think I just want to make it clear. We can't have a cross Condition that conditions the affordable housing to go first or second It just doesn't it doesn't work in the way we finance which is just basically private financing through a bank So that would be very difficult to do Okay So then let me bring this back to council. Do you have questions of the applicant the appellant or staff? miss combs I believe that the gentleman who was concerned about the um easement issue had wanted to make a quick statement of rebuttal and I wanted to give him that opportunity if that's all right It very briefly please. Thank you. I would like to address what I personally observed since 1984 Which is more than long enough as any One who knows anything about easements will attest to And then john who was with his dad from the age of five can talk about back to 1960 If you take the Northern edge of the building that you see there on the map the pulsing building The white building take the northern edge of that. There's a driveway that's been there I know since 1984 And it takes up the you or center section of the building to connect to west avenue That is the driveway that was in existence at least since 1984 And that is what is going to continue Under the prescriptive easement terms john can talk to you about What was in effect when the easement was signed? Okay, I mean yeah, if you have questions, so are there I just wanted to say Okay, does council have any additional questions for anyone on this? item So I have a question for staff We're now being told that we can't put across condition on For example that we couldn't condition the affordability based on the We can't condition the occupancy of one building with the affordability of the other based on the difficulty of the applicant for getting Financing is that Is that as have I understood that that's what you're saying? I just like to be clear that I got it Can we They have now offered testimony that because of for financing reasons They are Excuse me. They are Still wanting the concession of D linking those two components And they have offered testimony that The reason for that is is that those two components are going to be quite independent sources of financing And the Urban mix has indicated that any linkage between the two would make That financing Difficult would that include a bond requiring a bond to make sure that the affordable is built Was that is that linking the projects or who would who would be responsible for such a bond? That's an an open question as to who would be Posting the bond and what the nature of that bond would be Is My understanding is that some projects go forward. It's not unusual for a project to go forward with a bond. I'm just trying to understand that How do we do that? Well, we can describe to you a bonding process. It happens typically in a mapping Exercise gabe can describe that but ultimately that would have to be presented to this development team to see If they are willing to do that capable of doing that. So if you'd like we can give you a summary of how a bonding could work Can you be brief? Absolutely So bonds are fairly typical in residential subdivisions and they're used as a measure to Ensure that the public infrastructure is completed. So oftentimes we will allow the development of the residential units prior to the improvements being completed And the bond is essentially a performance bond that ensures those get done in those situations. There is one developer They're not linked into another developer. So they control the whole process The bond is required According to the subdivision map act when they elect to do the building first. So that's really the most typical situation where we see a bond Thank you. Thank you for that. Mr. Tim. This is your item Thank you, mr. Marin if it's all right, I'd like to provide some comments before I make the The motions You know, I think that what we have here is a project that has a lot of good Baked into it. We've got 52 low income units 23 very low income units These are a lot of the folks that we discuss on a regular basis here in this chamber We have the opportunity for the boys and girls club To have a home the library a priority also a priority of this council in addition to affordable housing Uh and the mercado in the square and and recalling back to my time working in rosalind as an intern with the economic development board is That was a very that was the number one priority for those residents if I recall correctly was that mercado in that square And this helps bring that to fruition You know perfection cannot impede the good in this instance in seven years of public input But with that said the robust discussion tonight Should not Go unnoticed and the debate should not stop here I think that mixed income housing is absolutely the gold standard of affordable housing And as we talk about that more In this chamber as more affordable housing projects as components of market rate come forward This body really needs to have Policies or at the very least an understanding of how that works vis-a-vis the financing vis-a-vis The mapping process and getting entitlements so what you're gonna You're gonna see for me tonight is to enthusiastically move this forward, but next week I am going to be enthusiastically making a motion to Have that conversation because we must So with that I move a resolution of the council of the city of san aroza Denying an appeal and making findings and determinations and approving the rosalind village tentative map for the two existing parcels Located at 6 6 5 and 8 8 3 sabastopol road assessors partial numbers 1 2 5 dash 1 1 1 dash 0 3 7 and 1 2 5 Dash 1 0 1 dash 0 3 1 file numbers prj 1 7 dash 0 7 5 maj 1 7 dash 0 0 6 and wave further reading of the text So we have a motion and a second any additional discussion Mr. Sawyer Thank you, ma'am. I will be very very brief. I am in support of the planning commission's decision I appreciate staff's involvement has been a Long lengthy discussion. This is what we have been waiting for in my opinion I don't think I believe that a perfect project is an oxymoron I want to move forward rosalind deserves it san aroza deserves it That the the the broken window Let's put a shiny new car in the middle of rosin and get go forward and give Give everyone in this community something they could be proud of and I think that this but that's what this project will do. Thank you Mr. Allers Thank you. Personally, this is a little bit of a frustrating process for me tonight I think it exemplifies what we've put rosin through in the past is delays delays delays and frustration And that doesn't bode well with me I think at the end we need to listen to what the residents of rosin want They put a lot of time and energy and input into the process I know there's a lot of processes and opportunities for them to do that And I cannot put myself in a position to start meddling in some of those issues And this is very specific to rosalind only because of the historical issues that have gone there in the past I don't live there. I visit there often. I eat there. I eat at private homes there It's a great place to visit And I look forward to doing more and more of that as as the changes come They are a part of our community But again the delays that we put this community through are are unacceptable to me And i'm happy to move this forward by by denying this appeal Hey, miss combs. You have comments Okay, you'll be coming next then Ms. Fleming I want to thank the the staff and my council for a robust Conversation and vid pen and urban mix for Sticking it out through this process. I want to be very clear that I I will be supporting this project and that any hesitancy you hear from me is is not me saying no to affordable housing it's me saying yes to To a robust conversation that we have to have about the realities that we know when we do do segregation and it is Separate and we are saying it's separate and we are saying it's equal and we know that those things aren't true I do think that the The tenor of the moment is that We need housing more than we need a perfect project I will share that three years ago two or three years ago when I sat on the Santa Rosa community advisory board Urban mix and midpen came before me and told me that this was not Might then when I raised these concerns about the poor door housing They really didn't want to have this conversation There was an opportunity for you guys to have taken that into consideration And while it might have cut down on a few of the affordable units We could have had a better project and you cannot claim that you did not know that this was an opportunity or a concern And so I ask you to please be more mindful when you go around Listening to community groups. Are you listening? Are you just sharing it and checking it off of a box? Because I'm very frustrated that I said this three years ago and here we are today So the community wants housing fine and we'll go forward with it Will we get affordable housing? Is that better than no housing? Absolutely But the red herring was that it's not that it's no housing. It wasn't no housing. It was A mix of housing and would there be fewer affordable units indeed? But the outcomes for those families could have been far better than the detriment that we may see by separating out the families so with that Those are my comments And I hope that you know that we don't look at this moment the way that I look at the people who redlined the neighborhood that I grew up in Because people don't typically get judged by the moment that they're in and they get judged by future generations And I hope that that this gets looked at Kindly and that this is a great opportunity for for roseland Miss comes. Thank you I've been excited and enthusiastic about the roseland village project for a very long time I'm particularly excited and interested in the zocalo in the Vibrancy in the idea of the full mixed-use housing Um, I have not been looking for perfect I have repeatedly mentioned to the Mid-Pen and and multiple meetings That I had concerns regarding economic integration. This should not be a surprise to anyone I recall at my last meeting with them saying don't be surprised That i'm going to talk to you about concerns about economic integration I'm really sorry. We haven't found a solution for this for our first roseland project Mr. Gravel's father once asked me to deny an affordable project that came before us Because it was not fully integrated for families I have had many folks comment to me concern about the kinds of separation that comes forward For example, when we do project-based HUD voucher use because the concept was integration One of the things that I'm hoping will happen when Mr. Tibbet springs the discussion forward next week Is that we will also ask our Colleagues in the senate And the state house The federal government that we ask them clearly and concretely to look at how we can revise this tax credit So that we don't end up having to make decisions like this Functionally we are creating separation by law We've spent a couple of hours tonight talking about this That's really a drop in the bucket And i'm somewhat unhappy to have been told that i'm significantly delaying a project by having a conversation About equity and fairness in construction practices at the one dais i can have that conversation at It's been a couple of hours of delay. It's not a permanent project delay I think we need to speak up for better housing for better mixed Housing I think we can do that. I'm hoping that the result of this conversation Is that the next project that comes forward? They've heard us tonight On that basis I will approve I will vote to approve this project But i'm approving it with reservations I think we need the housing. I know we need the housing But I think the future is going to tell us an awful lot about What happens between the l community and the c community? I think some of us have lived through that in other locations I'm sorry that i'm going to see it again here It's my understanding that we are put in a very difficult condition situation with regard to conditions Uh, I sure hope that I don't discover that we have the fourth situation where we get only the market housing And that we don't get the affordability. I'm trusting that the county will follow up with their obligations. Thank you Mr. Taylor, do you have any final comments? No, I don't. Okay, mr. Vice mayor Thank you, mr. Mayor I think part of the reason that this conversation has been as robust as it is is that this is not just a project site This is really the heart of a neighborhood It is an area that's represented neglect for a long time in an area of our community It's a part of our community that's under parked. It's getting a park It's a part of our community that has not had the same level of economic development This is going to drive business into the area And I think the irony of this conversation About talking about economic integration on this project is that we have none in santa rosa to begin with There are far too many people who are looking at the city wondering whether or not they can afford to live here I'm one of them. I live paycheck to paycheck in this city too having to rent an apartment and to say that this project is going to There's More people are going to be able to live in our community They're not going to have to travel as far to work They're going to be able to spend more time with their family like was said and I understand that it isn't How everybody pictured it, but I think we as seven members of the council who don't live in that neighborhood Do a disservice to roseland when we say that this isn't a perfect project and we're holding our noses and we're voting for it No Congratulations to the neighbors who came forward told us what they wanted and delivered a project Based on the core values that they have based on what they want to see with a park and with a community center and with housing Yes, not as integrated as we would all like but still congratulations to roseland. This is going to be one heck of a project And I hope it really is the turning point of feeling integrated into our community And i'm not going to repeat many the similar feelings I have as my colleagues, but one of the things for me Um, it's just the relationships we have in this community whether it be for my relationship with the chamber or mr. Grable mr. Currio Marco is talking to the downtown business owner here in the business owners and it's that consistent message that this is what we want And it's um, I'm excited to see what the possibility is because Would you understand mr. Vice mayor? I think this is a first step and we're going to show that yes Is it perfect? Absolutely not, but we're going to make it the best possible project that we can so it'll be enthusiastically supporting that So with that your votes, please And that passes unanimously. Thank you We have one more mr. Mayor and our second Yeah, it's my honor to introduce a resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa denying an appeal and making findings and determinations and approving a density bonus for roseland village mixed use located at 665 and 883 sabbatical road assessors partial numbers numbers one two five dash one one one dash zero three seven and one two five dash one zero one dash Zero three one file numbers prj one seven dash zero seven five db one nine dash zero zero one And wait for the reading of the text second We have a motion to second any additional comments seeing none your votes And that also passes unanimously. Thank you Mr. McGlenn item 16.2 item 16.2 public hearing gernville road homes planning project 1665 gernville road prj one eight dash zero eight nine christen a two mains presenting Thank you, mayor schwelt schwet helman members of the council. This is gernville road homes rezoning The request is to subdivide one acre into 12 residential lots in To be able to construct 12 attached single family homes They will include three accessory dwelling units The required actions were The rezoning which went before planning commission with a recommend recommendation for approval A conditional use permit which the planning commission approved and the tentative map which planning commission also approved This is the project locations on the north side of gernville road between marlowe and ridley avenue It's currently developed with a single family home Here's the project history the most recent events may 9th 2019 planning commission recommended approval of the rezoning They approved a conditional use permit for the small lot subdivision And they approved a tentative map This item is also tentatively scheduled for final designer view for the drb july 18th This is the general plan and zoning for the parcel. It's currently in medium density residential And it's zoned rr 20 The project is consistent the proposed zoning is consistent with the general plan designation of medium density residential In that the designation allows residential density at 8 to 18 dwelling units per acre The project is proposing a single family attached unit type at 12 units per acre This is the proposed tentative the approved tentative map The map approved by planning commission Here is the site plan showing how the units will Are proposed to be developed and includes three accessory dwelling units two at the corner And one in the top center These are the proposed elevations that the one at the top shows the adu To the side of the building The garages are insets insets lightly and they have front porches Here are the rear elevations showing the Private patio areas for the units And the fence As far as public public comment staff received an inquiry from two neighboring property owners One neighbor to the east cited concerns with noise from the proposed project The status of sidewalks on the subject property and concerns regarding potential overflow parking onto the redwood forest friends meeting house property the applicant is currently in talks with a suitable fencing solution between the two properties And as far as the project being having an overflow parking issue the the The project is sufficiently parked for their use A single family resident to the west emailed staff with questions regarding any proposed fencing As stated the project will have a fence separating private rear yards from neighboring property owners As far as sequel the project qualifies for a class 32 exemption per section 15 332 infill development projects And the project also qualifies for a sequel exemption pursuant to sequel guideline section 15 18 3 i for which no additional environment or environmental reviews required when rezoning for general plan consistency With that the planning and economic development department recommends that the city council Introduce an ordinance to rezone a one acre property located at 1665 gernbill road from r r 20 rural residential zoning district To the r 3 1 8 multifamily residential zoning district to facilitate the development of 12 attached single family dwellings and Three accessory dwelling units The applicants representative and engineer are here to answer any questions and staffs available for any questions you might have Great. Thanks for bringing back to council any questions for staff Seeing none, this is a public hearing. I'll open the public hearing. Do we have any cards on this one yet? You don't have to fill out a card if you would like to make comment. Please go up to one of the podiums It's all easy. I just I supported, you know, I said we clearly need more housing This is an opportunity to do that rezone, please. Thank you Anyone else like to make comment? Close the public hearing mr. Oliver's is your item. Thank you mayor. Thank you mayor I'll introduce an ordinance of the council city of senator osa meeting title 20 of the senator's a city code reclassification Of property located at 16 65 gernville road apn 0 3 6 dash 0 1 0 1 dash 0 1 0 from the r r 20 rural residential Zoning district to the r dash 3 dash 18 multifamily residential zoning district file number prj 1 8 dash 0 8 9 and wait for the reading of the text second Motion to second any additional comments? Seeing none your votes, please And that passes unanimously by six votes with vice mayor rogers having left the meeting All right. Thank you item 17. We have no written communications. Any additional cards for public comment? Seeing none meeting adjourned