 Okay, I'm going to go ahead and call to order tonight's meeting of the City of Santa Rosa Planning Commission and ask for a roll call, please Let the record reflect that all commissioners are present except Commissioner Carter and Commissioner Peterson Next we'll move on to the approval of our February 14th minutes any Corrections to those Okay, those are going to stand as printed and next we'll move on to the time for public comments Which is a time for any member of the public to? address the Commission on matters of interest to the Commission that are not listed tonight as a public hearing You don't have to have filled out a card, and I don't have any cards So I'm going to open the public comment period if you'd like to speak to us You can go to one of the two microphones at the top. I am not seeing anyone do that Okay No, these are non-agenda items just public comment. So, okay, great Okay, so in that case, I'm going to go ahead and close public comments and move on to planning commissioners report and Any reports? Yes, commissioner call. Yeah, sure on Monday chair Cisco commissioner weeks and I participated in a exercise with the boys and girls club tomorrow's leaders for today and the planning and economic department and just to Summarize to get their input on the downtown station area specific plan And so we broke up in three different teams there were around 30 to 40 youth high school age youth and we went around to different places and kind of got their input on what they would like to see in the vacant a few vacant buildings and It was a really beneficial exercise. I'm gonna let a lot of good insight from the from the kids Great. Thank you by sure weeks on Saturday I participated in a Santa Rosa together workshop and Patrick Streeter and Jessica Jones were there talking to the station area plan and I think they got some good information and we're able to disseminate Information as well as receive it. So thank you Any other commissioner reports? Okay, then we'll move on to department reports Good afternoon Like the highlight a couple of upcoming meetings coming your way that you might be of interest to at least observe some council items, so There was an appeal of a conditional use permit Be kind dispensary that was proposed on Sonoma Avenue the Commission acted on that Conditional use permit went on appeal. It was scheduled for this last Tuesday, but because of the storm event The entire council meeting was cancelled and so that was one of the ones that needed to get rescheduled And I just wanted to announce that new date. We're looking at March 12th, which is the next available date There is another appeal of a commission decision that's headed towards council, but we haven't confirmed the date But the dispensary that is on appeal for that. That's the Montgomery Drive Fox Den appeal So once that's known, I'll announce that And then April 2nd is our annual. It's a very important meeting. It's an annual study session Maybe it's a report item, but it's the annual planning commission Joint City Council meeting that goes over our annual report for how we're doing on our general plan implementation Similar to last year's scope We sort of added in how we're doing on our housing action plan initiatives because there's quite a number of initiatives and process Some of which have been completed, but many still are in process. We want to give an update on that And just other elements so we've brought in the scope of that presentation to include Those elements as well and that's April 2nd and since it's a report item It's earlier in the day. I don't have the time Yet for that, but it's typically 2 o'clock or 2 30 in the afternoon Also just a update on our how we're progressing with our downtown plan update process Want to shout out about our website that is the best way to track the project if you're interested in our downtown update process It's a plan downtown com you can also go to that website you can click on a Icon that's on there and you can sign up to get alerts for updates and whatnot says that is the best one-stop shop for following that process And kind of we've already started you heard from a commissioner We've already started various different ways of outreaching and that's going to continue on in fact this next Monday is the community advisory committee's first meeting and Just so those members have been selected. We did get a lot of applicants and the purpose of that Advisory committee is not to be a decision-making board, but really to become ambassadors to help us more with outreach So we're meeting with them on Monday to further explore our outreach plan And how they will participate in that plan So that's that I think that's all I have to report Okay, great so with that Any statements of abstention tonight? Okay, great not seeing any We do not have a study session nor any consent items So with that we're going to move on to our first public hearing tonight Which is item 10.1 the Rosalind Village subdivision. It is an ex parte disclosure And commissioner call you anything to disclose? I've visited the site and met with the applicant team and have no new information to disclose Mr. Duggan I also visited the site and met with the applicant team and have no new information to disclose Vice-chair weeks I Also visited the site and met with the applicants and representatives and have nothing to disclose Mr. Ocrackey, I met with the applicant team and I've nothing further to disclose And I also visited the site met with the applicants team and have no new information to disclose So with that I'll turn it over to Andy Gustafson to do our staff report Thank you very much I Am happy to introduce the Rosalind Village project to the planning Commission This action tonight before you is a tentative map and a density bonus the project is been proposed by the midpen Group and they are applicants for the Sonoma County Community Development Commission It's an important project for the city. It's going to provide a substantial number of housing units Including 75 affordable units total will be 175 units in this mixed units project It is located in the sabast excuse me North Faroaks Roseland area sorry Of Santa Rosa and it is just off of sabastopol Avenue as I mentioned this is a tentative map for us It's for a 7.41 acre site it result in five lots the proposed subdivision will include The typical improvements infrastructure Everything that to support future development there including roads and and circulation It is a project a map that will support a future project that We'll talk about more describe more about In terms of what uses are anticipated on the location also importantly because The applicants are requesting a density bonus to allow for 175 units on the property They will be exceeding the allowed general plan density there by 32% They need with this first discretionary action to get that density bonus considered and approved And so that's the second action for this evening with that density bonus requests They are also asking for three concessions and we'll talk more about those this evening The site itself is in general plan land use designation medium Residential and retail business services this mix of land use designations contemplates a mixed-use project The zoning there is general commercial And there's a small portion of it. That is retail business services These zonings are a supportive of the proposed future use the area has been subject to a specific plan and that plan took a close look at the at the community and and Saw it this site for a Mixed-use development to incorporate a number of features that would become a focus in the community One of the principal features would be a one-acre plaza This schematic that you see here is an illustrative plan that the applicant team has Put forward and has been working with the community and has actually gone to our design review committee for a concept review And it shows their Very refined concept of the arrangement of uses on the property You see at the back Apartment buildings on the left side in the rear are 75 affordable units and on the right side are two apartment buildings with a total of a hundred units and then in the center bottom is the park and right off to the side of it is a Market where a Lot of activity would be centered off off of the we were very public space and to support that public space is a site for a future civic building with the intent that it be a Place for the Roseland Village Library as well as other public type services These images Give a flavor of what the Design is of the facility and the project team tonight will be able to Provide a lot more detail about their vision going forward with the project But I just provide these here to provide a little teaser for them for their presentation the project has been Working through not only the city, but also the county it started in the county this site was in the Unincorporated area of Roseland and then in 2017 when in annexed it came over to the city to take the lead on the project And since that time the city staff has been working with the applicant team to help to ensure that The subdivision is configured and the improvement associated with that meet city standards and that the design Or the layout of the of the site will support the type of mixed use that the city is seeking and that That it fits a design that'll be complementary to the community Oops This shows the existing setting comparing The the map that was submitted with the packet for the tentative map against the aerial photograph. What you see is the site is Now largely vacant. It's being readied for development Right now it is the side of the branch the library branch at Children's Playground. Otherwise, it's a Fully developed site or has been historically developed Joe Radota trails on the north side. I'll try to point it out Here and then Sebastopol Avenue here and also important to note is West Avenue at the southern end the subdivision Will basically Partition the site into four parts With a strong central division by Western Avenue extending north through the site It'll provide for future access to development in the area north of the Joe Radota trail between the trail and the in the highway the city's Circulation plan contemplates that this road will be a primary one of the primary access to this air to that area to the north as it develops And then additionally There are side streets that are public that'll provide circulation within the site The lots are listed there in terms of size and use They all conform with the minimum lot sizes for this area This is rather a planner might look at grading and utility rather mundane, but they are important parts of a Development proposal and actually will be necessary to support the intensity of development that's Contemplated for the site and Much of the work that city staff has been engaged with the project team has focused on making sure that we have the adequate infrastructure to support future development Excuse me So the the key points about the tentative map it sets the stage for future development That's consistent with the general plan the specific plan It provides for an intensity of development that helps to meet the city's housing needs It provides separate Building or separated building sites That provide for passive and natural heating or cooling of the building. That's an important subdivision tentative map finding And also provides for infrastructure And improvements that help to ensure that there will not be any water quality violations that the Facility is adequately served by the city's treatment plant So that's the the first action substantial issue before the Planning commission this evening If there are any questions about that i'm happy to to entertain them now or now Just going to the second action regarding the density bonus. Yeah, let's keep going. Okay. Thank you So the density bonus is being sought as i mentioned because the site will be Developing 175 units on the property the current general plan land use Designation limits residential development on the site to up 133 The increase number represents a 32 percent Jump in number of units allowed by the general plan Our density bonus regulation, which was recently updated By city council on which of this planning commission reviewed last fall Will allow 35 increase in the residential density in this location This location is not within if you remember the supplemental density area where we can go much higher This is that portion of the city everywhere else in the city that's eligible for the statewide 35 percent and in this locale The proposed project would Fit within those guidelines or in terms of requirements now With a 35 percent with the requested density bonus and the amount of affordable units that they're proposing They well exceed the minimum number of affordable units that will be Otherwise required So this exhibit shows that there will be a standalone building with 75 units in it And then there's a standalone parcel with two buildings with the with the market rate units To qualify for a 35 percent Excuse me for for the 32 percent density bonus The applicant would have to propose at minimum 28 housing units In this case they're proposing 75 For the purposes of this density bonus tonight The applicant is putting forward or allocating 28 of these 75 housing units towards the city's densities bonus program The remaining units Beth is hard 47 thinks that I think that's correct um Will be subject to and operated under A affordable housing agreement with the county and that's In addition to the requirements of the funding that that is being sought and the applicant team here will be able to speak in More detail about how this affordable housing component is really tied Down for the long term and will become a affordable housing asset for the city But for this project to go forward the applicant is recommending or or requesting three concessions, which are entitled To this project given the affordability that they're requesting One concession is from the city's Concurrent construction requirement the second concession is the city's requirement that affordable units be Spursed amongst or combingled amongst the market rate units and the third concession Is a reduction in the number of parking spaces required and i'll go through each of these in turn But first regarding density bonus, I just kind of wanted to remind you of the tables that we looked at and here they are They're they're looking at providing 10 percent Low and 10 percent very low Um, excuse me 10 percent Low and and yeah and 10 percent very low Namely because they need to get Three concessions and by asking for those Specific levels of affordability. They they earn three concessions with the project And this just illustrates that point. Here's how they collect them up Um We don't have to go into the math if you wish to do so to to look it through then we can do so but i'll move right on Please don't The three concessions are are highlighted here and I want to underscore that concessions that are requested Really have to be approved unless the city can find that there is um, no Identifiable real cost reductions associated with the with the concession and then secondly If those concessions might result in a adverse impact to the environment or health and safety The applicant had provided provided with their revised project description that you have in your packet Explanation for the needs of those concessions of the financial basis for them Um Regarding timing they really have planned this project to be a phase development their intention is to first develop the market rate housing and when that occurs um CDC or the county will receive will will receive the proceeds of sale of the property on which that Market rate housing will be built that money in turn will help The cdc Pay for the infrastructure that will support the site including the infrastructure necessary To develop lot one with the affordable housing unit that really represents an important subsidy Of the site development costs. There are always a significant portion of construction of any project including affordable housing So that represents an identifiable cost savings to the project furthermore If the project um required concurrent construction that the two be built together That would mean the delay Of construction on the market rate project And so much of the value or certainly a portion of the value of that lot two for the market rate project depends on its construction readiness that it can be built now And so that uncertainty That complexity and delay That would necessarily occur if it has to wait for the financing of the affordable um housing project site before it can start constructing would would harm the value of the project or harm The value of that site and and cdc's ability to get money to help support the affordable housing project So staff finds that there is a Clear identifiable identifiable reason financial reason for granting this concession on on timing Nor would would there be any uh identifiable um public health safety concern with that And uh Or or uh environmental issue The second concession they're requesting is um On the location of the building being low the location of the affordable units being located Uh, uh separate from the market rate units The new density bonus ordinance anticipates that in some instances such as this uh a developer might wish to have a relief from this requirement because of the Understand the the identified complexity and difficulty of financing A blended project where affordable and market rate housing are built together um We heard from many developers in the time that we were preparing our Density bonus update that this was a major financing constraint And we have a provision in our density bonus ordinance that says The developer may elect to use one of their concessions For this purpose provided they can show us that there's a financial interest or reason for for the reduction and again The complexity of financing a blended project would drive up the cost and thus by separating them There would be a direct benefit financial benefit to the project Furthermore, there's a practical issue too with the management and operation of a of an affordable building Unit building by a affordable housing developer and management company They know how to do it. They they're they have efficiencies. They they understand the project or the process and so the overall long-term operation of the um Affordable units would benefit financially from being built separate and remember these are on the same site within the meaning of of of And I'll just say they're on the same contiguous project site That's being contemplated tonight The third concession being sought is a reduction in parking Um the request is to allow 324 spaces on this site when when If you if the strict application of the parking code Would suggest that 393 parking spaces would be required In this case the applicant had a traffic study prepared. That's a part of your packet and the key finding here was that the cumulative demand Of uses future build out on this site Would be adequately served by 324 parking spaces and the idea being that There are times of the day when many spaces will be standing open And will be available To visitors coming to res when residents leave they'll vacate sites and visitors during the daytime will be coming in And and and can occupy those sites. I have a diagram here That lays out the parking Fields, if you will the green areas are parking areas associated with the apartment buildings the residents and a proportion of those are are reserved for residents and Another part are open and shared The darker blue colored are parking spaces on the street And those would always be open to the public The parking study Lays out and this diagram here Illustrates how throughout the day. This is the parking supply here And then throughout the day various users within of parking throughout the Weekday or weekend Their levels of demand fluctuate and you can see that the cumulative demand here At about 2 or 3 p.m On a weekday Will peak at about 319 and 322 spaces There's not much margin But the project does show that there is adequate parking on site And I also might add here that um, this parking Did not assume that on-site parking would rely on the adjoining property this This site the where the project is being proposed Is a part of a reciprocal parking agreement And the assumption being made here is that The parking demand generated from this site will be fulfilled by this site Will not spill over require parking on the adjoining property Nor does it preclude The parking rights of the adjoining property owner for for their clients to come to this site So the other point I want to make and this is critical is that Because This parking reduction Would allow them to rely on surface parking by and large And not have to build structured parking It would mean would have a significant financial benefit to the project if 393 spaces were to be required structured parking would be required and that's an enormous cost and and would Threaten the financial viability of the project This fine this concession too would not result in a Adverse environmental impact or threaten public health and safety Because it's demonstrated that there would be adequate on-site parking So the findings here are that all of the requested concessions provide an affordable housing cost reduction And that none of them create a significant adverse impact on public health and safety To the physical environment and I also said ad would impact a california A place listed as on in the california registered of us register of historic places This project was subject to environmental review it qualified for a category or oracle exemption It is as it is consistent with an adopted specific plan general plan And there's been really no change in the environment to change the Underlying conditions on which those plans were created and the environmental documents That were certified for those plans So This exemption would apply to the project this project started in 2012 2011 And it has been out in the public arena. There have been a number of public meetings workshops and public comments have been incorporated throughout the design that you see here and and the layout of that Plaza our important expression of a lot of the public comments that have come in You have received letters in your packet That's vocalized support. Also, you've received letters concerning the parking issue with the neighboring property This project for the complexity scale and such Um I feel has received a great deal of support and over time Many of the issues that were raised in the beginning by the public have now been addressed or reconciled So that concludes my presentation with that. I will recommend or staff recommends that You approve the tentative map for the five lot subdivision and approve the 32 density bonus with the three requested concessions And the applicant team is here to Present if you have any questions of me, I'm happy to answer those Commissioners unless we just have like a general clarifying question I'm going to ask we hold our questions till after the public hearing because I'm pretty sure we're going to have involved complex questions and I want to don't want to delay that opportunity for the public to speak so Okay, is the applicant team here and there you are. Okay, great Good afternoon. Um, my name is ali gaylord. I'm the director of development for midpen housing Midpen you want to start thank you Um midpen along with urban mix development were selected in 2016 through a competitive rfp process by the sonoma county cdc To develop the rosland village site with a mix of housing a plaza civic building and a food mercado We're currently working with the cdc on the site environmental remediation Of the former dry cleaner that was located there and An approval for a two million dollars of state cleanup grant funding was just awarded So we'll be getting started with that shortly You want to go to the next slide adi? So i'll just talk a little bit about midpen and the team We are a nonprofit housing developer Um, we have an office right up here on college ab We are a long-term owner property manager and we provide resident services at all of our properties We are known as good neighbors or long-term owners and Ensure the long-term affordability of all the properties that we own We also build and develop to be integrated within the larger neighborhood context Um In this property we will in the rosland village development will be paying prevailing wages We pay prevailing wages on the affordable housing and the infrastructure construction So this will generate a lot of good construction jobs And we also provide opportunity by having an after-school resident services An after-school program that our resident services corporation runs at all of our family properties academically based and very good turnout and good metrics on that Next slide We are partnering with urban mix development who will be developing the affordable or sorry the workforce Market rate building that you saw the hundred units Next slide As part of our community outreach with the rosland village neighbors we Really got an idea of what folks wanted to see on this site They really desired housing a mix of different affordability levels of housing So we'll have the permanent affordable affordability of 75 units and the workforce targeted housing of 100 units on the site And as andy pointed out in his presentation the financial feasibility for this housing is really key with the Market rate purchasing their site from the cdc and allowing the cdc to then put that funding in to support the affordable housing development Next slide We were hoping to get the master plan entitlement in january. So we're before you today to ask for that the The final map and the improvement plans We will begin as soon as we receive entitlement approvals and hope to have that approved in the summer this year We could begin infrastructure improvements by the fall of this year And could see housing construction by the fall or winter of next year It's also very important to note that we want to activate the rosland village site now With our proposed plaza temperal, which we'll cover a little bit more in the presentation after i'm done next slide We also wanted to note that we are providing a mix of incomes and housing for a mix of incomes and different apartment sizes will be providing one two and three bedroom apartments serving Low and very low income folks as well as Unrestricted units that are targeted towards workforce housing Next slide Thank you ali and good afternoon. My name is barry long i'm a managing principal with urban design associates and we're the planners for rosalind village and have had the privilege to work for mid-pen and urban mix on this neighborhood I'd also like to and And i'd say a good afternoon to the chair and vice chair in the planning commission And i want to thank andy for such a thorough staff report We'll try to just hit on the highlights and not be redundant with what he already reported on But there are a few things that we'd like to highlight for you in addition to the staff report So what you see on the screen here is the context map the site is very well located As andy pointed outward directly adjacent to the joe redotta trail We have transit along sabastable road right at our front door But we're also within a five minute walk of neighborhood retail And within a 10 minute walk of the smart station in downtown Next slide andy andy pointed out that This neighborhood plan and the proposal builds on the urban vision plan Which we used as our departure point and also the more recently adopted specific plan So the elements that you see in the in the proposal that's coming before you this afternoon Including the one-acre central plaza and the connectivity the pedestrian friendly Circulation network All of those things were Given to us as aspirational and have been incorporated in the plan Next please the site plan This was interesting for us because The one-acre plaza Which wanted to be located and is located along sabastable Road became the centerpiece as it should for This sub neighborhood but also for the broader rosaline neighborhood And there was a requirement to extend West avenue which you can see running north south here right through the middle of the development Up to the joe redotta trail and eventually Per the vision plan and the specific plan that'll loop across the trail and around and all the way back to sabastopol wrote so the The elements of the plan The other streets which frame the plaza the mercado building which is shown here in red which is engaged into the plaza and the civic use Basically the circulation network in the park Defined the opportunity sites, which is what we'll call them and it Worked out just very well. It's almost a A layout that planned itself. However, we would point out to you that it's a little bit like cinderella slipper everything Over the time we've been working on this and where the community has been stitched in Comfortably but very compactly and we'd point out things like the north leg Of the l-shaped building actually has parking tucked in underneath to give us the right parking ratios And the c-shaped building actually has tucked under parking in the back Although units do face the streets in the front for the same reason One thing we also like to point out to you a lot of neighborhood activities Events the farmers market There's a playground already occur on this site today It's become kind of a de facto neighborhood center already and what we've tried to do in the design of this new place Is incorporate that pattern. So this becomes not Not a development, but a neighborhood that's A center of the broader neighborhood The circulation pattern and the arrows shown in green show the street circulation Connectivity is a big part of the design of the plan and very important to us You can also see dotted in and red the Fire access which is behind the buildings and along joe redotta trail Andy touched on the shared parking Concept this is very important to us We wanted to make sure that all the parking is well utilized all the time and that's what shared parking does So he showed a graph where we looked at the peak for the various uses on site around the perimeter behind the Apartment buildings we have shared parking. So those spaces Can be utilized for the commercial uses and we also don't rely on the Commercial spaces which are along the streets to park the residential. Those are available to visitors all the time The plaza concept is being done by Oh, sorry, Andy. Could you please? This is a new setup for us. I haven't We have help advancing in we're in the back of the room. So I apologize we're Behind the eight ball a little bit This is what we were referring to with the circulation plan that I just referenced with the the green arrow showing the street circulation and the Red dot showing the fire circulation next So the plaza concept which was done by quadriga Um in collaboration with the neighbors we listen to the neighbors about what and the residents about what they would like to see here It includes lawn areas with berms a dining area with a tree la play area play area and tree groves a shaded plaza planter seat walls And a road buffer and then a food truck and open-air market Is the core concepts The area that's dotted in the center is what we're calling plaza temporal It's on the schedule is something that we would like to Have open this spring And below it you see the logo for that it's since been named mitote The mexican food park and essentially this is a pop-up To sustain activity on the site While we're building uh the mercado the plaza and the buildings around it Next And here you can see an illustration Standing in the plaza looking down sabastopol road towards downtown At what it'll look like at the end of the day. So in the distance on the left We have the mercado We have the seat walls along sabastopol road with a wide and sidewalk and here we've illustrated food trucks Which actually can be accommodated around the plaza in different locations Even after The temporary use is formalized Next And this is a detail of plaza temporal and actually a detail of mitote So you can see what elements would be included within that We have seating We have a play area for young children In shipping containers, we have both restrooms in beverage service and we have a place for food trucks So it's a way to activate the site right away and we're very excited about that Next A little more detail on the affordable building building a Which is the l-shaped building it's a multi-story apartment building That is addressed on Public streets it's pulled up to public streets with units looking out over the streets to provide eyes on the street And create a very nice urban setting The building is parked behind and underneath the long leg that runs up towards the Joe redoted trail and we broken it into two pieces and entered in the middle To give it a scale that's consistent with the scale of the neighborhood And also we would say the the height of the The wings we've also varied and you'll see in the renderings Again to break down the scale of the development next And here's an illustration standing on what we call street c but basically it's the Upper side of the plaza looking back down at this building There's a very interesting thing when we put the one acre plaza in and worked out the circulation that we get this Wonderful terminated vista on this building not something that you often get but from an urban standpoint quite a lovely maybe accident but Kind of a wonderful thing that will be unique to this place You can see the wide sidewalk at the edge of the plaza and the play area on the left And then a building we're going to talk about in a minute the workforce building on the right next So this is what we call building b which is the workforce building. It's also called a market rate building It's affordable by design This building Also is a multi-story building in a c shape around the courtyard It too addresses on the park looking out over the park it has a commercial use Facing the park which is the red area and it also has non-residential uses at the corner of the building as does the building We just looked at so we're going to be activating the street with non-residential uses right at the 100 percent Corner and then it's not evident, but it is part of the design There's tuck under parking off of the courtyard so that we make sure that we maximize The amount of parking and it also has you'll see in a minute a we call a Skydeck or sky patio that looks out over the park as part of this building design next so this is looking from A spot standing in front of the civic building the library looking back across I'm building a to this building b you can see the skydeck almost dead center Maybe a little off to the right in this view and then the ground floor Retail use is underneath the trellis area and then the entry and the civic or Common area for the building is at the corner Next And this is another view that we did standing just across joe redoted trail looking Back down west avenue So you can see how the other leg of this building Addresses on that street again on west avenue provides eyes on the street Meets joe redoted trail in a very civic and civilized Way and also the concepts Architecturally for both of these buildings is is that we are going to break them down In scale by articulating the architecture differently as we go around the buildings and this would be a good point to point out that It was our recommendation and it is the way things are going to proceed We'll have different architects for each building Van meter is the architect for the a building. So they're already advancing the design of that We'll have a separate architect for the workforce building quadrig is designing the plaza We'll have another architect for the mercado and a different architect for the civic building the library And this was intentional because it's going to give us a much more neighborly feel to have many architects working I mean, we'll be interested to see your feeling but it was our Opinion that it should feel more neighborly not like a project So we feel that many hands together will make a better neighborhood and that was a part of this approach next This is a pop-up view looking out over the plaza when it's finished after Matote is formalized here later in the mercado, which is the building you see in the upper left We have an area for a small farmers market a plaza. That's something that already happens on site today. It's not a massive Farmers market, but There is a farmers market and an axe is a nice bookend around the green space in the center Which is less intensely programmed to create really a beautiful civic center for the neighborhood We have a play area for younger children along the the bottom of the park in this view And you can see how the farmers market is a plan to be staged We would also say going through design review board with this plan That they unanimously adores the site plan is which is what you'll be Making a decision on this evening However, we will be bringing and they know this and are appreciative appreciative Each building back and the plaza design individually to design review board So they've approved unanimously the site plan the layout We had a very good discussion with them about the architecture. They had strong opinions and good recommendations And we're incorporating that into the final design. I just wanted to let you know that next And then the final image here that we drew is standing down in the plaza on market day Looking back towards the building. We just looked at the b building with the With the affordable building on the right and you can see the kind of vibrancy That we already see in the culture of the neighborhood illustrated here We're very excited about How transformative development this could be for the rosalina neighborhood But we would also say it's not our vision. It's based on the resident's input and it really is meant to Absorb the culture that's there today In looking to the future And envisioning what this place can become as the neighborhood Transitions for the vision plan. Thank you very much Thank you And again commissioners. I think if we hold whatever questions we have for the applicant till after the public hearing Okay So this is a public hearing tonight on this item and I'm going to open it in a minute I want to kind of give you the the lay of the land here if you've not been here before What I'll be doing is calling each person's name and I will call behind that the person Following them if you wouldn't mind queuing up. We have two microphones up at the top And if you just begin by stating your name for the record, you have three minutes I'll warn you I'm a very tight timekeeper And so you have a little bar with lights on it and it'll start at green And as you get closer to the three minutes being up, it'll turn to yellow and then it'll turn to red And I'm going to absolutely insist that you stop when the buzzer goes off So if you can kind of keep your your comments within those three minutes Then I don't have to interrupt you and it's we really want to hear what you have to say So also If you Are in agreement with a particular speaker Please raise your hand. We don't allow cheering boos Inaudible Agreement is good So if you if you'd like to do that we can see Your response So with that I'm going to go ahead and Open the public hearing my first speaker will be frank bomb gardener followed by riss. I believe it's foxon Appreciate the time thank The members of the commission And the developer I think My comments are mostly positive I'm Glad to see this gonna speak right into the microphone for us please thanks I'm glad to see affordable housing finally coming to sonoma county because we all know Sonoma county is the third is like The third from the very bottom in the nation As far as homeless and affordable housing And that also includes a shelter for youth Of which we have over 700 Young people on the streets But this project How many stories will there be I'll get that answer for you after the public hearing mr. Bonkarner. Okay. I appreciate Yeah, I'm just you know excited to see it finally come Before you And that we need it Absolutely, we need it and rose land most of all Thank you very much for your time. Thank you Next is riss. I think it's foxon Followed by robert melison And if you wouldn't mind repeating your name for the record because I may have not pronounced it correctly Yes, you did my name is riss foxon and i'm chair of the sonoma county library commission I want to thank you for including rose land community library Which is a valued part of rose land neighborhood into your considerations As you know, we offer early early literacy programs and free tutoring homework help Supporting the local schools and and what the young people need We are only open at this time 27 hours But in that time we have over 2,000 people visit the library every month We offer 25 to 30 programs during the month For the young children 200 books in spanish are checked out during that time each month Which I hope all of you Recognize too that if you can create the early literacy if you can establish that bottom line Then these children will succeed in school and move forward to become productive citizens We have Printers and wi-fi In an area that lacks technology over 78 only 78 percent have access to wi-fi and that's a Less percent. I mean it's a smaller percentage in areas where there's lower incomes Um and in doing this we create economic development benefits and space for entrepreneurs and job seekers To access online resources and print things It's a safe place for people to go a library is always a safe place In rose land for the spanish-speaking people We're finding that it is a like a home to them. It's a good place to go and be with your community And that's what a library provides. It is a community hub. It is something that will Provide a good place for people now and in the future and thank you again for including us In your considerations. Thank you. Thank you Next is robert nelson and followed by Carmella bigs. I believe you wanted to speak on this particular item So mr. Nelson Thank you Good afternoon council Um, I'm sorry commit committee members 175 apartments and 10 000 commercial square feet on seven acres An unprecedented disaster nowhere else to be found in Santa Rosa It is the maximum abuse of the rose land community I attended the rose land community meetings for this midpen project At the rose land library all of the rose land community speakers complained about the horrible Existing traffic congestion not one community member not one thought this four to five story High density housing with inadequate Parking and inadequate traffic mitigation was appropriate for the site There is no supporting infrastructure On february 14th The last time that this was supposed to have occurred after it had been continued once It was again continued with little advanced notice to assure maximum suppression of community input People I saw the last two times who showed up here are not here tonight People who were at the rose land community meetings are not here tonight Donald trump would be proud of the way that it was used To dump 175 apartments with parking waivers and a 10 000 square foot commercial development on a seven-acre plot And simul and this this Uh Committee and the city has simultaneously found that 10 apartments per acre Or 10 houses per acre with adequate parking is inappropriate for the wealthy neighborhoods Midpen plans and cute mid pens plans include some future Undefined traffic mitigation measures which are not part of the scope of its responsibility or construction Why not because mid pen from the south bay Expects the city of santa rosa citizens will pay for mid pens profit and mid pen Will immediately make the 100 market rate apartments For its own purposes leaving the remaining construction incomplete What mid pen is proposing is the equivalent of erecting walls Installing windows and a roof and then saying at some future time the city of santa rosa Can worry about installing a foundation here the vital and essential road infrastructure to handle increased traffic Before it makes its profits Mid pen must first be compelled to make sabastopol road and all of the affected intersections Including the disaster known as the Okay, great. Thank you. Mr. Nelson. I appreciate your comments and um carmelo bigs is All that says on your item number is parking regulations So i'm not sure it's for this item or another item, but i'm not seeing carmelo come to a microphone So maybe it's a different one. Oh, oh there you are. Okay. Great. Is it this item? I'm carmelo bigs I live at amorosa village I wanted to address the parking hazards that we experience on tux horn and pebble creek drive Right off of her. You know, um miss bigs. I'm going to ask you to wait till the next item I think that it's the next item that that would be more pertinent for us to hear that Great. Thank you Fred kruger followed by john pulsan Good afternoon I was surprised at the presentation by the city In that it was so one-sided because we've had a number of presentations in the neighborhood And it's been unanimously opposed by residents So I want to bring out four points First in roseland we have a public health disaster that has been unaddressed And that's childhood asthma in the roseland school particularly right across From this proposed roseland village right now over a quarter of the students have asthma which disables them in their studies And we know from medical research This is attributable to stalled traffic particularly diesel So as you expand the traffic in this area, which is already intolerable You are increasing the public health disaster in that area and I wonder who's going to pay For those extra visits to the hospital because this will be measurable Uh when we did the draft EIR 10 years ago for walmart We found that the traffic just as the previous speaker said Had a level of service of f It flunked and since that time there's been a lot of population growth So that we have gridlock at rush hour now there's three other topics I want to mention I notice that there's impermeable surfaces in the proposed village We had flooding that blocked the north south roads Crossing roseland creek this week Climate change will intensify the flooding and cause Further transportation difficulties We're also severely under parked right now throughout all of roseland Where we're supposed to have at least three acres per thousand residents. We have 18 000 residents We've only got 23 acres of park That area should be a park for the people and serve the people Rather than housing because we can't fit those people in those in the infrastructure Which has not been developed in a way that is suitable for the size of the population So that while you're serving special interests You are not serving the citizens of roseland with this proposal Thank you, mr. Thank you, mr. Krueger John polson followed by effrin korea Hello members. My name is john polson I was born and raised in santa rosa attended roseland elementary school I own the roseland shopping center adjacent to and east of the proposed development I'm at the roseland center practically every day I've seen the traffic on sabbatical road. It's terrible most of the day And it's worse at peak times This proposed development with parking waivers is totally under parked To afford marker rate homes Any people in california both parents have to work that means two cars Roseland residents are hardworking folks. They don't ride buses to work They don't take the train. They load their trucks with their tools And their cars with their tools and they go to work moms and dads drive their children to school This development will eliminate 270 shared parking spaces And be replaced with just As I counted from your from the previous presenters About 70 street parking spaces These extra one or two cars Or a third will end up parking on my side of the shopping center that will take away parking for all my tenants customers Already at previous meetings roseland residents have complained about traffic and cars parked on their streets In front of their homes from apartment buildings scattered throughout the roseland Without adequate parking For this proposal this project will hurt my tenants possibly putting them out of business Thank you. Thank you, mr. Paulson Efren curio followed by marcos j suarez Madam chair members of the commission Efren Carrillo, santa rosa I'm here as a former sonoma county supervisor who Was on the board for both the county board and the community development commission that originally purchased the site Here back in 2011 If you look at the site and you look at its past history This site has been a site A dilapidated site quite frankly that saw quite a few businesses that did not succeed on that site You had an alphabeta luckies and albersons at one point and over time you saw these businesses go away I too lived in roseland. I too went to rosen school. I'm not fortunate enough to own property Near this the site, but i'm here to tell you that the community did in fact participate through various community meetings that dated back to 2011 After the purchase of the site from a private owner We had well over 100 people show up at a community meeting at the rosen school that presented their vision for the site Presented their dreams for the site and i'm here to tell you that mid peninsula housing Has responded admirably In partnership with the city of san erosa and the county of sonoma Into responding as to what many community members saw as being the key For the future and the redevelopment and the re-envisioning of rosen This development is in fact The key to a larger vision for this community The revitalization has been a major component The desire for housing at all levels market rate Workforce housing and affordable housing was something that we heard from many working class families that aren't here today for many community members The component about parks and open space The original proposal actually had a half acre proposed for park and community gathering The response back was to enhance that and increase that from a half acre to an acre Which is proposed before you We have to plan for the future not plan for the existing and plan for the past Technologies are shifting Mobility is shifting in the future the way we we we get from place a to place b will be different I do hope that the planning commission in the city Is looking at the future of what development will look like In retrospect acknowledging yes when you have additional residents, there's additional Uh congestion. Yes when you have additional vibrancy, there's additional congestion. Some folks see it as traffic I gotta tell you having been part of downtown discussions and not having enough parking or enough People or enough activities Rosen is not that rosen is alive and it's alive and well There's businesses that are thriving, but it's developments like these that'll push rosen into Into the future and really continuing to be the heartbeat of the city of san rosa I would encourage the planning commission to support the recommendation before you Including the additional three zoning changes as required by staff. Thank you, mr. Kariyo Marcos j suarez followed by jim bray Thank you. Good afternoon planning commission and everybody here My name is marcos suarez I'm a past president of the hispanic chamber of commerce and for the past four to five years I've been working extensively with the rosen community including all the business owners there along sabbastopol road and I was one of the people that helped actually organize a lot of the meetings there the community meetings business meetings In terms of annexation the whole process has been going on for the last four years specifically there in rosen And I can tell you that the excitement of the community is On the other side of what's being You know expressed here today business owners That don't own property are looking at an opportunity to maybe be able to get in to that property and hopefully one day Own a piece of the property or even the community members. They're looking for the housing They're really excited about the plaza community center Even the boys and girls club the library The community of roslyn And I can tell you the latino community Are really excited about this project and I can see that this is going to be something really great for them For our community the vibrancy and really helping Especially with the mercado incubator, which is something for me that we can see that Working there with our current with octavio Diaz that would be the anchor tenant And and giving opportunities for other rosin community members and some of the business owners that currently are their Leasing space. They don't own space. They don't own the their their buildings But they want to be able to succeed in business So this will give an opportunity to quite a few members that have already contacted me about That are that live in rosin that want to actually one day open their own business And they can start here with the mercado incubator. So I would encourage you to approve this because like Effort career just mentioned This is the future of rosin and rosin has been waiting for something like this for a long time This is going to beautify the area and really make it a destination the place where a lot of our latino community can thrive Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Suarez. Jim bray followed by octavio Diaz Good evening. My name is Jim bray. I live at 10 14 ruby court. I'm about a half a mile from proposed site Um ever since the first meetings I have attended just about every one of these community meetings And I want to start off by thanking and commending the city and county's planning department staff for the excellent job that I think they did in encouraging and receiving the different types of input from the community And contrary to some of the previous speakers The majority of people did not speak against this project. We were in favor of it We think this is a good thing for our community I would like to to propose that you go ahead and approve this Plan My one concern is and I this is something we'll have to be addressing in the future I like the idea that western western avenue has been uh is being extended However, it needs to move on too The traffic conditions are extremely bad and they have to be improved Sebastopol road will only get worse any of you who've been there on Sebastopol road When the elementary school is letting out or some of the other schools are letting out know how congested this Road becomes so as a future Um, and it's not your department to do this But for the city of santa rosa to work on improving the traffic situation in roseland would be very important. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Bray octavia dias followed by I think it's chris ne'er Thank you. It's an honor being here this evening with most of you This is quite an experience for me to see the pros and cons but as a business owner We're always lacking of affordable housing for our employees our staff our family And I think this is just a great enhancement enhancement to the roseland Area in santa rosa, which will just make a thrive As a business owner small business owner. I am very excited. I would be the conductor chef owner Manager ceo as a restaurant owner. Now you have to do multiple things. This is very exciting to me So I would say let's get this up and running so mid-benton. Give me the least Soon so we can make things happen Marco swatters spoke briefly about the incubator project Well, we we want to start that before the mercados even built by training some of our key staff chefs Business owners for the future. We're looking at future and Get them trained so they can build and start their own business This would be four trucks for separate business owners To start their business. So with that in mind, I want to tell you that this is a great project There's always a lot of negatives with traffic, but traffic is really bad everywhere Not just in roseland. This would create a lot of jobs for the diverse community in roseland I would want to make sure that I Hire an interview the people myself That's how I involve I am in the business to make sure that those people first get a first big job From the roseland and that could be kids from high school. It could be a homeless There's a homelessness problem in in sonoma county, california I would want to make sure that I work with those people that deserve a second chance So they can someday believe in themselves on what they do I come from a very poor family background from the state of oaxaca and I know what it takes to build a business We have worked very hard in sonoma county agave. Heelsburg has been a tremendous workforce for us in a great Place to to be in as an operator in Heelsburg It's obviously a different type of town But I like to help where I came from my first house was purchased in 66 speech court in roseland area in santa rosa Small house and then I always wanted to do a better thing for my my family and myself And I thrive through the business So with that in mind, I want to tell you to please make the right choice and make this happen now. Thank you Thank you Next is chris nair followed by I think it's tim blow felled Hi, good afternoon. My name is chris nair. I'm here representing the Operative platters and cement mason's local 300 Santa Rosa california We do have an office over on corby over at the carpenter's labor temple So this would be a neighbor And looking kind of looking forward to it a couple things I want to Echo here following the gentleman prior local hire I think it would be great if The general contractor who I don't know if it's been Determined yet would use the local trades that have certified apprenticeship programs in the city And To take advantage of that a lot of if that sounds like a lot of jobs So this could be a win-win for the community And the only other thing I have that I want to bring up is if that there's any idea I did hear prevailing wage that's going to be used which is key And Make sure that any off-site work that's done for this project is also covered under the prevailing wage Don't want these guys trucking in modular buildings that are built in tebecula That's it. Thank you. Thank you Tim blow-filled That's correct. Yeah, that's close. Thanks Um I have property down the other end of sabastafal road I I know there's traffic issues everywhere. It'd be nice to widen sabastafal road all the way along But the main Main concerns I seem to hear are parking issues And I have to say I think it would be a bad idea to Overpark this place. Maybe it's under parked. I don't know but The I'm sure that in the future we're going to use less cars. We're going to need less parking So let's not build parking spots. We're never going to need We might need them for a few years But in the future there's going to be less parking required for various technological reasons Most of people are aware of already So I just like to say I like the look of the project. I like the various I like the way it's going to Improve the the neighborhood much better than it is at the moment I like the various attributes the library etc. I think it's a great project and I urge you to Approve it as it's put forward today. Thank you. Thank you That's all the cards I have on this item However, you don't have to have filled out a card if there's anyone else that would like to speak on this item Just come on forward and state your name for the record, please Hello, my name is katie elsey and I'm here representing the boys and girls club I'm the program director of the rose and village boys and girls club teen club I've been the director there for three years and I've been with the boys and girls club for seven years Mostly in roseland I've been coming to these meetings for the last five and six years and I've bought brought teens and kids to these meetings Um to every single one They have drawn on maps placed stickers on pictures Asked questions given input in a general have been an active part of the process since day one In the beginning there was never really a question. They were getting a teen center All they had to do was dream big these kids were excited They were empowered and they felt recognized by the community. Over four years ago when we first opened the library slash boys and girls club slash community center there was a sense of accomplishment amongst those of us that helped make it happen. There was also a feeling that this was just the beginning. Over the years we've been lucky to have an amazing partnership with the library although it hasn't always been easy with 80 teens trying to run a muck around there. We've been part of painting the parkette in front of the club. We've been a part of painting the Andy Lopez murals. We've helped with painting the blocks in the sports courts. The boys and girls club has already been an active part of the Rosen Village community. It hasn't always been easy. We've dealt with leeks, we've dealt with cockroaches, we've dealt with mice, we've dealt with no heater, we've dealt with no air conditioning. It's not a secret there was a homeless shelter directly behind us for several years. And instead of being fearful our members wanted to help. Every night giving leftover snacks to the camp and donating sleeping bags and food. These kids have shown up for the community and I'm asking the community to show up for them. We all know that Rosalind is low on the socioeconomic scale. It's common knowledge that after school programs help teens. I could brag to you for hours on all the programs we have offered throughout the years from academic tutoring, stem programs, college readiness, job workshops, painting, drama, music and more. Sorry I bragged a little. But what it comes down to is this. What does it say about us as a community when we don't want to invest in our kids? What does it say about Santa Rosa when we've asked the members of Boys and Girls Club to give so much and made so many promises and we don't deliver? These kids need a place to go after school. These kids deserve a place that's safe and have been proven high quality. It hasn't been easy explaining the politics to the members of this club on what's happening and why. I know it's a complicated issue with a lot of moving parts. The kids that are here to speak today were just simply asked, what does the Boys and Girls Club mean to you? I hope you listen, I hope their voices are respected, and that their dreams are fulfilled. Thank you. Thank you, and anyone else wishing to speak, wait, wait, please. Okay, now we can see you. And please start by stating your name for the record. My name's Liz Ciariza. I've been a member of the Boys and Girls Club for six years. I've attended the Rosa Village Teen Club since it was open. Teen Club is my second family. When I go to Teen Club, I feel safe because I know I can talk to and trust the staff members like Katie. Life isn't always easy, but it's easier to know that I have someone to talk to, whether it's serious family problems or help with school. Teen Club is where I feel secure, unjudged, and happy. Teen Club has changed me by teaching me to open up more, be myself, and it taught me to focus on helping others. I can get creative by painting. I learned life schools through cooking, and I volunteer on the community. Teen Club is teaching me about what it means to be a good person and a successful adult. Basically, I love Teen Club. If Rosa Village wasn't there, I would have nowhere to go after school. I wouldn't have met such caring and nice staff. I wouldn't have all the opportunities that Teen Club has presented me over the past years. So please keep Rosa Village open so that I can continue to go to the place that I live with all my heart. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? No, Mr. Kruger, you've already spoken here. I didn't get a chance to ask. Well, I'll get to it later. Right now we're in the middle of a public hearing and you had your chance to speak. So anyone else wishing to speak? There you go, now you have to go back up. My name's Odalis Roque, and I'm one of the few teams that Katie has brought to all the community meetings. I've been going to Boys and Girls Club in general for about 10 years now. Boys and Girls Club has been a huge part of my life. It's the place where I feel most comfortable and I feel I can be myself. If this place would ever be taken away from me, I don't think I'd feel safe anywhere else but here. Boys and Girls Club has made me the person I am today. If it wasn't for them or Katie in particular, I wouldn't be the woman I am now. Although I'm, although all of you guys see us as just kids, although we're just kids, we have a voice and we would like you guys to listen to us. We've gone through so many things from, as Katie says, from cockroaches to no heater, to no AC, but yet we deal with the place we have now because we enjoy the place we have now. We're not complaining with what we have but we would love an improvement. We love what we have now and we'll always love what we have. I said it. Village is like our second home and our second family. Everyone who's there is part of a community but also part of a family. Village has helped us improve us, helped us improve our grades, helped improve us, become humans. Boys and Girls Club has helped us in particular to do so many things. They've taught us how to, they've taught us so many things that our parents weren't able to. My mom's a single mother and throughout all this she hasn't been able to pick me up from school right away and Village has been a place where I can stay for hours. And although they have their own lives, they're willing to give us their time in order for them, for us to be in their lives and they do all these things for us. And if this place were to ever get taken away from us, some of us wouldn't be the people we are now. We wouldn't be able to speak like we are right now today. We'd be very quiet, very insecure thinking that there's no one out there to hear us. But thanks to them we found their voice and we're able to know that there's people out there who are willing to listen. And thanks to them we are who we are now and thank you for listening. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Okay, I'm not seeing anybody else come to the microphone so I am going to go ahead and close the public hearing and thanks to all you boys and club members for participating and being willing to stand up here and speak. Sometimes that's not so easy so thanks for doing that and letting us hear your voices. So I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. Next, Mr. Long, you have an opportunity to address the concerns that you heard from the public. So if you are ready to do that. I think, again, very long with Urban Design Associates and I'm here with Ali for mid-pen. And we'd be happy to answer any questions that you have and the concerns that were expressed, especially related to traffic and parking. We would, as the staff report highlighted, reference the traffic report and parking report in your packet, which does detail the technical study details that we do have adequate parking and that the traffic concerns have been addressed. Would you mind just describing how many stories for the benefit of Mr. Baumgardner for each building? For everyone's knowledge, there's a 55-foot height limit on the site and we're not asking for an exception for that. The majority of the, we have buildings from one story up to I think one portion of one building might pop up to five stories in element, but the majority of it is lower scale and along Sebastopol Road it steps down. So we have one and two-story buildings along Sebastopol Road and then the apartment building step up as we go back into the site. Okay. And yeah, we'll get more information again with staff as traffic. There'll be probably more questions from commissioners about that. One of the things that you could help us out with is maybe what plans there are, higher local prevailing wages as was brought up by Mr. Nuer. Any information on that? So as I stated before, we would be paying prevailing wage on all of the affordable housing building and the infrastructure. We believe that the infrastructure will likely go through the county procurement process because the streets will be installed on the CDC's property. Okay. And then probably most importantly is what, what arrangements plans do you have for the existing library teen club as construction goes along so that we don't? Yeah, I'm going to let Paul Osmondson from the Sonoma County CDC come up as the owner of the property. Okay. Good evening commissioners. Paul Osmondson special projects director for the Sonoma County Community Development Commission. The civic building as the plan showed is currently proposed to have the library on the ground floor and another civic use for the second floor. It's a two story building. We have been in conversations with both the library commission and the boys and girls club and we're hopeful that we can come up with a plan that accommodates both users. So that's the current status of where we're at with both of those entities. Our commission has also approved funding to assist both organizations to find temporary relocation in the event when the project goes under construction. Because we will have to demolish the existing building in order to build the streets and roads and affordable housing. Okay, great. So I'll probably be having you come back up when commission gets to questions. But I think the next ones that need to be answered, maybe staff can be helpful and just reference generally the traffic study, the parking study, just again to help the public understand. And also maybe you could discuss what the future plan is for West Avenue once it begins to cross Redota Trail. I think that would be helpful. Certainly, and thank you. The project was application was submitted with the traffic analysis to look at circulation, volume of vehicles coming and going to the site with full build out of the project as you've seen here today being proposed. And part of that analysis is parking. So the, because the reduction was being sought, the parking analysis really focused on how will this assemblage of uses be able to share parking on the site? Will they need separate and isolated parking for each reserve? Which is a typical approach to parking. Could there be a shared arrangement that can be used? And so the figure that was shown earlier and I'll just bounce forward to that illustrates how shared parking can fulfill the cumulative parking demand on the site. I'll put the traffic consultant on the spot and say that they will be able to go into detail beyond that I will be able to. But the basic concept is this graph charts the individual users of parking on the site throughout the day and layers them on top of one another to show cumulative parking on the property. And here graphically indicates that parking demand as you might expect in how we experience swells over time in the midday, mid-afternoon is typically the peak. And using the parking demand for the various uses on the project, this graph shows that the provided parking on the site will accommodate that demand over time. So how that parking demand for the individual uses is established, the accepted parking rates, I'll have to rely on the traffic consultant to speak to that and any other sort of methodological approach. But the conclusion is that with shared parking concept, this will work. Now also important for this project is the residential component that the residents do have a place to land their car when they come home. And those spaces are designated, those are reserved, and they were accounted for in this shared scheme to allow for this cumulative parking to be met. I'm hopeful that that provides more detail. I just wanted another sort of general reference for those that have expressed their concerns. And commissioners, I'm going to go ahead and bring it back to us to questions. Do you want to start with staff or prefer to start with applicant? Which, let's do staff. Okay. Commissioner Krepke, you have a question. Yeah. So attachment number nine is a letter from Deputy Council Aldo Mercado from the County of Sonoma regarding the allegations by Mr. Paulson related to the reciprocal parking and driveway easement. And he finds that no reason that Mr. Paulson's allegations regarding the easement should delay at this time permit Sonoma's review of the commission development since this was at county time before the annexation. My question is actually for our council. Do you have any opinion on those findings? Hi, thank you. I have reviewed the material submitted by county council and have spoken with county council. I've reviewed all of the easement and related documents submitted by Paulson and his attorney. And I do not have any additional concerns. I concur with the findings of county council. It's a very broad reciprocal easement and it should not preclude the planning commission from taking action on this land use this evening. Thank you. I have nothing further for staff. Any other questions of staff? Commissioner Duggan. Yeah. Excuse me. I've got a couple. And one was, Andy, you mentioned about the affordable units that I think 28 of the 75 are going to be under a city housing contract. And the other 47 are under county. Can you explain how that works? Or what's the reason for that as well? Well, generally, the density bonus ordinance requires that when units are allocated towards getting that density, in this case the 28, they are encumbered by this agreement, by the density bonus agreement. The remainder of those units will have a similar encumbrance, but not through the city. And I would have to defer or have the applicant team and midpen talk about how they will have the remainder units encumbered by a similar type of agreement. We spoke with them and in the conditions of approval for the density bonus action this evening, we will require that midpen provide us evidence that those remaining 47 units will be encumbered for 55 years for affordable uses. So it was important not to simply sweep all of the affordable units under the city's density bonus program because there are administrative costs associated with each of those units. And rather than unnecessarily burden this applicant or this affordable housing project with those administrative costs, they requested and we agreed to place under the city's density bonus program the amount necessary to qualify them for this supplemental, for this density, the 28 units that are going to be part of the city's agreement. Okay, and one more sort of picky question. I believe the traffic study mentioned having crosswalks on all four legs of the West Avenue, Sebastopol Road intersection. And I didn't see that captured in the DAC report. I will have to defer to the engineers on this and I know that there was a lot of work on the crosswalks internally. And so I'm aware of that. That's recent work. I do know that there are existing crosswalks and improvements in the street section in Sebastopol Road for traffic flow and pedestrian safety that are requirements of this subdivision. And I'll comment more detail about the specifics on the actual pedestrian crossing improvements. Okay, thank you. And we have Gabe who will of our engineering department. Good evening commissioners, Zach Matley with WTrans. Part of the public improvements will be completed by the project. They will be modifying the intersection of Sebastopol Road West Avenue to add a crosswalk on the west leg of the intersection. Currently, there's only crosswalks on three legs of the intersection. But given the level of pedestrian activity already in the area and that anticipated from the project was determined to be appropriate to add pedestrian crosswalk and phasing on all legs of the intersection and the applicant will be completing that signal modification as part of the project. Mr. Osborne, were you going to add something? Good afternoon commissioners. Gabe Osborne planning and economic development. That is consistent with our requirements. We are going to finalize the striking on that intersection to ensure pedestrian connectivity exists on that west Sebastopol intersection. Some of the last minute discussions occurred on some of the pedestrian travel on the interior crosswalks on west as it gets into some of the interior roadways. Those did move towards the last minute because of the clustering of the pedestrian crossings. We are attempting to support proper pedestrian access at all intersections and finalizing the pieces on the west and Sebastopol Road intersection. Thank you. Any other questions of staff right now? Any questions of the applicant? Yes. Okay, Vice Chair Weeks. Just a couple of questions of the applicant. For the affordable units, are you going to be giving priority to people who already live in Santa Rosa? What's your process? Thank you for that question. We typically work very closely with neighborhood groups. We've worked with La Luz in the past. We've recently rented up Federer's apartments in the boys hot springs area where we had 60 units of family housing. And I believe 50 or 55 of the actual residences that were selected were from Sonoma County. So we're very, we do very good outreach to the local community. Make sure that they know that the application process is coming up. When we intake applications, then we select them by lottery process once we've reviewed the applications for their completeness. Thank you. Yes. I couldn't read the unit mix on your slide. Can you talk about that? Sure, for the total unit mix? The affordable units. Yes. Unless you don't have it divided that way. I think I do have, I think I can pull it up. You want to, sorry, my computer just locked. Did you, you wanted to know the number of units at each affordability level? No, I'm sorry. The number of studios ones, twos, threes. Oh, okay. Yes, I can do that. But my computer is locked and I don't have my, I don't have that slide here. Thank you. Well, while you're finding that, let me ask you another question. When would the demolition of the existing building where the library is occur? That's an easy one. So in our timeline where we spoke about getting the improvement plans started or approved this summer and then starting the horizontal infrastructure construction late this year. And the demolition of all the existing buildings would take place prior to that and that construction. And so you would hope to have some kind of an arrangement for them to do a temporary relocation by that time? Yes, and I know that's something that Mr. Osmondson spoke about that's already being contemplated. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, and then here's the chart again for the one, two and three bedroom split. So the affordable, the affordable has one, two and three bedrooms. The workforce unrestricted has one and two bedroom units. And we're not proposing any studios at this time. Thank you. Any other questions of the, yeah, Mr. O'Crabke. Yeah, with the concessions that the below market rate will be separated. And also built second with the market rate going in first. Is there, I don't want to say, I don't want to say, can you guarantee? Because that's a terrible thing to say to promise. But what can you do to assuage my fears that there may be some sort of delay between market rate and the below market rate housing being built? Well, we are currently working on our design of our affordable housing building. And really the only thing that would delay the affordable housing is the funding because we have to compete for funding across state and federal levels. So I think I would just say that we are moving forward. The CDC is behind us. We've already received $2 million of CFH funding commitment from the CDC as well as $537,000 to purchase the Roseland hardware store site. We're making great progress in completing our design and going towards construction as soon as possible. Thank you. Any other? Commissioner Collier. Can you just share with the public a little bit why specifically the market rate units are separated from the affordable units and kind of talk through how the financing creates that throughout that situation? Sure. So the main source of our subsidy for the affordable housing is called the low income housing tax credit. And that funding can only be used for 60% of area median income or lower residents. So in Sonoma County, family of four, 60% AMI income would be about $60,000. It's about $58,000. So in order to be able to finance a property and use the maximum amount of subsidy, we have to have a building that has all of those units targeted at 60% of AMI or below. So as you can see from the chart, we're targeting from 30%, which is very low income up to 60% of area median income. If we were to try and combine them, we wouldn't be able to use any of that subsidy on a large part of the building, which would require more public subsidy either from the city or from the county. Thank you. Any other questions of the applicant? Any other questions of staff? Great. Okay. I have one question. Mr. Goesesson, we did make some amendments to the resolution and to the DAC report when we begin to read the other resolutions we have in the iLegislate current and have the amended language connected to them. They do. So there are no further changes required. Okay. Great. Well, are they included in late correspondence or are they where we would typically be reading them? Can we just refer to them as amended and call it good? I bear in both. I'm sorry, what? They've been loaded into both. They're in the iLegislate? Yes. Yes, they are. Okay, great. That's what I wanted to find out. So would somebody like to move a resolution for the purposes of discussion? And that would begin with the density bonus resolution. I'll move a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Rosa, making findings and determinations to approve a density bonus for Roseland Village mixed use located at 665 and 883 Sebastopol Road. Assessors parcel numbers 125-111-037 and 125-101-031. File numbers PRJ17-075, DB19-001, and wave for the reading. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. So that was moved by Commissioner Duggan, seconded by Vice Chair Weeks. And let's just go ahead and discuss the entire process. And we'll do the other resolution afterwards. So Vice Chair Weeks, would you like to start? Sure. I am very supportive of this project. I think it's going to be a great boon to that neighborhood and a real revitalization of the area. And I'll be voting in favor of it. I can make all the findings. Okay. Kusher O'Crepkey. I'm also in favor of the project. The low-income housing, very low-income housing, the Civic Center, the park, the Mercado, the walkability of it. The incubator and starting the incubator before construction even is finished is also great. The library, I wanted to commend the youth for being here, but they left. It's not the most exciting portion of government, but it's staying involved in what the future of their community was great to see. And I know there's concerns about traffic and everything. I just hope the traffic report is correct because my favorite taco truck is right across the street. But I will vote in favor of this project. Commissioner Duggan. I'm also in favor of the project, and I can make the findings for the density bonus for the dispersal of the separation of the affordable units from the market rate with the delayed construction and the parking reduction. I think those are all fine, and they've been supported by the evidence it was given to us. And I also think it's a real exciting project, and I like all the components. I like hearing from the county that there's a plan to temporarily move the library and the Boys and Girls Club, and then they'll have a future home at this location. So I am in support. Commissioner Collier. I also am fully in support of this project. I'm really excited to see it come to this level, and I look forward to seeing it progress and through construction and actually moving people in. I think the bringing in the economic vitality to that area and creating an equitable Roseland is really important to me, and I'm really happy to see this come through. Great. And I'm also in support of this project. It's been such a long time coming. I mean, there's been community interest on that site way before 2011 and lots of conversations among the community. And I'm kind of sorry that some of those community members aren't with us any longer, because they would be really excited to see this finally coming to fruition. Definitely, I wish it wasn't the way that it is with the financing, with the affordable housing, but it is, and so I can make the findings for those concessions. I really, really appreciate the attention to keeping that space active and intact while you are moving forward. The Plaza Temporal and working to make sure that the teen club and the library have a place to go. I really appreciate your attention to that type of thing. It's been a Plaza Temporal ever since closed. So the fact that you're creating one with some actual amenities connected to it is a real plus for me. And so I'm definitely in favor of this project and moving forward. So with that, the resolution was moved by Commissioner Duggan and seconded by Vice Chair Weeks. And your votes please. That passes with five ayes, commissioners Carter and Peterson being absent. And we have another resolution. If someone would like to move that for the tentative map. I'll move a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Rosa approving the Roseland Village tentative map located at 665 and 883 Free Sebastopol Road. Assessors parcel numbers 125-111-037 and 125-101-031. File numbers PRJ17-075, MAJ17-006, and wave for the reading. Second. Okay, so the tentative map resolution was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Vice Chair Weeks. Any other discussion, comments? All right, your votes please. And that passes with five ayes, commissioners Carter and Peterson being absent. So that concludes this item. Thanks for your input and we will take about a five minute break. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and call our meeting back to order. If you wouldn't mind taking a seat. We're going to move on to item number 10.2, which is the Dutton Meadows Subdivision General Plan Amendment. Conditional use permit tentative map. It is an ex parte disclosure. And Mr. Collier, anything to disclose? I met with the applicant team and visit the site and have no new information to disclose. Commissioner Duggan. I met with the representative of the applicant and visited the site and have no new information to disclose. Vice Chair Weeks. I also met with the applicant representative and visited the site and nothing new to disclose. Commissioner O'Crepkey. I too met with the representative of the applicant and have nothing further to disclose. And I also visited the site and met with the applicant's representatives and have no new information to disclose. And with that, Amy Nicholson is staff and will be giving the staff presentation. Thank you, Chair Sisko, members of the commission. The item before you is the Dutton Meadows Subdivision Project. The proposal includes the subdivision of an 18.4 acre site. This would accommodate 130 single family dwellings along with 81 accessory dwelling units. 81 accessory dwelling units would also include 20 affordable units. In addition, proposed improvements for the subdivision include the extension of the North Point Parkway and Street A, which provides access to the 130 lots. In addition to lot-specific parking spaces and common areas for visitor spaces, private and public landscaping. The entitlements before you include a general plan amendment to modify the proposed circulation, a tentative map to subdivide the land, and a conditional use permit for a small lot subdivision. The project site is located at multiple addresses on Dutton Meadow and Hearn Avenue in Southwest Santa Rosa. The project site is primarily undeveloped. There is a detached single family dwelling fronting on Hearn Avenue and some associated accessory structures. As you can see from the graphic, there are large areas of undeveloped land and there are areas of residential development, including immediately North and South of the site. Just a note, Meadow Wood Elementary School is located immediately west of the project site along Dutton Meadow. This graphic is one portion of the tentative map. This covers the western portion of the site and does show the North Point Parkway extension coming through this area. This is not consistent with what is shown in the general plan or the Roseland area-specific plan. I will discuss that in more detail shortly. This is the northern portion of the site. This is Street A continuing through the site off of that North Point Parkway extension, which provides access to private streets and each of the 130 lots are off of those private streets. This graphic shows the proposed location of the 20 accessory dwelling units I mentioned earlier that would be affordable. They are located along Dutton Meadow and the North Point Parkway extension as shown here. This graphic is a street scene. It is representative of several of the different housing types proposed. There are four different housing types proposed in addition to four kind of architectural elevation styles, and the garages are primarily located away from the street, so it's really either the side of houses or the front and front porches of houses that dominate the streetscape. Just to go a little bit into the history of both this site and the project itself, back in 2002 and 2003, the Planning Commission held four public hearings, at which point they discussed what was called the Dutton Meadow Master Plan. This plan covered a 51-acre site, which includes the entire project site before you, and the focus of the public hearings was really the proposed circulation for the area. At the time, the Master Plan proposed a modification to the North Point Parkway extension, and Trumar Combs, who's the current project applicant, was an applicant of the Master Plan project at that time. In January of 2003, the Commission directed the applicant to address a number of issues with a focus on circulation and the design of the North Point Parkway, and following the Commission's direction, staff and the applicant brought back a plan that closer implemented the general plan and the concerns of the Planning Commission. At that time, the Commission recommended approval of the plan to the City Council, who adopted it in March of 2006. Later in 2006, there were two tentative maps approved on the site that we're discussing this evening, covered by the Dutton Meadows Master Plan. These included a 126-attached unit subdivision and a 66-detached unit subdivision. In October of 2009, the City Council adopted the current general plan, and circulation elements from the Dutton Meadows Master Plan were incorporated into the general plan. In October of 2016, the Roseland Area-specific Plan was adopted. The specific plan looked at area-wide circulation, infrastructure, and included a number of circulation goals and policies to improve both connectivity and alleviate congestion. The specific plan update also, or excuse me, specific plan included a number of land use changes to parcels within the Roseland Area, including on this site. A portion of the site was previously designated for retail and business services and medium-density residential development, and it was modified to medium-low density development. In March of 2018, a pre-application meeting was held with City staff and the applicant team. In June, a neighborhood meeting was held with the team and interested residents, and in June, applications for the three entitlements were submitted. In September and October of 2018, City staff and the applicant team met to discuss ongoing concerns regarding the proposed circulation modifications, and in December, City staff conveyed that the City could not support the proposed circulation. This graphic shows the general plan land use diagram for the site and surrounding area. As you can see, the site is all residential. Most of it is medium-low residential, but there is a small portion that is designated for low density residential. The proposed project does fall within the required density range, but it is at the very low end of the density range. So this graphic here shows how the circulation is being proposed to be modified, and so this dark blue area is what is in the Rosalinaria-specific plan and the general plan. So to provide some orientation, Dutton Meadow is west on the left side, and her avenue is the top of the screen to the north. The North Point Parkway extension is envisioned to come up from the south and connect with Dutton Meadow and eventually to provide access to North Point Parkway. This other portion would come also off of Dutton Meadow and eventually connect up to her avenue. The proposed circulation creates a different intersection. So this is a kind of 90-degree turn movement here, which would be immediately east of the elementary school, and we can talk more about that in a moment. And it also creates a pretty significant change along this street A, which is proposed to eventually connect to her and by creating several 90-degree turning movements, which are off of the North Point Parkway instead of Dutton Meadow. The project has been reviewed in compliance with a number of general plan policies. It is not consistent with those in the transportation element related to reducing the volume of traffic in neighborhoods or exploring different circulation patterns to provide better regional circulation. In addition, the project has been found to implement a number of our land use and housing policies in that it provides a wide range of housing stock, both for sale and for rent. It does propose affordable units. This graphic here is taken from the Roseland Area Specific Plan. It shows the different infrastructure that exists, roadways that exist, and those that are proposed as a part of the plan. This is just zoomed in, and so you can see her avenue toward the top, and this is just kind of a wider zoomed-out view of what I showed earlier with the connection being shown in a very different manner than what's being proposed. Applicants must answer several questions on their general plan amendment applications. One is related to the need to amend the general plan, and the applicant responded that this amendment would be necessary to allow for a detached single-family product in concert with the planned circulation of the area. When asked to address the changes or events that have occurred since the current general plan was updated, that would warrant a change to the general plan. The applicant has responded that the city has been in a housing crisis, the fires certainly exacerbated that condition, and also referenced the adoption of our accessory dwelling unit ordinance in 2017. In addressing the question related to detailed plans or other studies, revealing a need for the general plan amendment, the applicant responded that the Rosalynn area-specific plan has a figure and table that specifically referenced the proposed circulation, and the applicant referenced the traffic study to describe how the proposed change would affect surrounding land uses. The applicant is requesting a general plan amendment to the planned circulation of the area, again, to accommodate a detached single-family product, and it's understandable that a detached single-family product would take up more land, and the planned circulation also takes up more land, and so this struggle is recognized. However, it seems that there could be a potential solution with having some attached housing products, which would have less of a building footprint, and also allow for circulation that is closer to what the city has in its policy documents. In addition, the general plan is one of its major purposes is to guide feature development, and it does so by providing some predictability and stability for important elements like circulation, especially circulation for a broader area. The applicant has already mentioned that there are some amendments that come before you typically relate to increasing the density on a site or a change in land use. Change to the transportation element is anticipated by staff to have much more wide-reaching impacts, and so this is an atypical request. In addition to the general plan amendment, there is no guarantee that this particular project is constructed, or that any project is constructed on that site, and so what the scenario highlights is the need to have a circulation change really benefit the area regardless of a development proposal. Staff has found that the general plan amendment would be detrimental to the public interest and convenience by reducing the functionality and efficiency of two planned connections. It would exacerbate existing congestion that's along Hearn Avenue, and it would create a high volume rate turn at an active school crossing. While the traffic analysis does demonstrate, intersections would operate acceptably. The overall impact is anticipated to negatively affect the regional circulation. Just to highlight much of the area is undeveloped, and previous analysis regarding infrastructure needs has been based on these two planned streets that are proposed for modification. As such, city staff aren't able to support the proposal without a more comprehensive traffic and infrastructure analysis, and this would typically be done with a general plan update or a specific plan. The project site is zoned R16 and PD 06001. These are both intended for low to medium density residential development as proposed. As I mentioned earlier, and I won't go back into detail with all of these items, staff has a continued issue with the realign roadways. They include regional impacts. Again, the Southwest has not been developed to full general plan build out, and there are concerns as to how this modification that's proposed could affect all of those other sites developing to the potential that has been identified in the general plan. In addition, it would reduce the efficiency of two connections that are meant to provide access to both commercial and business areas, north and east of the project site, in particular the North Point Parkway business area and commercial areas to the east. Staff has also anticipated that the proposed street alignment would increase traffic volumes along Dutton Meadow, and Dutton Meadow was studied as a part of the rosinary specific plan and it was determined that the two-lane road that it is currently was acceptable based on all of the other improvements planned for the area. There have been a number of public comments received throughout the process. The first is at the neighborhood meeting, so this occurred back in June. There were a number of residents that showed up to the neighborhood meeting and they did express their preference for the lower density proposed when compared to the previous project approved in 2006. They liked that the buildings were two stories instead of three stories. There were concerns expressed about the existing congestion on Hearn Avenue. There were questions about the overall traffic plan for the area, what are the other improvements that would be going into the area in addition to issues with the lack of sidewalks and pedestrian circulation. Several comment letters received and afforded to you include parking concerns. Parking has been highlighted as an issue within the area and many residents are concerned that the development might not include enough parking spaces. And finally, traffic on Dutton Meadow has been raised as a concern based on the number of projects that are currently going through the process in the area or that have been approved. And so here we have a slide that shows all the projects that have either been approved or in process just in the area between Hearn Avenue and north of Bellevue which is not on the screen. And so Dutton Meadow runs right here and so the project site is here and up here. And so there are these numbers indicate the number of units. And so these have all been approved except for this one here which is in process slated to go before the commission next month and this one which is just in its early phases here. So this was something that staff did discuss with concerns about reducing the efficiency of some of those intersections and roadways relative to the development that is occurring in the area. The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this project as it doesn't apply to a project that an agency rejects or disapproves. CEQA is inapplicable once the city determines not to proceed with a project. However, there has been an addendum prepared to the EIR for the site and that has been uploaded for your information but staff has not reviewed that environmental document. With that, the Planning and Economic Development Department recommend that the Planning Commission deny the General Plan Amendment tentative map and conditional use permit. And the other options before you include going with staff's recommendation which I just mentioned or directing staff to return with resolutions of approval and completed environmental analysis. This option would require the commission to make findings of fact in support of the General Plan Amendment. And then another option would be for the item to be continued for the applicant to change the project or provide additional information or analysis. And I'm happy to answer any questions. The city's traffic engineer Rob Sprinkle is also here to answer any questions and the Director of Transportation and Public Works, Jason, is also here. Great. Any general questions right now or do we want to hold it? Okay, great. So I'm sure we're going to have questions for you. We're going to hold them after the public hearing. Is the applicant here wanting to make a presentation? Okay. Are you guys downloading there? There you go. Great. Great. Thank you. Good evening, Chair Siscoe, members of the commission. My name is Garrett Hines. I'm the Director of Architecture with True Mark Homes. True Mark is a local Bay Area land developer and builder based in San Ramon, California. We've been developing residential communities for over three decades throughout the greater Bay Area. In 2018, we won the National Master Plan Community of the Year Award. Actually, it was the fifth year in a row. Also, in 2018, we were recognized by Professional Better Magazine as the builder of the year. This just proves that we care about the buildings, the communities, and the homes we build. True Mark is pleased to present. Go ahead. Not gone. There we go. Thanks. We're pleased to present a residential development proposal for 211 housing units on 19 of the 50-acre development Dutton Meadow Master Plan. As Amy mentioned, approved 13 so years ago. True Mark was approved to build 196 three-story homes on the same 19 acres. 2006 was the peak of the market. Unfortunately, three-story homes in Santa Rosa were not feasible on this site at that time, and they're still not feasible on that site today. For an example, Christofferson Homes, the biggest and best builder at that time in this area, dropped our deal back in 2007, and as many other builders, national builders, have not been interested in this development each year for the last decade. Banks are not loaning money to build these, even to True Mark. They are too expensive to build here and less desirable than a traditional two-story home. I have visited your planning department every year since 2006 asking to please build two-story homes and have been turned away until 2018. They asked us to go ahead and proceed, and we are encouraged to be here. Today, we are asking you to please allow these 211 housing units. We are proposing 130 traditional two-story homes, perfect for raising a family, perfect for young couples, young families, mature families, within walking distance to Meadowview Elementary School, the Southwest Community Park, and the future four-acre Dutton Meadow Neighborhood Park. 81 of the 130 homes comes with a one-bedroom apartment above a rear-detach garage, separate from the main house. This alley-style housing type is nothing new to Santa Rosa. You already have the wonderful Match Point and New Zealand Avenue neighborhoods, which are very similar to this proposal. The two alley-style house plans are modest in size, 1,800 to 2,000 square feet with three to four bedrooms. These homes are high-quality design style. Each plan has a bedroom on the ground floor, which is critical for today's home buyer. None of the 2006 plans had a one-bedroom on the ground, making them less desirable. Each alley-style plan has a one-bedroom rental apartment above the rear garage. The larger alley-style plan is on a wider lot, which allows for a larger rear rental unit plus a dedicated, covered parking space. All rear rental units have separate entrances. The varying home styles help create an interesting and varied street scene. The architectural style aims to reflect the agrarian and farmhouse history of the site, using porches, shutter, arches, and a mix of materials to create a timeless and authentic neighborhood theme. I've worked with your design review board in the past, and I'm sure these can become another award-winning Santa Rosa and True Mark community. Homefronts without garages creates a wonderful streetscape from surrounding collector streets with the garages in the rear. The one-bedroom apartments above adds much-needed residential units to your community. 49 of the 130 homes are slightly larger, two-story homes, traditionally plotted, to continue the diversity of plan types throughout the neighborhood, attractive to mature families with growing kids. These traditional homes range from 2,200 to 2,600 square feet and also have the critical downstairs bedroom. They load from the front with full-drivo aprons for guest parking. And they have bigger rear yards, again perfect for maturing families. In all, we're proposing six different floor plans, ranging from 550-square-foot-1 bedroom apartments up to 2,600-square-foot-4 bedroom homes. The diversity is what makes the neighborhood financeable due to the wide appeal of household sizes and family structures. Today, a great percentage of homes have multi-generational families living under one roof. We have our parents who come for extended times to watch the kids while both parents work. We have our boomerang kids that come back from college that need a place to live while they work and try to save money. And unfortunately, we still have many families and individuals displaced and looking for appropriate living opportunities in the area. Our proposal provides the community 130 single-family homes and, again, 81 rental apartments. The neighborhood is efficient and organized to address various edge conditions. Instead of ugly walls, we have front doors facing the collector streets, Herne, Dutton and North Point to create a real friendly atmosphere. Internal of the neighborhood are the larger traditional homes clustered in groups of six off of shared alleys. These are essentially miniature cul-de-sacs that are safe for kids to play out. Pedestrian connectivity is transparent. Go ahead. With green belts and sidewalks connecting perimeter public sidewalks, bike lanes that connect to Meadowview Elementary to the west and the Future Park and Shopping Center, hopefully to the east. Go ahead. Unfortunately, the 50-acre Dutton Meadow master plan has not come to reality due to unrealized projections. We all thought three-story townhomes would be feasible. But they're not. The only thing built to date is Burbank's housing, Amorosa Village, which was heavily subsidized as affordable housing. But we are here today to talk about proposing something that can keep the dream alive of this master plan. The dream of the master plan including a new grocery store and service retail to the west of 101, we are ready to go. The property is fully mitigated. We have our mitigation permits in hand. We already created the 100-acre Gobi Preserve, cover CTS, wetlands, rare plants for this and the entire 50-acre master plan. We're very excited to finally have this discussion about providing your community with desperately needed housing following recent SAD events. We're asking for two minor changes, changes that have to do with being efficient and realistic. One change, as I've described tonight, is two-story homes with accessory bedrooms. It actually increases the housing supply and does it with lower building heights, lower density, lower density, and creates a much more southwest Santa Rosa-like home. The price per square foot to sell these homes is actually less than the previously approved three-story homes, meaning this is more affordable to your community and more desirable, meaning these homes appeal to a broader segment of your population, more attainable housing for more people in need of housing. The second change is a minor adjustment to the circulation pattern. I'm going to ask Robin Miller from our team to discuss that. Thanks for the introduction, Garrett. I want to take this moment just to thank Amy Nicholson, as well as Rob Sprinkles, Bill Rose, Gabe Osborne, and many other staff members that helped work on this project to bring it forward today, despite the recommendation of denial. A little under 18 months ago, True Mark was invited to attend a builder's round table meeting to discuss ways to provide 2,000 additional homes to the city. Unfortunately, that meeting never occurred. While I was driving up, the fires forced me to turn around, and that meeting never got to take place. Yet, a few months later, I returned what this project proposal we're presenting to you today. This project is really personal to me. I was born and raised in the North Bay. I still live here. I have family that lives in the Roseland area, and I understand staff's concerns about traffic. I believe they're a bit too focused on one narrow element of this project and the potential impacts are negligible, in my opinion. The project benefits I feel far outweigh the impacts. This slide here represents the difference between the two circulation patterns. As you can see, the current design is designed to put a 45-mile-an-hour designed roadway that crosses in front of Meadowview Elementary School. It stops at the three-way stop on the north at Hearn Avenue. The proposed design brings traffic to a signalized stop south of the school itself, and I want to be clear that I do not disagree with staff's staff report where they say that the proposed design, it will be slower. It absolutely will be a bit slower than what was currently designed. But do we really want a 45-mile-an-hour posted street going in front of Meadowview Elementary School? I guess that's for the commission council to decide. So what does the current design do to the proposed project? It impacts 26 lots resulting in a loss of 52 homes. The feasibility of losing 25% of the proposed housing stock for this project is not we're not able to overcome, and ultimately we would have to shelve this project so that the existing circulation design were to exist or to be maintained. So what are the impacts of the project? Well, the potential impacts of the project in our estimation are approximately 60 seconds of traffic related to the additional stops, but I'll let our traffic engineer address any questions or comments regarding those elements. The benefits of this project as pointed out by Garrett are 211 home opportunities, 80 of which will be rental or the availability of rental, 20 of the 81 shall be set at affordable housing rates by deed restriction. The roadway improvements, signalized intersections, crosswalks to the elementary school and sidewalks where none exist are all part of the project benefits as well as $12 million in fees that will be paid towards the city and the impact fees. Once these entitlements if approved it should take true mark approximately nine to 12 months to move forward with grading permits and the plans associated with. All other mitigations as Garrett pointed out have already occurred and I'm doing something that has been done before. We're not requesting approval of the gpa tonight. What we're asking of council commission, forgive me, is to forward the project on to city council with recommendations to direct staff to return on a date certain with draft findings, conditions of approval, resolutions necessary to approve the project as presented and adopting an addendum to the 2005 resolution EIR. Now, I'm available for any questions and I thank you for your time. Any clarifying questions from the applicant right now? I do have one for staff. Mr. Heinz's comment jumped out at me that he's returned to staff on two occasions to look into reducing the height to two stories. What would have been the process of that and do you recall that at all? I don't recall those specific discussions. If the proposal was presented however and we do get proposals quite frequently actually to look at an approved project and look at modifications to those projects. What we do is a comparison. We take the approved project plans and we do a side-by-side comparison. We look for the changes. We also evaluate conditions of approval and we also evaluate any mitigations associated with an environmental review document. And those things are important because if any of the changes relate to conditions of approval or mitigations or items that were specifically addressed at a public hearing then the project goes back through that public hearing process back to that original review authority. If not then we look to see if it can be considered the new project to be in substantial conformance with the approved plans and then we often will review those at a more administrative level. Like I said we do get a number of these. We do get a number of projects that were approved during the era that the gentleman referenced and that have had to be modified for current conditions. So there would be an analysis and pathways described not just a no you can't do it. Correct. Okay great thanks. Okay so we're going to go ahead and move on to the public hearing. I think most of you are here because you're going to have three minutes. I will call your name and call the following person's name if you would watch the little light bar and make sure that you end when the buzzer goes off. That would be great. And I'm going to start with Carmela Biggs since you had to wait so long. And I'm going to open the public hearing. My name is Carmela Biggs and I live in Amorosa Village on Tebel Creek Drive and this proposed project. Right now I would like to call attention to the critical need for parking regulation on the street as people park on both sides of the street and reducing it to one lane and also they park with their cars sticking out into the center of the traffic so that you can't see what's coming around you nor can the other oncoming person see the other driver. So there are hazardous situations and when you try to get down Dutton Meadow when the school is getting out the cars are all lined up to pick up their children and you can't get down Dutton Meadow. And then at certain times of day I would say from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. getting down Hearn to the railroad tracks is just bumper to bumper very congested emergency vehicles probably could not get through if they had to. Also if you're coming down West trying to turn on to Hearn Avenue and get onto West Avenue there's some really near misses and there have been a few accidents there so I would suggest with the growing pains of Santa Rosa that you carefully look at how to regulate things and also if you want to reduce the number of vehicles to improve the public transportation for the city. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Biggs. Next is Carly Seitzer followed by David Alexander. Hi, I'm Carly. I live on Corn Drive. I live west of Dutton Meadows across from the Amarosa complex. Parking is a very serious concern in our neighborhood. I see parents trying to herd their children walking blocks in the middle of the night trying to get their children home. It's a serious safety concern. I'm also very concerned about the school and the increased traffic there. I see cars getting impatient and going around cars in the other lane and I'm waiting for the day I see a child get hit. I think it's easy to say that the traffic and the parking concerns are negligible when you don't live in the neighborhood and you don't see the concerns we see every day. I don't want to see this being minimized because it's at a tipping point. It's a serious concern and no one's addressing it. We call the police. We email the parking division and we're told essentially that there's nothing that they can do for us. I can't imagine adding to this problem. You don't solve one problem of housing by adding to another problem. That's not a solution. That's just more problems. I would ask that before any more housing is approved that the city finds a way to address the parking issue. I think it's a concern. It's become a safety concern. It's also become a health concern. Our street can't be cleaned. The street sweeper can't even go down the street and clean the street. We don't have anywhere to put our garbage cans because there's cars parked bumper to bumper all the way down Tuxhorn Drive to the southwest community park is certainly not the answer. Thank you. Thank you. David Alexander followed by Roger Farrell. Well, good afternoon. My name's David Alexander. I'm the superintendent with Bellevue Union School District. First of all, you have incredible stamina with these meetings. I thought I had it. So a couple things I wanted to address. First of all, thanking you for the opportunity to address our concerns. I've always been our superintendent for a year and a half, but I'm getting to know our community quite well. I want to talk about two things. Maybe some facts and figures. You guys talk about units and such, and it almost depersonalizes what I get to deal with on a daily basis, and that's the children, the hearts of who we support and our families. I love the idea of us trying to find affordable housing, more housing myself. I can't imagine what our parents are doing. So I want to address a couple things first. First of all, that traffic on Dutton is very concerning. I have a hard time even getting in when traffic is not flowing from pickup or when students are dismissed. The parking situation she's referring to is real. Sometimes it's hard to even get across when the traffic parks on each side and so it's very concerning. The other thing that I'm very concerned about is the existing traffic itself. That morning period when the students pick up or get picked up, excuse me, dropped off or picked up, it's very real in that if you consider who our families are, especially in today's society, we don't really like our kids to walk anymore. When I grew up, we walked to our community schools. The new union has four community schools. Meadowview is one of those beautiful places where we consider that a family center and the challenge is to be honest with you, as I look around Santa Rosa, this is a bigger issue, the traffic what we call passageways, they're not even really sidewalks, a little bump is really unsafe. I unfortunately have had the experience of going to a kindergarteners funeral who was one of my students in a community much like this because of a situation like that. It was an accident, but again, there's not much room there for our parents and our children to use. So my concern is from my heart. Let me tell you who our families are. We're 90% low income we're 90% Latino. These homes, I'm not too sure if very many of our families are going to be able to afford those homes. The biggest concern though is the concern and safety of our own students and our families. I don't know which proposal is better, but I think we need to look at the infrastructure in the sidewalks if we are truly to keep our schools and our children safe. Thank you for your time. Thank you Mr. Alexander. Roger Farrell followed by Fred Krueger. Good evening Madam Chair, Planning Commissioners. My name is Roger Farrell. I'm from the Belview Union School District. Like Dr. Alexander, I share concerns about the roadways and the foot traffic pedestrian passageways. In looking at the safety of ingress and egress for our students that primarily depend upon walking to and from school, there is very limited safe passageway for those pedestrians. The other concern that we in looking at both plans that are being submitted is the safety of ingress and egress for our buses in front of our school that faces Dutton Meadow. That is our bus loop. So you're talking about a large bus needing to access off of this busy street and exit onto a busy street. With the current traffic flow, it will be quite difficult. So I caution you to ensure that we have those traffic lights strategically placed for that safety of ingress and egress onto our campus and to our neighbourhood. In review of Stony Point Road adjacent to RL Stevens, RL Stevens, yes adjacent to a 45 mile per hour road, but it has a luxury of Giffen Road which is a place where traffic is able to relax and safely access and exit the school. Dutton Meadow does not or excuse me, Meadowview Elementary does not have that feature on the infrastructure, current infrastructure of Dutton Meadow. So whatever ingress and egress onto that school campus, that predates really any of this planning consideration. It was built and established. Doors were open in 1998. So I caution you to ensure that whatever decision is made for the pre-existing infrastructure and keep ultimately the safety of our students and families in mind. One of the great concerns is, yes, the pre-existing traffic congestion without any of these improvements or adjustments. But again, I share with Dr. Alexander these failures to plan for these will result in but what I'm most concerned about will result in traffic accidents that may involve pedestrians. So I caution you to be mindful of the ingress and egress to Meadowview Elementary School and also to our neighbors. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Fred Krueger followed by Tulio. Thank you very much to Amy for her presentation and the applicant. I'd like to make four points. The additional pressure on the local schools would bring population pressures in the school to a breaking point. In the Roseland School District they're financially strapped and they're overcrowded and 85% of the budget goes to teachers and there's no room in that budget to handle this new influx of pedestrians. There's also the draft EIR 10 years ago from Walmart which rated the traffic on Herne as worse than Sebastopol Road and so this brings up a question how do we handle a medical emergency for someone who stranded and emergency vehicles are blocked and I think a test about this project could be a developer willing to indemnify and assume financial responsibility for those medical emergencies that get stranded within the area and cannot get to a hospital. I don't know if that's done before but if they're going to resume responsibility for this then it follows that financial responsibility should follow. Now this is also an area where the California Tiger Salamander has been identified and located in fact just a half mile away there's a pond which was used to mitigate an earlier development. So these are issues which haven't been brought up yet and yet it points out the severe need across the southwest of Santa Rosa for additional infrastructure. We've been in a building boom but there has not been the proportional increase in infrastructure whether it's for parks whether it's for roadways more signals on that street will only exacerbate a terrible problem. It takes more than a half an hour sometimes at rush hour on Saturday to go the quarter mile from the intersection of West and Hearn to Santa Rosa Avenue. It's impossible to negotiate that and so we do a long roundabout journey this development would only make those matters worse. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Kruger. And last is Tulio didn't give the last name. My name is Tulio Vasquez. Great go ahead. Thank you. Three minutes. My main concern is about the traffic. I live in Alois in Salian and close to Hearn Avenue and sometimes during the school when the schools are out it takes me about 20 to half an hour to go from Alois Avenue to the freeway and also I'm concerned about in case when a disaster like a natural disaster like a fire or quake or floods we're going to be trapped in there because it's so much traffic I make the math and it's going to be 130 houses and each house at least is going to have two or four vehicles and even all the total is about I mean more than 500 cars and so how are you going to solve this problem? I mean I moved to Santa Rosa about 10 years ago and they were talking about the over part that they are going to build an over part and so on and nothing has happened there are not even sidewalks in Hearn Street in the North Side, South Side or Hearn Street so I mean it's kind of it doesn't make any sense to me especially you know in case of something big big natural disaster so the traffic in the parking some people on Hearn Street I notice about six cars in each house sometimes so what's going to happen here it's going to be more cars than people thank you that's all the cards that I have on this item but if you want to speak you don't have to have filled out a card and if you just state your name for the record please you got there first you go good evening we prepared the traffic analysis I wanted it to be possible to bring up the presentation by the applicant and go to one of the sheets that shows the street system a couple things I wanted to just note quickly while they're doing that is the school district's concern about access and particularly egress from the site is that there is a proposed street configuration at this part of the subdivision plan a T-intersection would be created at Dutton Meadow and North Point Parkway directly at the southerly side of the school site providing signalized egress from the school with the traffic on the west side their driveways would end up offset from the signalized intersection one direction or the other so it would probably be made worse than it is today unless there's some way of bringing them in elsewhere so the other thing I wanted to note is that in discussing the regional effect of this layout I wanted to make sure that there's some information to determine if someone started in the lower left-hand side of either of those two diagrams and wanted to get to the upper right-hand side so from south of from the south side on Dutton Meadow to the north side on Hearn if they took the left-hand side to go through three traffic signals and make a left turn at the T intersection they're over on the right-hand side of the diagrams conversely if they're coming from the south and they use the they could go along that southerly route through a roundabout and they would only have two signals through which they'd be making a through movement rather than a left-turn movement which is typically your highest delay movement so from a regional perspective a route that gets them between Dutton Meadow to the south and Hearn Avenue to the northeast approximately it's about the same length neither one of us particularly longer what we looked at from a regional perspective is that the traffic can still be drawn across and avoid the segment of Hearn between Dutton Meadow and Dutton which as I understand it is really part of the focus of trying to provide this adopted plan line it's mostly about trying to keep people off of Hearn where it's two lanes and they can't make it any wider so if there are any questions I'm happy to answer them but I just wanted to point those two things out great thank you anyone else wishing to speak on this item yes hi my name is Tom Schneider I live on Hearn Avenue right across from the proposed project I think this is a great project I'd much rather see two stories than three three story you're going to have a whole lot more people a whole lot more cars and it doesn't blend in with the neighborhood that presently exists what really is needed is for the Bellevue Overpass that is going to alleviate a whole lot of traffic congestion and that needs to happen sooner rather than later thanks thank you and yes Howdy I'm another Tom my name is Tom Schneider and I live on Victoria Drive which is just east of the field that backs up to this project I can see the I can see where it's at there 15 years ago or 20 years ago our neighborhood association met with a number of you and Garrett was kind enough to come over to our house you remember Frank Kazimov and found him easy to work with I share all the concerns of the traffic I don't know if the state's going to let you put in something at Bellevue and maybe you figured out the answer to my question I hope that I'm not wasting everybody's time but I'm here to talk about drainage the proposed project is somebody's hauled in a ton of dirt there you can see it's about eight feet above the surrounding field which is pretty much underwater what's going on my house was built in 1947 and all the drainage goes the wrong way all the new houses that are built they drain the house to the front of the street it would be drained to Victoria Drive not us, our house, the grade everything sends it back toward that field so my concern is that if we put a big plug on the other side of the field a new housing thing maybe Garrett's figured this out already but I don't want to be sitting inside a bowl of water all winter long so that's all I wanted to say and the traffic if you've lived there the traffic is awful now and it's going to get worse I don't know if the state will let you put an overpass in at Bellevue but that's the simple thing thank you thank you Mr. Shader anybody else wanting to speak okay I'm not seeing anyone else rise so I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing and Mr. Hines do you have the opportunity to respond to the public thank you very much Tom yes we're going to take care of drainage we're not going to send any water your way that's required and I hope we get to that point real quick I just want to honestly say that yes I did approach staff with my business partner Chris Davenport every year we almost made a little fun should we come see you next year because every time we'd walk in and staff is not going to support a change next we are not going to negatively affect Amorosa Village in their parking we are over parked our design will improve safety at the school adding an intersection adding crosswalks if we need to bus duck out I'm more than happy to work with the school district to make this a safe intersection that is of the utmost importance let us fix the problem let us not leave it the way it is a 45 mile an hour street in front of a school is not appropriate we're proposing a 25 mile an hour street with corrections Mr. Krueger yes we have mitigated the CTS fully do you want to add something I just want to add one point with this property as you can see from the diagrams that are behind you is a critical piece of property both for the proposed and for the existing circulation pattern and is quite honestly the key to being able to route traffic and circumvent Herne Avenue and without this project being able to be approved those connection roads that circumvent that are not possible yes this project will not finish the last piece that is on the most easterly side that requires other property owners to do but this is a step towards that and if this project is not feasible and cannot be approved that roadway circulation is a beautiful piece of paper it's just not going to be reality so those are my only points thanks I think a lot of the other public concerns about parking in general and circulation in general we can get to when we start to grill you guys any questions of the applicant while he's up there right now about the project by sure weeks I have a question regarding the ADUs you indicate that they are going to be affordable will there be a contract with the housing authority for those units yes absolutely there will be actually two deed restrictions as I understand from staff on these for the affordable ADUs that are deed restricted at the affordable rates based on AMI those will be deed restricted for the typical 55 years I believe you guys are probably concerned about the property ownership issue to developers on those in addition to that my understanding is that staff said to have these ADUs work on the property they require that the property owner be the resident on site in order for those to be rented at market rate to affordable rental rates so yes two different levels of deed restrictions will be applied to them depending on if they are owner occupied or if they are the 20 units that are being offered as strictly affordable rental any other questions of the applicant yeah, shall I call you just real quick what are the ballpark prices that you're thinking the different levels of the housing I think we're looking at the low mid sixes all the way up to I'd say the middle range of six thank you I would like to point out one item to that regarding that question that I forgot which is our understanding from the lenders that would be lending to the potential buyers that the accessory dwelling unit rental rates could be applied against their mortgage to reduce the monthly thank you okay and then I just have a question of your original proposal that I saw when I first got my packet showed the inclusionary housing ADUs disperse throughout the project and then we got a late one coming in that now shows all of the below market rate along the streets could you say something about what that change was about we are open to negotiate where those are located and they could be dispersed in another way and I'm sorry that graphic really got in there honestly we're open to where those 20 occur okay and then just a little bit of piece of history here and I know I asked Robin when he came out with me is we just did the Roseland specific plan update and that would have been a good time to tackle looking at the circulation issue I know you did tackle having your density actually reduced on this piece of property you must have had some kind of a project in mind is there some reason why you didn't tackle that then I don't think we have a very good answer for you on that one okay good okay so questions of staff commissioner yeah since this is an appeal can staff ballpark I don't need exact how much time was spent on this going back and forth trying to find a resolution that would be feasible for approval for both sides so it's highly unusual for us to bring a denial forward we don't dispute what the applicant is indicated in terms of what they're providing numbers of units the ad use the city pursues those aggressively there was extensive discussion with the applicant our goal is to bring a project forward that is something we can support and that we can recommend approval on and I would say across all departments that was the effort it's in line with the city council's goals and and so this went on it's ongoing still tonight our intent is to work through issues but there became a point where there was not a resolution that was available and that's why the recommendation for denial is forward is brought forward to tonight thank you I have two more questions so in one of your slides you showed the proposed and approved projects in that area how would this project as proposed tonight affect those I'm not sure I'm clear on what you're asking so there's other projects that are proposed in the area and so if this project as proposed were to go forward how would that with the traffic would it impact those projects in any way shape or form as to their feasibility or what might happen with them good evening we're up sprinkle so as part of the rosalina area specific plan those projects were studied in conjunction with the road alignment that's approved in the plan not with the proposed alignment so it's hard to tell you exactly what the impact would be but the original analysis was done with the other roadway alignment so there's no way to say if it could if it would have no impact or if it could negatively impact the road whatever we want the icing here you can say for sure I can say that with the traffic analysis regarding the future with the with that intersection as proposed and the intersections as planned using those two words as the distinction the planned with the However, we have to keep in mind is the intent of Dutton Avenue and North Point Parkway is to be a regional arterial street and by bifurcating it with intersections at right angles, we're really not aligning with that concept. We're cutting that in half and that's one of the main things that we're looking at is the overall development and the overall circulation of the south part of the city. This element was intact as planned, not as being proposed. If I could follow up, I may. So that's the technical answer. I'm just going to give you the real answer in terms of how we coordinate with applicants. So approved applications, they have a right to move forward. They have entitlements, right? So they were based on best available information, adopted general plan policies. That's how traffic modeling works. And so based on all that, they received their entitlements. So they have a right to build those projects. But as noted, some of these are coming in. They're in process. Maybe they've filed an application or a pre-application. So for example, the one that's immediately to the south that says 70, they've come in. They're interested to develop. And what are the tools that they work with that we show them is the general plan. But if the general plan is in flux, there's no predictability for how they develop their project. And that's a significant change in terms of what they're supposed to do with their project. So it does affect how we build out this area. And that's one of the reasons for staff's caution in this general plan amendment is because, you know, it really has, we may not even build to imagine all the indirect impacts that this change would have. We have to analyze that. So it's not just one project. It really has repercussions on a much wider scale. And if I can add just one other thing, we've referenced here several times through Amy's presentation how we think that there are potential regional impacts to this quadrant of the city. Beyond the technical analysis, there's also a public process to this. And we've indicated that through perhaps a general plan update with that broader level of public involvement, that is possibly a preferred mechanism to analyze this. We see this as potentially having impacts up into the North Point Parkway area as it gets nearer the business park. And through that expanded general plan update, for example, the public noticing is broader. And so properties that may be impacted will actually be able to be made aware of this proposal. Thank you, all of you, for answering that question, far better than I asked it. Okay. Any questions of staff? Any questions? Yeah. Commissioner Deggan. This is another traffic-related question. So if we deny it, take staff recommendation and deny the project tonight, and that delays the buildout of the North Point Parkway Dutton Meadow as shown currently in the general plan, what's the impact going to be to Dutton Meadow? I mean, Dutton Meadow is always seen as being a two-lane road, correct? And it's going to be in the straight alignment potentially for years down the road with all these housing units coming forward. And so has that impact as far as traffic goes been looked at? So the intent of improving like near the school is part of this development. We don't have any CIP current projects to do any winding or development of Dutton Meadow other than what's related to the development that's being done along there. So it would be if these projects shown on the current slide go forward, it's going to maintain just a two-lane road. To the North, correct. Yeah. Okay. And then I also have a question for staff, and it's from the staff report page 10, and it mentions, if the city were to approve the requested general plan amendment, the applicant could decide to construct a different project or no project. How does that work? They could just decide not to go forward with this project. Correct. So if a general plan amendment is approved, that's a change that doesn't expire. They could, for example, receive that approval and then possibly change the number of units they could change the map. They could come forward years down the road or perhaps they wouldn't be able to construct it within a certain time frame and then maybe the property gets sold and then the street still doesn't get constructed or streets. Anything, Commissioner Collier? Any other questions? Yeah, just kind of going off of what Mr. Rose said, if that were to happen, if they were to wait till there was a general plan update, what is the timeline that we're looking at for that? It's on our docket to begin that work. It's going to begin anytime now. It is a long process though. It'll take probably several years to get through that. It is the broadest level of analysis that a city can do when it evaluates its land use, its primary land use document. So the beginning is forthcoming, the duration will take some time, however. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Sprinkel, could you just go back over the history? Ms. Nicholson's staff report was really very thorough and excellent as to the struggle that the Planning Commission had in 2002, of which I was a part of. But could you describe some of the history with North Point Parkway and the struggle we had with aligning it then at that time for True Marks Project? I can give you some history. Mr. Nutt may want to fill in some of the gaps that I have. I was not directly involved in a lot of the history other than looking at some of the plans that had been developed in the area. There was one specific development on the corner of Dutton and Hearn that was in for a tentative map, I believe, which precluded us from putting the actual North Parkway alignment through that property at the time, as Amy's pointing out. The alignment of North Point Parkway actually, I'll use this if you don't mind. Continues from this point if you look on the slide, and this is a rough alignment by all means, and it comes down across this location. Originally it was to basically come through and tie into Dutton. Since this property at the southwest corner of Hearn and Dutton Meadow had been, I don't know if a tentative map was actually approved, but a map was constructed, we had to alternate that plan, and that was not a choice from the traffic engineering side, from the circulation side, that was more of a choice of this property was going to be developed and we're a little late. So my attempt here is trying not to make the same mistake again, in that we have an empty field, and it's really, I think, invested interest of the city to get that regional connection that we planned on for all these years. Hi, Jason. Director of Transportation and Public Works. I was working with Rob as city traffic engineer at this time when that last proposal or regional proposal came through, and Rob's recollection is spot on. We spent a considerable amount of time working with the community, working with Meadowview Elementary, trying to ensure that the alignment that was going to be, that was being proposed as a part of the specific plan really did work, was appropriate, and conveyed the traffic that we felt was necessary to support the development that was throughout Southwest Santa Rosa. You've heard a couple of indications about the potential for a Bellevue interchange, while at this current time the interchange, as a full interchange, is not a viable option. The regional overcrossing is still something that we're pursuing. In addition, we're looking at how we can improve the Herne Avenue interchange. The challenge with Herne Avenue is, as we've already built up around Herne Avenue to restrict its potential widening where it was originally, it's now a three-lane road and will be a three-lane road in perpetuity. What we worked on back during the specific plan was really trying to identify not just this specific piece of property or even the properties and the immediate vicinity of that, but it was everything south of Sebastopol Road, west of Highway 101, all the way out to the city limits. That's what we were focusing on. North Point Parkway was the primary driver to bring vehicles, especially commercial vehicles, going in and out of the corporate center area, in and out of this quadrant of town. It was a long time, a lot of work. There was a lot of effort put into it. I will say you had a very diligent team at that time as you do today. That's really taken a conscientious approach to evaluating what the traffic conditions and what the socioeconomic benefits are of having a regional arterial like this. Okay. And then in Ms. Nicholson's report, she was describing the difference that we, typically when we see a general plan amendment, it's about the land use and it's been rare. Have we ever had a circulation proposal like this as a general plan amendment? Well, we had the Roberts Road realignment with the Redwood gospel mission a few years ago. Right, which we denied. Yeah, they're very unusual. Right. Okay. Great. Has happened, but it's rare. Okay. Any other questions? Questions of staff? Okay. So let me get to where our resolutions are. So we have a number of resolutions to get through here, and these are resolutions denying the application. And at what point we get to vote? Would you end up voting yes on a denial or no, we want it to go forward. But what I'm thinking I'd like to do is have somebody move the first resolution. We'll have a very general and I hope robust discussion about the entire project and then I'll try to collect how we're feeling about this and make decisions about either how we modify or just vote on each resolution. So with that, if somebody's ready to move a resolution, the resolution for the denial of the general plan amendment is up first. I can do that. Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Rosa denying an application for a general plan amendment to modify the planned circulation for the Dutton Meadow subdivision located at 2650-266-2684 Dutton Meadow and 1112 and 1200 Hearn Avenue file number GPAM18-003. Wait for the reading of the text. One second. Okay. So that was moved by Vice Chair Weeks, seconded by Commissioner McCrepkey. Mr. McCrepkey, would you like to begin? So looking at this project, there's some things I do really like about it. I'm very happy about the 211 units. I love the affordable housing component, the opportunity for multi-generational housing and passive income within the ADUs. Personally, I just like the elevations. And then that's an area that does need to be developed. All that being said, we want housing and we do want it bad, but we need to be smart about it. Circulation issues mean that that's going to seep into the surrounding neighborhoods. That's just the way it is. People could try to find side streets or however they can to get around traffic jam, right? That brings out a quality of life issue for those surrounding areas. Just last week, the council set their goals and a tier one goal was housing and it's important. Another tier one goal was the climate action plan. Now, while a small delay of 60 seconds may be a reasonable argument to say it's only 60 seconds to get wherever you need to go, over time, those emissions from all those cars is in conflict with our own climate action plan. So it's larger than just level of service. Also, the EIR hasn't been reviewed by staff. There's no guarantee what's being proposed will be built. And if we look at it at a micro level and a project specific level, the project doesn't look bad. It looks like a pretty decent project, but when you get to the macro level, and it becomes more of a regional issue, and it's, in my opinion, not appropriate for a general plan amendment, but more appropriate for a general plan update. And I understand that's not what the applicant is asking for at this point, but at the same time, you did have the opportunity to participate in the Rosalind plan, which could have alleviated a lot of this, to address what the applicant would like to see happen. Our council's already is already busy with issues. The fire recovery budget homelessness appeals for stuff that goes through the proper channels, three of which we heard tonight. And, you know, I'm not inclined to be in favor of of skirting the proper process and putting the onus in more stress on the council. I'm also in support of staff's recommendation denying the amendment. However, because housing is such a dire need for our community, I'd like to see if there's some way we could continue the tentative map and conditional use permit resolutions to a later date in order to allow the applicant to find a solution with staff. And if that's something we can do, I'm not sure of the process because I'm the new guy, but if staff or the chair could direct me on how that would take place, I'd also like to hear the rest of the commissioners' comments and thoughts on that. Vice Chair Weeks. Well, I also truly understand the need for housing. However, we have specific plans for a reason. And when the Roseland specific plan was developed, it went out to a broader community. We've got a lot of community comments and we looked at the whole not an isolated piece. And I think making this change is an isolated piece. And I would like for somehow the developer and staff to figure out a way to redesign it because we do need housing, but just not in opposition to the circulation plan that was put forward in the specific plan. So you would be in support of denying the general plan amendment? Yes. Okay. Just making sure. Commissioner Duggan. Yeah, this is a hard one. I don't want to repeat what my fellow commissioners have said already, because I think the housing product proposed here is really attractive. I think it's much more in keeping with the neighborhood instead of having three-story attached townhomes in this location. So I really want to find some kind of solution so everybody is happy, like we get what we want on the city side and the developer gets to go ahead with the good product. I'm also not convinced, even though I know that the North Point Parkway, whatever the parkway is called in the Dutton Metro extension has been in the plans as they're shown in the documents, but they've been in the plans for a while like that. I'm not convinced a 45-mile-hour boulevard passing by an elementary school is the best idea either. I wish the city could revisit that and think about that, because I know in this town I think we have a really bad driver problem here with very little enforcement, and I think that's just a recipe for disaster to make a nice big wide boulevard that people can speed on in front of a school. But I guess I have to, aside with my fellow commissioners, I would be in favor of continuation to see if we can figure out some happy medium and also vote in denial of the general plan amendment. Okay, Commissioner Collier. Yeah, this is also very interesting with me, difficult for me. I agree with a lot of Commissioner Duggan's comments. I do, if I am correct in my assumption that a general plan amendment would have to go in front of the city council, the city council is anyway is correct. It would. Yeah, so in that case I can see, I can, oh sorry, in my opinion I think that recommending staff to return on a certain date with findings and conditions approval and then, and taking that to the city council with, as presented with their projected, or sorry with the subsequent EIR, that's kind of more where I'm leaning towards. Okay. I think there's a real danger in just seeing this as a minimal change and I think Steph's done an excellent job of portraying like that. It's like a domino. You move one and you lose nine and so having had the long history that I had with the struggle with getting this alignment in place and I agree it's not perfect. It's not perfect for the school. Their arrangement is not perfect for the school. There could be a lot that could be looked at again in a more regional approach with a general plan update and we could certainly ask for that but I just don't think, I don't think we can get there with asking staff to return and to do this kind of level of work without it being part of an update process that really includes the other part of Santa Rosa that's involved. This is this is really a big deal even though it may not look like it. Definitely appreciate the applicants proposal. I understand the three stories are not marketable or saleable and so I do not blame you for wanting to modify that and I, but I do think there are ways to modify it without getting a general plan amendment that modifies this particular roadway alignment and so I would like a win-win also where we make it clear that we're not going to amend the general plan on the fly here or ask staff to do that but that we deny the general plan amendment and ask that the applicant be willing to go back and continue and revise the project. I think you can get a really great project with the alignments in place without sort of knocking everything over you know we've heard from the southwest residents the traffic is terrible and you know this is an important piece of the circulation. I'm a little frustrated that the applicant didn't bring this up and deal with it at the time that they were already requesting a land use change through the specific plan process that would have been an ideal time to go hey we've really reviewed this and we can't get something to happen without this happening. They didn't do that I don't think that they have to do that I think they can get something that would be very viable and great for Santa Rosa. They say they've got their you know their cleanup is done they're ready to go but I just don't think that this particular project is the one that I would vote for. I do think it's important for us to remember like Commissioner O'Crepkey said and others have said changing the general plan is a big deal. The first finding we have to make is that there's a reason to change the general plan and a good reason and a good reason wouldn't be gee I want to fit this one project in the expense of another thing so I think we really have to think about the kind of findings we would have to make if we send it back to to have staff do this work. I would not be able to make that first finding and I think we also have to remember that whatever project we've seen this we've we've seen projects come back from years ago you know I'm just having one now built in my neighborhood that's over you know 17 years old of approvals it does not mean it will be built if it's approved it does not mean that it won't be sold and in some other projects so I know some of us appreciate it when a project comes forward with the general plan amendment but we do have to remember it's the general plan amendment that's really primary and it needs to work no matter what the project is attached to it because that could change over time so where I'm at is that we would deny the general plan amendment I guess take the temperature of the applicant and see if they what do they feel about a continuance to redesign their project and see how you feel about that honestly we'd prefer if you just took the first resolution full denial thank you okay so full denial across the board okay and so so and commissioner kaya are you feeling any differently do you want to make any other comments do we want any other discussion I mean this really is kind of a big deal it's our opportunity to say how we feel about many things yeah I think that I just my the thing that I'm struggling with is you know this our perception our reputation as a city and how long it takes to develop our project and that's something that is important for me and I think we as a city we're trying to change that and say you know we're working you know we want we need to build housing and we want to build housing so we're doing what is necessary to facilitate that and so that's kind of that's where my head's at and I think by having the council decide that this part of that is that's where I'm that's where my head's at yeah and and I can appreciate that I think council does want housing I my hunch is is that when council realizes the the difficulties involved in making this general plan again I think it we get into this position gee we're you know we're not being cooperative with housing versus what is really being asked of us here and it's big it's not just you know a housing complex it's come maybe with some minor change this is a big change in favor of this particular project which you know it's a decent project there's definitely some things I would ask of it it's not a technically affordable housing project that's coming forward so I just think we have to be aware of the sort of the emotional pull to get the housing which I want and and I think we can get versus what are we asked being asked to do with this particular project because I think there are other projects that could come forward that could I mean we're you know with the resilient city measures we're refining and making this a speedier process for Santa Rosa and and have done a good job of doing that but I think when it's something this big it to get into that place of oh you know maybe we're you know hindering housing being built and and again there there was projects approved for a very long time that never came forward and I understand why because of the feasibility or the markability I don't necessarily understand why if they've come back numerous times wanting a two-story product why that didn't happen because that can happen and so I don't I just wonder about that so anyway that that's all I have to say is that this this isn't to me just oh housing minor road adjustment it is a big deal for a piece of housing so anything else the big thing for me it was was staff's response to the ramifications within the regional area one the traffic issue is does matter the the the effects that it would have in regards to the climate action plan matter but if we make this amendment for a specific project it would have ramifications throughout the region and that could mean that approved projects there and increase the traffic issues or projects that are adhering by the plan won't be able to pass because of traffic issues and so I think it's it's a situation for me where I don't want to take projects that are going about it the right way and saying we're fitting within the plan with what you guys are told us you want to do and we're working with staff and make an amendment for that could affect them um for you know the for this for this project okay any any other comments or discussion chair sisco yes just if I may uh I'd like to just address commissioner call you his comments about findings for approval uh by bringing forward the recommendation for denial effectively what staff is saying is we are not able to make those findings so if the commission did decide to direct staff to go back and make findings for approval we would actually ask you to help draft those and give a specific direction on those okay thank you okay so um we have the back to where it was done um moved by vice chair weeks seconded by commissioner okrepke it's a denial you vote yes for it if you want the denial you vote no if you don't okay okay your votes please and that passes with four eyes oops we need to do again sorry that passes with four eyes commissioner call you uh voting no commissioners carter and peterson being absent and our next resolution is the conditional use permit resolution I think we can also make it clear when I mean this probably will be going well it will be going in front of city council that um our preference would be we want to be on the side of housing however the applicant asked for a straight across denial so we'll make that clear okay who would like to move the resolution for the denying the conditional use permit I could do that um resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa denying a conditional use permit for debt and meadow subdivision located at two six five zero two six six six two six eight four that meadow and one one one two and one zero one two zero zero herna avenue file number c up 18-101 wait for the reading do I have a second a second okay so that was moved by vice chair weeks seconded by commissioner dougan and any other discussion you say yes for no you say yes to deny it no to accept it okay I love these your votes please and that passes with four eyes commissioner call you voting no and commissioners carter and peterson being absent and I think we've got one more tentative map okay resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa denying the debt and meadow subdivision tentative map located at two six five zero two six six six two six eight four a debt and meadow and one one one two and one two zero zero herna avenue file number ma j one eight dash 006 wait for the reading the second okay so the tentative map resolution was moved by commissioner weeks seconded by commissioner dougan and your votes please and that passes with four eyes uh commissioner call you voting no and commissioners carter and peterson being absent and I believe that concludes this item so thank you for all your hard work and and miss knuckleson I really want to compliment you on the staff report that was extremely well done and thorough thank you so do we need a break or you want to just keep on going let's go so we're going to go ahead and move on to item 10.3 which a public which is a public noticing text amendment a rezoning text amendment it is not an ex parte disclosure and the staff presentation will be given again by Amy knuckleson thank you chair sisco and members of the commission the item before you is a public noticing text amendment which would apply citywide the proposed text amendment would modify three chapters of the city's zoning code chapter 2050 related to permit filing and processing chapter 2052 related to permit review procedures and chapter 2066 related to public noticing or public hearing and all of these items relate to public noticing the purpose of this amendment is to modify the zoning codes existing requirements and practices to result in more clear effective and inclusive noticing this is achieved by increasing the methods the recipients and the lead time of noticing within the planning division the goal of this is to provide opportunities for notification of projects which not only affect residential neighborhoods but perhaps where people work or take their children to school and also allows people who are interested in projects citywide to be made aware all of this increased noticing will hopefully hopefully result in individuals who feel encouraged or informed to provide feedback throughout the process just like to discuss a little background as to how we got where we are today as I'm sure many of you know back in 2014 the city council formed the open government task force and the purpose of this was to discuss the status of open and transparent government in the city and to make improvements related to those two items in october of 2016 the planning and economic development department brought forward a housing action plan which outlined a number of items to address the city's ongoing unmet housing needs and one of those items was to continue the implementation of permit streamlining for planning entitlements permit streamlining is a more broad concept than just our noticing but we see this public noticing as a component of permit streamlining in may of 2017 the city entered into a contract with metropolitan planning group to assist with the permit streamlining processes in april of 2017 city staff met with the community advisory board or cab to review the permit streamlining process and did ask questions as to how noticing might be improved in recent years development review planners have received general feedback from residents regarding the notification process and how that might be improved as well I'd like to just skip a slide briefly this slide represents the different meetings or opportunities for noticing that the department either is required to or can practice the beginning of the development review process usually starts with either a neighborhood neighborhood meeting or concept design review a neighborhood meeting is required in many cases when a project might affect a residential neighborhood this neighborhood meeting is conducted with both city staff and the applicant the applicant is able to introduce the project and city staff can explain the role in reviewing that project this really provides an opportunity for any interested members of the public to ask questions or provide comments and because it's so early in the process that can help to form the project prior to applications in middle concept design review is required for multifamily and commercial developments in the city there have been some changes I'm sorry it's required only if projects fall within certain categories under the resiliency development measures ordinance and this is because the review authority is no longer the design review board but is instead the zoning administrator what this allows is for the design review board to provide additional comments aside from those received from the public that can be incorporated into the project a generally concept design review is pursued even if it is not required by the zoning code this is a process that city staff encourages because it makes for an improved project and a quicker process really for an applicant that ultimately will go to the design review board for approval a concept design review item is heard as a as a part of a design review board meeting these meetings are open to members of the public they're in the council chamber and they're televised and members of the public do have the opportunity to provide comments if an application moves forward and is submitted to the department a planner can send out what's called a notice of application this notice informs people who receive it that a project has been filed project application has been filed and invites them to review the file and to provide additional comments the last notice that goes out for a project is the notice of a public meeting or a public hearing this notice states that the review authority is going to act on the project and that members of the public are invited to provide any comments i'd like to reiterate that the public meeting and public hearing notice is the very end of the process and if this is the first time that someone is hearing about a project it makes it a little bit more difficult or challenging to incorporate some suggestions that they might have and while not a part of the text amendment before you the planning staff have redesigned the public notices that go out to to recipients uh within a certain radius of a project site and we have some examples that we can have you take a look at we've been experimenting with just different sizes and a few different formats but they'll all look relatively similar and so our our previous public notice we've kind of been phasing this new style in looks like the items on the screen here so black and white very text heavy it's kind of difficult to identify the information on the notice the backside includes a location map and then there's the bright yellow envelope to hopefully attract people's attention the new notice is it's a postcard so people don't need to open an envelope it includes color graphics and that makes it more interesting and hopefully um easier to understand the meeting date and time is called out more clearly and each of the the contact information the how to follow up to get more information is all very clear hopefully to members of the public so let's get to what the proposed text amendments are here we have a graphic that shows what is required currently by the zoning code and what we are proposing the first category is the meeting items noticed uh the first uh well currently we notice neighborhood meetings public hearings and zoning administrator public meetings so the the change here would be that we would start to notice concept design review meetings um these traditionally haven't been noticed because they're not public hearings and while they are on an agenda for the design review board there isn't a mailed notice or an onsite sign and so people who may be affected by a project are more times than not not aware that that concept meeting is occurring the next change is the distance for mailing currently the zoning code requires that anyone within 300 feet of the boundary of a project site receives a mailed notice the proposal is to increase that or double it to 600 feet currently property owners are the only recipients of mailed notices within that 300 foot radius the proposed amendment would require that occupants or tenants within that 400 i'm sorry 600 foot radius receive the notice uh currently the zoning code requires onsite signs so those those blue signs you see driving all around town just for public hearings this amendment would require neighborhood meetings and concept design review items to also have that blue sign onsite and again the intent of that is to to make it so that people who might not receive that mailed notice because they're not within that 600 foot radius um to to find out that something might be going in uh in their work neighborhood or near where their child goes to school and and they receive that notice very early in the process and not when an action is about to be taken the zoning code talks about using the internet for noticing but it doesn't mandate it uh the proposed text amendment would require that each of these notices that i mentioned um that those would be posted on our planning and economic development website and also on social media as appropriate uh email is not mandated in the zoning code for notification of the proposed amendment would require that all public notices go to the city's community advisory board so they're able to communicate any projects to people that they connect with and it would also require that notices are posted to an electronic distribution list database and so that way anyone who signs up who would like to receive notices for all projects in the city has the ability to do so they wouldn't need to log on the website on a daily basis to see if anything new had been posted and finally is the notice of application i mentioned this when discussing the general process of development review and it's not mentioned at all in the zoning code it's just been kind of a best practice for planners generally when projects are of a certain scale and may might affect a residential neighborhood however the the text amendment would require this notice within 45 days of an application being submitted to be distributed for any project that has a public hearing and then to also capture projects that benefit from the resilient city development measures ordinance it would also require that projects that receive concept design review have a notice of application distributed this proposed text amendment has been found exempt pursuant to the california environmental quality act seco guideline section 15061 b3 which is the common sense exemption in that the proposed amendments to our public noticing would not in and of themselves permit a new structure the alteration of land instead each of those projects would have its own seco analysis these text amendments were noticed by way of a one eighth page posting in the press democrat they were emailed to the community advisory board and posted at city hall and no comments have been received so with that the planning and economic development department recommend that the planning commission by resolution recommend to the city council adoption of an ordinance amending city code chapters 2050 2052 and 2066 regarding public noticing requirements and we're happy to answer any questions any questions of staff vice chair weeks thanks Amy I have a couple of questions on the public on the notices that are that will be going out to the community has there been some thought about having them also in Spanish as well as in English that's one question um I'm gonna I have three questions um what's the increased cost of doing this and who pays for it and then my final question has to do with the blue signs and whose responsibility is it to take them down thank you thank you for those questions um related to your question about notices being printed in Spanish or just another language uh planning staff did meet with the community engagement office and we discussed options for having a phone number or another way that people might be able to get additional information if they didn't speak English we did discuss the subcommittee open government task force subcommittee they are currently working on revising the sunshine ordinance and there's a lot of discussion around having information available in different languages so we discussed looking at that but there isn't currently a number that the city has where someone can call um to to get information in a different language the only thing that I would add to that is um actually translating our notices and any other documents is really a citywide issue that we need to address and so um having it be addressed just in our department alone was not looked at as something that would be preferable we do want to look at it on a citywide basis so we are looking into the the translation line and perhaps having something on our notices for that but for overall noticing and full Spanish translation we are working with the city manager's office and the office of community engagement to address that citywide the public hearing sign question is a quick one it's the applicant's responsibility to remove the sign um I I believe it's specified in the zoning code that it's 10 days after the public hearing and what happens if they don't it's a it's a code enforcement violation so obviously if we know they're continuing on and they're going to update the text because they're moving on to a different board we usually don't get complaints but when it's up there sometimes a year well we'll get complaint and that's what triggers the code enforcement investigation and first thing we do is we call the property owner and ask them to take it down and then related to the cost of these new public notices um we did just do some research prior to bringing this amendment before you and kind of revamping many aspects of our public noticing what we found is that um there's a lot of staff time saved with going this route because um our admin staff aren't um stuffing the envelopes and printing labels and sticking them on which is a very time-consuming task for them um in addition they are postcards so the postage we anticipated might be a little bit less although the weight of the paper might affect that some of them were a little bit they weren't quite the price we thought um but all in all there's just the fee that we take in for applications includes noticing the difference is is negligible so it doesn't appear that it would be an additional cost put on the applicant or the city just in addition we have a folding machine that i'm not sure how old but might can tell you they struggle it breaks down all the time and so we were looking at having to replace it and just the cost that would go into replacing this what would be an antiquated you know manner in which we mail so it was part of the process of revisiting the entirety of how we do this i'd recommend that when this goes to council maybe you put in some information about the difference thing about the cost so that doesn't come up again great suggestion any other yeah commissioner crepe just two quick questions so if there's no residences within the radius correct correct me if i'm wrong if there's no residences when they're within the radius it's treated differently correct there's no public meeting is that correct so we have what's called a neighborhood meeting and the zoning code says that there's a project that has a public hearing that may affect a residential neighborhood then a neighborhood meeting is mandated however staff always has the discretion to require a neighborhood meeting when when they believe it's appropriate and that it i would say we err on the side of caution if we think that there might be an impact um if there was not a neighborhood meeting there would be if it's a new construction proposal there would be a concept a requirement for concept design review or an option i suppose as well but in either case those would be noticed through mail and also on-site signs hopefully at seeking that early feedback all right thank you and then my next question is and this is just speaking from experience there's been issues with um uh especially in the burn zones um the mail not being forwarded to new residences um have you addressed that with a post master the local postmaster fight to see if what you're proposing is would be something that would be forwarded i don't believe they forward postcards um i could be wrong but i was just wondering if you had that conversation uh we have not spoken with the post office about this um uh i my understanding is that um mail would be forwarded um if there is a forwarding address we always get them back when there is no forwarding address um so that's certainly something that we can look into and to ensure that that does happen yeah that would just be my recommendation before you before you go before council thank you any other questions commissioner call yeah kind of going on with commissioner weeks asked about uh having them having them be bilingual i would really appreciate if we could have something within the staff report for the city council that we recommend that i guess as a city as a whole all the departments are having an issue with translating i think that's something that's incredibly important especially if we want to facilitate uh uh engagement with the public and i think notice as being bilingual is incredibly you know is a very important step in that traction any other questions okay this is a public hearing tonight on this item i don't have any cards i'm going to open the public hearing if anyone would like to say anything on this item you could step to a microphone and i am seeing no one move so i'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing and bring it back to the commission what somebody like to move the resolution on this i'll move resolution of the planning commission of the city of san erosa recommending to the city council approval of a zoning code text amendment to amend city code sections 20-50.040 20-50.050 20.52-030 and 20-66-020 to modify public noticing requirements file number rez 19-001 and wave further reading i'll second okay so that was moved by commissioner duggan seconded by commissioner okrepke um mr duggan would you like to discuss this i think it's a wonderful change to the noticing requirements i like um including tenants and also the the area covered to 600 feet from 300 feet um i fully support all the um suggestions and comments from my fellow commissioners and even if there's not a way maybe um if we know a neighborhood that might be impacted like the roseland village if targeted neighborhoods could be furnished with this information in spanish that we know is if it's a majority spanish speaking area just if we even could do that i think that would be a great improvement but otherwise i'm in fully in favor of it okay mr calia i completely agree with commissioner duggan's comments i really appreciate the the fact that it's a larger scope uh 600 feet and the fact that tenants are also notified because that's something that i feel like comes up all the time and um having some kind of scalable uh you know as our goal is for everything to be bilingual i think if we're able to in specific neighborhoods or areas that we know about high uh non-english speaking language preference i think it would be great if we could at least accommodate that in the interim mr weeks i wholeheartedly support this i think it's a huge improvement um and it's actually kind of attractive what you've designed so far so i'll be supporting this commissioner crepeki uh yeah i think excellent job by staff um i really appreciate the work you guys have put into this and that table in your presentation pretty much answers every question or every concern in my short time i'm not a season to some of the other commissioners but in my short time a lot of the complaints of public comment notification it pretty much answers all of them so great job and i'll be in support and i'm also in support and echo my fellow commissioners like i really like the postcards they're just like fun so okay so that was moved by commissioner duggan seconded by commissioner crepeki your votes please and that passes with five eyes commissioners carter and peterson being absent and i believe that concludes that item and last but not least as item 10.4 to i'll go ahead and let you a little wait just a sec here everybody left that's kind of de facto everybody's left i didn't declare it but we're taking one yeah there we go okay we're going to go ahead and do item 10.4 which is the santa rosa craft collective conditional use permit it is an exparte disclosure commissioner call you anything to disclose i visit the site and have nothing further to disclose great i also visited the site and have nothing further to disclose commissioner crepeki i have nothing to disclose and i also visited the site have new new information to disclose with that the manual or so will do our staff presentation thank you chair cisco members of the planning commission and members of the public that are still here this is an application for a cannabis dispensary and cultivation and distribution micro business the project is at 335 ohir court and units a and b my presentation i'll give a very brief overview of the cannabis ordinance describe the project get into the public comment and brief overview of the sequa review process and then staff's recommendation under the cannabis ordinance it kind of divides cannabis into two broad categories personal use and then cannabis businesses this is a micro business as i mentioned it includes retail cultivation and distribution the businesses is to be considered a micro business it must have less than 10,000 square feet this is actually just below the 10,000 square foot size this does not include delivery as part of the retail components the cultivation component is has less than a 4,000 square foot canopy and it does include distribution as well the use is these uses are allowed in a variety of commercial and industrial districts including the light industrial district in which this project is located all cannabis dispensaries need to be at least 600 feet from k through 12 school and 600 feet from any other cannabis retail facility they're subject to conditional use permit which entails a neighborhood meeting and a planning commission hearing which is where we're at this evening decisions of the planning commission are appealable to the city council deliveries are allowed with retail dispensaries that is not proposed in this application drive-throughs are not permitted hours of operation are limited by the by the municipal code to 9 a.m. between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. seven days a week there are certain provisions in the code pertaining to security and on-site consumption is allowed as part of the use permit process that is not being proposed with this application for cultivation the code prohibits outdoor cultivation and there are specific requirements pertaining to pesticide use and several other requirements that apply to cultivation of cannabis distribution also has a comprehensive set of regulations in the municipal code designed really to track the the plants and their distribution in many of these requirements layer on top of the requirements of the state law as I mentioned cannabis businesses are subject to a conditional use permit so these are qualitative standards subject to review and consideration by the planning commission there are six total standards the three listed on this slide plus these additional three they tend to generally deal with neighborhood compatibility consistency with the applicable zoning regulations and compliance with the california and bar melo quality act what is being proposed here is a total of 9700 square feet in a 23 000 square foot building the remaining portions of the building are currently vacant and presumably will be leased to a separate user retail makes up approximately 1700 square feet cultivation is around 4300 square feet and the distribution is roughly 3700 square feet this process started in april of last year with the receipt of the application for the retail component the dispensary component we deemed the application incomplete had a neighborhood meeting the application was subsequently deemed complete notice of the application was mailed to property owners within a 400 foot radius then we received in september of 2018 the second application for the cultivation and distribution component of the project after that application is deemed complete we then scheduled it for this meeting the project is located in the southwest quadrant of the city it is in the light industrial land use designation there is it's surrounded on three sides by land in the land light industrial designation and then residential single family residential as to the west of the project site the zoning is consistent with the general plain land use designations as shown on this exhibit the project site contains existing parking that will be restriped to comply with the eda requirements handicap access will be provided from the street via a new sidewalk and then bicycle racks will also be installed in compliance with the requirements of the municipal code and then on the west side of the project site which is the top of the screen top right 15 additional parking spaces will be added and then on the north side which is on the right side of the screen seven additional parking spaces will be added this is area that is currently paved it'll just be striped and then landscape islands or peninsulas will be installed as shown on the kind of the top right portion of the of the slide the retail component is down in the left bottom left of this floor plan as i mentioned it consists of just under 1700 square feet including the office and bathroom areas the cultivation area is in this location one of the recommendations we have is that the vacant warehouse space that's shown in the cross hatch not have direct access into the cultivation area and a separate access be provided so in this area they can so one of the ways they can achieve that is put a door away here that is locked so this way when the tenants of the vacant warehouse space come in this back door or the roll-up door they don't have access to the the cultivation area so that's if that's one easy option there may be other options that they can use the distribution area and support office is in this portion of the building similarly there is an existing doorway here that goes to the vacant warehouse space a recommended condition of approval is that that doorway be permanently sealed there may need to be to comply with building code egress requirements they may need to provide a secondary access one of the ways they could do that is put in a hallway and with the doorway here but that is that that'll be up to the the applicant to to comply with that requirement parking is more than adequate they're adding approximately 22 spaces the proposed use requires 21 spaces the remaining facility will have sufficient parking there's a total of 63 parking spaces that will be on the site 21 of which will be required for the proposed use the proposed hours are from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. for the retail operation the non-retail components of the cultivation distribution there would be employees there between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. there was no public comment received no members of the public came to the neighborhood meeting and after we sent out notice of the meeting and put the notice on the project site we did not receive any input from any members of the public it is well well within the requirements of the separation from schools the closest school is approximately 20 I believe it's about 2100 feet to the west and that's this school the that's the lc allen high school this is an aerial view of the project site there is a creek to the west this is the single family neighborhood to the west it is at the end of a cul-de-sac this is a building that is used by for a kids party use so that would be a kind of a sensitive nearby use we did not hear anything from the operators of that business the the dispensary would be in this corner of the building where it is visible the entrance is visible from the street the cultivation area is in this portion of the building and then the distribution is in this area of the building and here's another aerial photograph the parking with the landscape peninsulas would be back here this would be the area that would be striped along with seven spaces along this northerly property line property line the project qualifies for exemption under several sections of the sequel guidelines and with that staff recommends that the planning commission approve the project with the conditions of approval contained in the draft resolution that's in the packet that concludes my report thank you any questions this don't yeah commissioner dug in yeah just have one I just noticed this on um I'm one of the slides she showed so on the site plan there's a existing gate that's on the the left-hand side of the the slide I guess it's on the southeast corner of the building and it looks like that area connects to the building that's to the south is that correct so yes okay so there's not not any kind of separation proposed between um like putting the fence or any kind of a long offense along here yeah no um it doesn't look like it and the applicant can clarify that when you look at the aerial photograph yeah that's that's the one I was yeah so there's a fence here as shown on the plan but there isn't in this aerial photograph any separation here I don't know that it's necessary I mean the dispensary entry is here the cultivation areas here this roll-up door would be where the distribution is um so they would pull vehicles in there to to load them up for distribution so I'm not sure what purpose this fence here really it's it looks like it's an existing gate there's there's also one on the north side of the building this existing I'm just curious that they don't over on this area there's a fence with a gate and there's no you can actually get there from the neighboring property that was shown on the site plan but just for my curiosity oh yeah this this here we can have the applicant speak to that I'm not sure uh the purpose of of those fences I believe yeah the and the applicants are here and they can now answer those questions any questions of staff right now commissioner call you just a quick question um are the single-family homes to the west of the site are they within the noticing yes they're well within the they're well within the 400-foot radius okay absolutely yeah not all of them but um yeah anything else and is the applicant here wishing to make a presentation Brian Elliott with the canico compliance we represent the applicant and the applicant the ownership is here tonight I want to thank staff and the commission for our opportunity to present this project to you we really have no presentation to give we agreed with the staff report we thought it was well assembled as was we believe our application as far as the fence goes this is an existing commercial facility I don't know that we have a requirement that would require that on that south side that there's fencing the way that the distribution is going to work if the other section of the building is least they'll have access to the back of the building that wouldn't interfere with the distribution side so but I can let I mean if it becomes a condition we can certainly have that conversation but I don't I don't see that it would serve any utilitarian kind of function yeah I was just curious about it but yeah um my name is Emily Farron I helped put the application together I work with this team here they actually have the current lease for the entire warehouse so that wasn't clear in the application that was my mistake um sorry about that but they do have the entire warehouse leased out right now so any questions the commissioner you have a question of the applicant oh okay well let's hold on to that in a minute and of the applicant or staff okay go for it I have a couple of questions um for the security staff when um would you be when are they going to be there that wasn't clear in the information provided hi my name is Victor Nguyen project sponsor so security staff would be there during business hours there would be two security personnel there at all times and video surveillance 24 hours a day so they'd be there from the 9 to 9 yes okay um then the other question was um deliveries um will they normally occur between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. for delivery are are you speaking of uh us receiving deliveries yes yes yes and then um where on the site plan on the floor plan distribution where would the um where would you be receiving the deliveries unloading delivery shipment or loading dock loading delivery shipment okay and that would be that would be deliveries for the distribution and that's where the roll-up door is yes okay thank you any other questions of the applicant not seeing any okay thanks um this is a public hearing tonight I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing I only have one card and that card is from Richard Hunt senior hi there uh again my name is Richard Hunt and if someone could put the aerial view of the two buildings I want to I'll show you not that one the one the parking lot that is adjacent to it on the bottom side of the picture you see all those cars that's my company my company's datum technology I'm precision machining manufacturing company I've been in that building for 15 years now I'm representing the owners of the building who are new owners Thelma and Jim Klebauer and you say there was public notice and stuff sent out none of us in that building tenants receive anything regarding this we only saw the sign that went up last week or whenever it went up so I'm representing the owners I'm representing model and drywall maple is plumbing kids party central now here this is really interesting we've got a jump house party place that's been there for more than five years very successful on the weekends you can't even get a parking spot because they're doing a great little business for birthday parties and stuff for children so weekends in a day and night there's their mothers and their little SUVs and all their children with parties and so I think it's absolutely inappropriate to have a dispensary I don't have a problem with the cultivation or any of that stuff but to have a dispensary where people are going to be hanging around there buying whatever when there's all the children and all that kind of stuff that concerns me my company has two ships we're open from six in the morning until 10 30 a night it concerns me that we're going to have people you know they're buying cannabis we already have issues with homeless in the area we already have issues with people breaking in we would sub least a portion of our building portion to a company called executive limousines and they had they were broken into so many times that they broke the lease and left so model and drywall maples plumbing they've had people breaking into their trucks and into their building so I'm very concerned with the addition of people coming in you know what's that going to do to our business I've been there for 15 years I'm a little concerned about it but most importantly the kids that's what really kind of bothers me is that these little kids are running around all over the parking lot with their mothers and in that type of thing while leaving and going from the parties so I'm concerned about that great thank you Mr. Hunt anyone else wishing to speak on this item tonight okay I am not seeing anyone come to the podium so I'm going to close the public hearing and ask the applicant if you would if you could respond to Mr. Hunt's concerns maybe yes thank you very much again Brian Elliott can a code compliance there's a couple of I think comments we can make first of all I think for the area when it comes to security you're going to find that you're going to have far better security in that area that you've ever had before it's a requirement of state law it's a requirement of the city of Santa Rosa and with the number of guards activity cameras 24 hours surveillance I think we all have seen at this point in the city of Santa Rosa that these projects actually improve security in industrial areas regarding the dispensary and children and in loitering I raise a disabled grandson who uses the medicine so I actually go to a number of dispensaries I think soulful and Sebastopol is a great example right next to Starbucks if you sit there for a while I think it's a misperception of what happens at a dispensary the people don't just hang around there aren't there isn't a loitering they usually look like parents grandparents or dressed like I usually dress I do find that all of our clients that are in this business are very responsible and great community members so but again I think the security is going to greatly improve our two security personnel that that will be there during business hours this is not only for the security of our business but it's there for the well-being of the neighborhood it's the direct traffic coming in and out to make sure our customers get from their car into the dispensary and back to their car safely but on top of that it's to watch the neighborhoods to make sure there's no loitering to make sure there's no illegal sales or anything of that nature going around and to make sure that everyone that comes into dispensary is at least of 21 years of age so our security personnel will actually be helping the area in the neighborhood to make sure it's safe to make sure there's no abandoned cars being abandoned there and to watch out for any suspicious activities yeah and once again to speak to Mr. Hunt's concerns about children being next door our signage is going to be very minimal and won't have anything that represents anything to do with cannabis on it um our visibility is going to be minimal from kids party central um we illustrated in our application that there will be no smell or odor coming from the space um and I you know we'd be happy to meet and do some further resolution with you know visibility or fences or neighboring stuff like that but I think that um you know the old model of what was thought to be cannabis dispensaries is really gone with the new regulations and you're looking at sort of a new face of retail something you you would probably walk by a lot of times before you even knew it what it was thanks great thank you and then for staff could you address Mr. Hunt's noticing concerns we just did that actually yeah I was gonna say as we just heard in the prior agenda item we do send notice to property owners within a 400 foot radius of a project site so that notice did go out at the neighborhood meeting stage and then prior to this meeting and then the notice is also posted on the project site before the 10 at least 10 days before the before the hearing and apparently that is the sign that he saw so the owners of that neighboring building would have received the notice is not necessarily the tenants which is what we're changing so correct okay great thanks um any questions of I know you had a question of staff commissural crepe key yeah I'm curious um the process if they own the lease for the entirety of the property um if there is an expansion or if that uh does how does how does that transpire in terms of um permitting and and whatnot and does it affect this application at all now knowing that they have the entirety of the yeah so this application would only approve the space that is indicated on the application if they wish to expand they would need need to come back to the city and get proper approvals for expansion Mr. Weeks I have a question for the applicant um did you reach out to the neighbors um in the adjoining businesses um I know that you the notices went out but did you go and visit them to talk about what we were going to be doing on the site when we attended the uh neighborhood meeting we didn't have uh city didn't have any comments they didn't have phone calls and they didn't have any attendance it's been pretty much our response that um when there is neighborhood a meeting and we do get input is when we actually do outreach um there was no door knock if you will um at this industrial site no okay any other questions yeah commissioner dug in this is a question for staff excuse me it's late and I don't have the ordinance in front of me but as far as the ordinance what are requirements for security does it does it require a security personnel to patrol parking lots because I know most of the things that have come before us have said that they will do that but I don't know if that's a firm requirement uh well I don't have the ordinance in front of me either but maybe memorize no um we can look it up if but in general it's not patrol of a parking lot it's a 24 seven surveillance with retention um of a certain threshold of keeping the tapes and making them available to police should there ever be a activity um but yeah there's a number of security measures that are standards that are unique to cannabis just because of the product and also because cash operations but but is there a requirement to um to make sure that people don't loiter on site yes there's uh anti loitering um standards as well for cannabis as well as uh it wasn't mentioned in the presentation I think it's worth noting um because one of the number one concerns is sort of the overall impact of these cannabis facilities with non-cannabis facilities is they think they're uh the odor itself might be an attractive nuisance and one of the things that the city adopted was a basically a no-tolerance odor policy for cannabis which is unique to cannabis um but it's such a attractive nuisance so the standard is that you shall not smell cannabis outside the facility so that's the I I think that's the number one security measure they can offer besides the video surveillance and having on-site security okay thank you I'm sorry in in addition another one that we've learned because we have three existing dispensaries and I I think it's it's uh important if you can visit them just to see how they work but uh it's that screening in the at the lobby you know you you do have to it's not like walking into a general store you you have to show ID you get um scanned uh you have to be 21 to enter it's a adult facility um so it's not like people are loitering in and out any other questions of staff any other questions of the applicant okay so in that case we will bring it back to the commission and would someone like to move our resolution for discussion I'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa approving a conditional use permit for Santa Rosa craft collective to operate a cannabis micro business with adult and medicinal use retail dispensary cultivation and distribution within 10,300 square foot portion of an existing 23,224 square foot building located at 335 O'Hare court units A and B assessors parcel number 043-0-135-008 file number CUP18-052 and CUP18-129 and waive for the reading do I have a second second not sure why the second is so hard I understand the reading the resolution that was always tentative of these seconds are coming in kind of slow okay so that was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner O'Crepkey uh Commissioner O'Crepkey would you like to start uh yeah um I mean we've heard uh one public comment and there's been one um then that's the sole response from the from the community and I understand that the issue with the the kids party central there I've been there on a weekend and um it is crazy but there's a hedge there that you can't even see anything and it doesn't factor into what we need to do to make our requisite findings because it is not a school so because of that I can make I can say that I can make all the requisite findings and uh support this application by share weeks I'm also going to support the application um but I would hope that applicants would reach out to the neighboring the neighbors um regardless of having nobody show up to a neighborhood meeting it would still I think would serve you well to go knocking on the doors and say introducing yourselves um and I think just that's my personal opinion um but I am going to be supporting the project Commissioner Duggan um I also can make all the required findings um and I do think that our previous item tonight with the noticing change will help inform neighbors when we can inform tenants in the future which I think is a great positive change so I'm um in support Commissioner Callia I also can make all of the required findings to support this project and I agree with my fellow commissioners um especially Commissioner O'Crapke about the the hedge that's there I think that's going to alleviate a lot of the issues and I think that's probably why only one person came from that area as well because it you know it's not easy to see through that hedge and I'm also in support of this project and support everything that's already been said I have no issues and can make the required findings so with that that was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner O'Crapke and your votes please and that passes with five eyes and uh commissioners Carter and Peterson being absent so with that I think that concludes our business tonight and we'll adjourn to our March 14th meeting I think