 Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us for today's Planning Commission meeting. Today's date is May 11, 2022, and the time is 9.30 a.m. Today's meeting is completely remote via zoom. There are a couple of different ways to participate in today's meeting. If your computer is equipped with a microphone, it is recommended that you participate via the Planning Commission Zoom meeting link, which is posted on the Planning Department's homepage at sccoplanning.com. Alternatively, if your computer is not equipped with a microphone, you may provide comment by telephone to call in please dial 1-669-900-6833. The collaboration code is 813-4736-0347. This information is also posted on our Planning Department homepage. During key points in today's meeting, time will be provided for members of the public to provide their testimony. Speakers will be muted until called on to speak. I will ask participants who wish to provide testimony to either remotely raise your hand by selecting the hand icon on the Zoom link, or if calling in by telephone by remotely raising your hand by pressing star 9 on your phone. I will call on participants by either your name or the last four digits of your telephone number. If you're participating via the Zoom link, when I call on you to speak, you'll see a pop-up on your screen that says Unmute. Please accept the pop-up, state your name for the record, and provide your testimony. If calling in via telephone, you must unmute yourself by pressing star 6. If at any time you have difficulty connecting to today's meeting via the link or by phone, please email Michael Lamb at Michael.Lamb at SantaCruiseCounty.us. He will be checking his email periodically throughout the meeting and he's on standby to assist anyone who's having difficulty connecting. All right, with those instructions, I'll turn it over to the Planning Commission Chair, Tim Gordon. Good morning, Tim. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. And thank you, Jocelyn, for that intro and welcome everyone to the hearing of the Santa Cruz County Planning Commission today on May 11, 2022. And it's 932, so let's call this meeting to order. Can we please have a roll call mystery? Yes. Can we have a liaison beat? Here. Commissioner Shepard? You're muted. I am present. Thank you. All right. Commissioner Shaffer-Fritus. Present. All right. And Chair Gordon. Here. Thank you. All right, move on to agenda item number two here. Do we have any additions or corrections to the agenda today? No, we do not. We would like to note that if anyone is, does happen to be on for item number nine that it has been rescheduled. So if anyone is here in the public for that item, we will not be heard today. We can move on to agenda item number three. Do any commissioners have any expertise communications that they would like to declare? I do. Yes. I did speak with the owner of the property immediately across from 2740. That's on the item number eight. I do have a question for the commissioners. Item number four at this time, oral communications. This is a time when members of the public have the opportunity to speak on items that are not on the agenda today. Ms. Drake, do we have any members of the public that would like to talk at this time? I will check. So as a reminder, this is the time to press star nine on your phone. If you're participating, get a telephone. And I'm not seeing any members of the public who is to speak chair. Great. Thank you. We can go ahead and close our communications at this time and move on to item five and six, the consent agenda items. Today, the consent agenda items are AB 361 resolution and the extension of the minor land division of the project application number two to one zero three zero. I would like to give the commissioners opportunity for any minor discussions prior to looking for a motion on the consent items. And if there's not any anyone would like to make a motion. I'll move approval of the consent agenda. Thank you. I'll second that this is Judy. Thank you commissioner shepherd and commissioner ways and be we have a motion and a second then at this time we can take a vote all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Any opposed. I'm standing. Great motion passes. And we can move on to the next. Regular agenda item. That's from the March. Planning Commission hearing. The night. It might be the March night hearing. That is correct. Yeah. March. But I don't like to make a motion to approve. I move that we approve the minutes of the March nine planning commission meeting 2022. And I will second that motion. We have a motion to approve the motion. And we have a motion to approve the motion. And we have a motion to approve the motion. Commissioner lays and be. Then we have a motion a second. We can take a vote on this as well. All commissioners in favor of the motion. Say aye. Aye. Any opposed. Any abstaining. That motion passes as well. And we can move on moving right along today. Right on to our next agenda item. This is application number two zero one two zero eight. Located at. 2740 Madison lane. It's a proposal to develop a 10 unit dwelling group in the RM six zone. District. District we have staff and the applicant available for this item. And maybe we please have a staff report. And we have a Zen Jeffs from the planning department joining us. And she's going to give the presentation. Good morning. Good morning everybody. And I do apologize for that technical difficulty there. But hopefully everything goes smoothly from now on. So let's start. So this. The project is located on the south side of Madison lane. It's approximately. Thousand feet south of the intersection with Soquel drive. And the highway one runs along the southern property boundary and that is designated as a scenic road in the county. It's a scenic road in the county's general plan. Like consists of two contiguous parcels of land. There's APN 025 21102, which is approximately 2.02 acres in size and APN 025 21107, which is approximately 0.73 acres in size. And together they total approximately 2.75 acres. The net developable land of the parcel. Is about 1.97 acres, which excludes all of the areas within the Madison lane right away. And all areas within the riparian corridor along rodeo creek Gulch. And also any lands within the associated 50 foot riparian buffer that are slope greater than 30% as shown on this map. The parcels are located in the R M or multifamily residential. Zone district, which allows for multifamily residential uses. And the proposed residential dwelling group is a principal permitted use within the district. The RM six zoning is consistent with the sites urban low density residential general plan designation that covers most of the project site. There is a portion of APN 025 21102. It has a general plan designation of open open open space. And that corresponds with the non developable portion of the parcel located within the riparian corridor along rodeo creek Gulch. Project is also consistent with the goals, guiding principles and strategies as a sustainable Santa Cruz County plan. To the east and western north of the project site. The areas surrounded by a varied neighborhood that includes one and two story single family dwellings, which are include older and renovated residences that predominantly a ranch style. In addition across Madison lane to the northwest is the school campus, the good shepherd school. And that serves students from preschool through to eighth grade. And as I said before to the south of the project site is highway one. The property itself is relatively level and is mainly comprised of open grassland. However, along the eastern property boundary, the site slopes down towards rodeo creek Gulch. And this area contains a mixed riparian woodland. In addition, there's a 40 foot wide area of trees and other vegetation in the Caltrans highway. Right away, which creates a buffer that separates the project site from highway one. The proposal is to develop the two adjacent vacant parcels with a 10 unit apartment complex and all of the associated site improvements where the 10 proposed units would be grouped into five two story duplex style buildings. It's also proposed that the project will be constructed in two phases where phase one includes for duplex style buildings totaling eight units that are numbered a through age. All site improvements will be constructed. And phase two, which includes the addition of a further smaller duplex, which is numbered I and J. And the reason it's broken down into two phases is because of the. Around a gold show you rodeo freak to a moratorium, which only allows for a maximum of four units to be built on each parcel at this stage until sewer upgrades have been completed. The proposed project complies with the allowed density for the urban low density residential general plan designation of the site based on the net developable area of the parcel, which would provide that a minimum of eight units are required to be built. And the maximum density that would be allowed to be 14 units. And in addition, the project will also comply with all of the applicable site and development standards. The parcels in the RM six zone district is set out in county code section 1310323. As proposed units a through F would each have a habitable floor area of 1902 square feet and units G and H would have a habitable floor area of 1713 square feet. All eight of these units that are going to be built in the first phase are proposed to be built. They have they have four bedrooms and three bathrooms and each includes the 441 square foot two car garage. Within each duplex style building the two units are connected at the garage common wall and these plans here. You can just see one of the two pairs of units that the garage wall is where they joined. The units I and J that will be constructed at the second phase of both 1200 square feet. And each contain two bedrooms and two bathrooms, but these units do not include barrages that out in county code section 1310552 a three off street resident parking spaces are required for each of the four bedroom multifamily dwelling unit. And then two and a half parking spaces are required for a two bedroom multifamily dwelling unit. And in addition to the resident parking guest parking is required to be provided in amount equal to 20% of the resident parking, which results in a requirement for a total of 35 spaces. As proposed, the project will fully comply with these requirements in that a total of 38 spaces will be provided, including 32 spaces for the eight units that will be constructed during phase one of which 16 garage spaces eight spaces are located in front of the garage doors and there are an additional eight guest parking spaces. In phase two, there will be an additional six spaces for the two units that will be constructed at that time. It should be noted that there are eight additional parking spaces that are potentially available in front of the garage doors. So each of units, they were necessary, so each of those units potentially would have four spaces. The project will result in approximately 34,076 square feet of new impervious area. All of the site runoff associated with the project will be directed to rodeo creek and will comply with all county regulations. All of the control or detention and water quality bio or bio filtration measures have been included into the proposed drainage design. And the system will also be sized so that the detention volume is provided in a storage volume beyond that required for the project alone. So that the entire watershed, including off the site impervious areas that Madison Lane will be directed to the project drainage system. In addition to reduce runoff, pervious surfacing will be included into the final project design, including along the proposed sidewalk on the Madison Lane frontage. Rodeo Creek Gulch runs within an Arroyo along the Eastern property line. And the land that is within that Arroyo meets the definition of a riparian corridor in accordance with county code section 16.30.030. The portion of the project site, which is also mapped as containing riparian woodland is characterized by oak woodland with other riparian vegetation. The completed project is not expected to create any permanent impacts to the riparian corridor or to any sensitive habitats associated with it. This is because all components of the project, including the residential buildings, the associated site improvements, the detention retention pond and the storm drain outlet outfall will all be located outside of the required riparian buffer and outside the associated construction setback from the Arroyo. And it's in an area that's characterized by primarily non native grassland. Further protect the riparian corridor in any associated habitat areas. The project proposes installation of a permanent lip rail fence at the boundary of the 50 foot buffer, which will protect the Arroyo from further disturbance. Then to further ensure that there'll be a minimum impact to special status species or their habitat. The project has also been conditioned to include all mitigations as recommended by the project biologist and the project arborist to ensure protection of native oak and other sensitive habitat and species associated with the project site. To the south, as I have said, the project about Highway 1. However, the development will not be visible from Highway 1 due to both the change in elevation and the existing row of trees and other vegetation along the southern property line that are within the right away. In addition to the existing vegetative screen, the applicant is proposing to construct an eight foot high sound wall along the edge of the Caltrans right away that will screen the proposed development in views from the travel lanes. The wall itself may be just visible beneath the canopy of the trees that will match other walls along the highway and so will not have a significant visual impact. Further, the existing oaks and other vegetation in the right away will be retained and protected so they'll continue to screen and soften the development in views from the scenic road. The proposed project will incorporate design features such as varied wall planes, a pallet of muted earth-pwn colors, and it includes accent details such as wide window and door trims and natural wood trellises. These features together with landscaping that will be both within the project site and along the project frontage at Madison Lane and will include trees and other plantings will help to reduce the visual impact the proposed development on the surrounding neighborhood and on the natural landscape. In addition, all of the existing trees that surround and are within the property will be retained and protected. So, in conclusion, the project as proposed and conditioned is consistent with all of the applicable codes and policies of the zoning ordinance and the general plan. And staff therefore recommends that your permission adopt the CEQA mitigated negative declaration and mitigation measures and reporting program is related to the proposed project. And certify the mitigated NAICDAC pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and then approve application number 201208 based on the findings and the conclusions within the staff report. Next is my presentation. I am very happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much, Ms. Jess. We really appreciate that thorough presentation. I would like to ask the commissioners if they had any questions of staff at this time. I have. Sorry, I had a question too. I did not mute fast enough so I'm happy with. Okay. Yes, I, I didn't see anything in, in my file that showed that there was a water will serve for this project. Or a sewer will serve letter or fire requirements. They are on file with the planning department. They were sent in. I did not include them in the packet. I apologize for that. There's also will be required to be provided together with any building permit application when that comes in as well. I'm just looking for dates to see if they were still current. Unfortunately, I don't have that information with me here since I'm at home right now. I can check the project applicant is here. So they should have that information available. Maybe when the applicant has an opportunity to speak, they could have that information available for us, but he appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That'll be fine. Thank you. Do you have any other questions? Not at this time. No, thank you. Commissioner shepherd. Yeah. This may be also appropriate for the developer, but are these, do these homes have appropriate orientation for solar? Look at that with most new construction. The homes are oriented in an east west, although units G and H, the roof lines are oriented north south. And that was, there hasn't been any discussion with this project to including solar panels. But I'm something I think that the developer should answer that question. I think the developer could comment on that potential when it gives his presentation. Yeah. Thank you. Commissioner shepherd, Mr. Fred is, did you have any comments or questions? No, not at this time. Thank you. Thank you. I did have a couple. Kind of along the similar lines as commissioner lays in these is, is there a reason that seems like a lot of the conditions are things that would sometimes be already included at this point. And some other things that. That aren't, is that going to be a challenge or are those reports actually all done. We just didn't see them. Could you comment on that? Yeah, the reports are done. They're actually all of, they're all available to the public in that they will be included in the package for the initial study. But they are on file with the planning department during the building commit stage plan review letters will be required from the civil engineers. Okay, great. So that is all there. Okay. Yes, it is all there. Okay. Chair. Yes. I just wanted to say the sewer water geotechnical if they're done they should, we would always like to see copies we always have in the past. So I'm looking forward. I apologize for not including those. Is there any affordability requirement to this project. They will be paying the affordable in lieu fees based on the square footage of the development. Okay, so it's going to be an in lieu fee there's not any actual affordable units being created. The last question I had this might also be for the developer. Eight units being a kind of the bottom range of the density allowed is there a reason why there's only eight. I know that you know just kind of doing some my own calculations. The project could hold a lot more if it wasn't, you know, originally a larger project was discussed but because of the sewer moratorium the maximum number of units that can be developed is eight at the current time. That's the reason why this project is including two phases. So there are eight units during phase one where they limited to four units for each of the two parcels. And then second phase will be two additional units that will be added. I understand. Maybe it'd be nice to know if it seems like the moratorium is kind of an older challenge and I'm sure it's the big problem that it's hard to comprehend at this level but is there an end to that is that going to be fixed at some point in the future or are those two units going to just sit there kind of indefinitely or do we know what the plan is. I believe that the funding is available either later this year or next year I believe we have someone from public works who could maybe answer that question, but it is in the foreseeable future. And it's likely that those improvements will be taking taking place sort of concurrently probably with this development so that maybe they can move straight on the timing is still yet to be determined but I know that the board is voting on the improvements fairly shortly. I should move ahead. All right, so there would be an opportunity to get those two and at least and then. That's my understanding that it's in it's in the foreseeable future. Okay. Okay, thanks so much. That was all my questions. Unless any commissioners had any follow up questions, we could invite the applicant to present at this time if they have a presentation today. Okay. Okay, so I see Jim is with us this morning. Good morning, Jim. Will you please state your name for the record. And you need to unmute yourself by pressing star six if you're on your phone. Jim weaver. Good morning Jim. Good morning all. Thank you for this opportunity and would like to very much start with thanking staff for getting us to this point. I think we've had quite a long haul and sort of catch up a little bit and elaborate on Lizanne's presentation. This project started as a 24 unit project. And six of those were going to be affordable. And two were going to be moderate and two were going to be low income. But because of the moratorium, we spent about two years processing and then we're finally told that the public works department wasn't sure when the moratorium would be lifted and that we needed to revise the project and go down to what was allowed under the moratorium, which was four units on each one. So that's how we got there. And we do have will serve letters which were provided in November of 2021 or water and October of 2021 for sanitation. We also had earlier letters for the first 26 units. So I think those should be in the file somewhere. And other than that, I have just a couple of quick, easy questions for staff. I don't really have any other presentation to make I think Lizanne did an excellent job as usual. And presented the project and did a really nice job with all the photos. If you want I can let you know what my two questions are they have to do with a couple of the conditions of approval. And I'm just not clear on how those are worded and what they actually mean. Yes, absolutely. Definitely ask those questions. I think that would be a fine use of this time and then we can follow back up with a couple of questions that the commissioner had of you and then yeah, that should be good. So condition six a on page 25 of the staff report talks about a four foot sign easement, and I'm not really clear at all what that means. And then the other question I have is on condition number 12 on page 24 talks about a private maintenance for sewer laterals and easements, but we're in a public street, and I'm not sure how that quite works. Other than that we're happy with all the conditions feel like we can meet them and as was asked earlier all the reports have been prepared and most of them have been updated because they were a few years ago and then we had to update them for the revised project. Yes, we do have a comment on this. Am I still live. Yes. So both of those conditions are conditions. The first one was from which page Jim page 25 six a talks about a four foot sign easement. And I just can't figure out quite what that is. G six a. I don't have the same numbering. G six. Yes, this was a six a that was something that came that was a condition of approval from the road engineering section. I believe that there was a plan markup that was sent to you as one of the completeness or incompleteness comments. And I know that that is available from Greg Martin in the road engineering section. And so I believe that somebody should be available from road engineering to answer that question. And ask that somebody was there because you have made that question. Oh, and to clarify that it's either Russell Chen or Greg Martin available to speak on that item. I am seeing Rachel raising her hand. So Rachel for two with DPW drainage show I will begin with Rachel. Good morning, Rachel. Good morning. So I, I raised my hand because of the comment about that the 12th comment rather than the signage easement. Oh, okay. Let's see. So we'll keep you on the line and we'll get back to you. Let's see. Do we have anyone. The department of public works road section I am not seeing anyone. Let's see. We do not have anyone from the department of public works road section to adjust that comment sounds. Oh yeah. Is this something that we could potentially follow up with after the hearing. Yes, let's see. Matt Machado has his hand ready. So let me see if Matt has anything to add here. Good morning, Matt. Good morning all thank you. You know what I think as we discussed some of the other points we could get someone from the road division on the line so I will work on that I did want to ask Jim. I missed part of his comment about the sewer moratorium I did want to provide the commission a quick update on that and I just missed a bit of that comment but I know the, the sewer moratorium project the projects that's going to lift that moratorium is going to construction later this year. And it's my understanding that once the sanitation group awards a contract they will be providing will serve letters and pursuing the lift of the moratorium and I might have missed a part of that comment earlier so I just wanted to share that information and and I'll stop with that and then I'll pursue getting a staff member on the call here just in a couple minutes. And Matt I believe that the plan markup was from Greg Martin. Okay, thank you. I'll get them on the line. Thanks Matt. Um, see, we move on to question on 12 a the next condition of approval question that you had, Jim. Yes. So, it's talking about a private which would be the project, maintaining the sewer drainage and stuff, but we're in a public street. So I'm not familiar with quite how that would work. Normally I would think public works would maintain all of that but maybe I'm missing something. I see Matt is raising his hand again. Thank you Jocelyn. I do I will share on that and so that condition is the laterals are privately owned and maintained the sewer main in the road is the sanitation district responsibility but any laterals that come off the main are privately owned and maintained and that would include any onsite lateral or sewer connections on site and so does that clarify Jim it's it's the part of that lateral is in the public right away but the but the lateral is still the private ownership and maintenance. I agree with what you're saying about the laterals the condition reads the maintenance of the proposed inlets and storm drain in Madison lane shall be responsibly of the property owner. The storm drain okay I thought we're talking sewer laterals. I think Rachel might still be on the call Rachel. Can you chime in on that condition. Yes, I, I'm unmuted now that the improvements that are shown on the plan are not made per county design criteria standards they are 10 inch and even though we said shall be 12 inch even a 12 inch is not for our design criteria. So if you do the standard requirement for per the design criteria which is a minimum of 18 inch pipe in the right of way. Even though that there isn't the whole road in that area look like an easement but we do maintain that part of the road. So you would need to build it for our design criteria for us to accept the portion in the right of way. It leaves the right of way, it's still going to be yours to maintain, but within the right of way you need to build it for our design criteria. Okay, so we can submit that as part of the building permit. Yeah, it would need to be 18 inch pipe minimum and what we see on the plan you have also smaller pipe on your property so the hydraulic will have to be figured out by your engineer to see how you go from larger pipe to smaller pipe. But we will need it to be 18 inch in the right of way. So we need to change the condition of approval to reflect that 12 applies as is if unless the storm drain is upsized to be 18 inches to meet county design criteria. The comment can go like unless the improvements within the right of way built for the design criteria that the comment stands. Yeah, okay I can add that as a change to the conditions. Thank you. Thank you. It looks like great Martin joined in the attendee list. Yep, I see him. Good morning, Greg. Yes, you're unmuted. Okay. Good morning. I heard you had a question about sign easements. Yes, Jim weaver the applicant had a question. Jim, would you like to repeat your question. The condition talks, it's G six a, and it says a four foot sign easement is provided as shown on the plan markup and I'm just unclear as to what that actually is the science. I can talk in general typically that's behind the sidewalk, and it allows you to preserve your setbacks from the back of sidewalk. So we consider it like part of the street section. And but we're allowing it instead of being separated sidewalk with a landscape strip separate separated. It's on the landscaping is on the backside and so we're doing it as a, and then we also want the ability to put signs in that area. And so that's the overall philosophy I'm not looking at these specific plans right now. All right. That answers that. Okay, I can go now. Thanks. Greg. Okay, thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thank you all for working through that so efficiently. You know, I know as the applicant sometimes it's, you know, it's not always easy to get through the conditions of approval outside of this hearing. So I appreciate everyone's willingness to work through those questions for the applicant there. Mr. Weaver, did you have any other questions or comments before we can respond to to one of I think there's just one other question about solar and solar orientation from the commission that we'd like to address. You know, other than the way the units are oriented. We didn't really push real hard for solar. There's a fair number of windows. And of course, once you build under the title 24 energy requirements most of the units will be pretty energy efficient, but we haven't proposed any solar panels on the homes. Thank you. Great. So then, at this time, I'd like to invite the commissioners to ask any follow up or, you know, have any remaining comments for the applicant now would be the time to do that. Commissioner lays in the side and me, did you have something. Yes, I do the page 17 of the conditions at 16 a. And it says details showing compliance with fire department requirements. Now that's sort of an important thing do we have anyone from fire or do we have the report. The plans were reviewed by the fire department during the processing of this permit and did provide comments to the applicant. The comments generally their lengthy they things like show fire sprinklers and show locations of fire hydrants. All of those requirements were passed along to the applicant and will be required to be included in the building plans. The building plans themselves will go back to fire to ensure compliance. But most of the comments are not really appropriate for conditions of approval because they are very much standard comments about what you need to show on your plans to meet her department requirements. But otherwise the project itself has been found to be. So they, they approved, they approved the width of all of the lanes, the travel lanes, interior travel lanes. Yes, that we, we sent it back to them towards the end of the processing of this because there was a change to that turnaround close to went where you go down towards units I and J. And that was reviewed by fire as well so we know that they do approve all of those interior roadways. And there's no way we can see that, or check to make sure that all the details have been met, all the requirements have been met. I do the only way that I would have to show you would be to just to assure you that the project has been routed to fire and that they have approved the plans and deemed the application complete. And can you confirm at what stage they did this. Let me take a quick look. When we, we did check in with them right towards the end of the project but I only took this project on fairly recently. See what we have here. Why you're looking Lizanne I could speak a little bit to that. It'll be great thanks Jim. We have the re the revisions to the plans and adding I and J which came a little bit later than the first eight. We've worked pretty extensively with Jim Diaz central fire to make sure that we have the right width and the right turnaround areas for them to get in and out of the property. And they've had Jim Diaz out on the site to look at things so we're pretty comfortable that we can easily meet all central fires requirements. I reviewed the last review, which was dated June 29 of 2021. The project was complete on July 8 of 2021. So they were one of the latter reviewers. Okay, thank you. Any other commissioners. All questions or comments. Oh, I do. I'm all confused where we are in the process did we. We have a public hearing and your way. We've heard the applicant. And now we're hearing from commissioners but are we going to open it up to the public. Absolutely. This was an opportunity to ask any follow up questions of the applicant in particular. And to give him an opportunity to have his 10 minutes or so to present. And then as soon as we're done with these follow up questions, opening up to public comment. Anyone that would like to speak on the front. Great, thank you. Yes. I had one last question for the applicant was, you know, if the project was designed for more units, and then got pulled back. But now that moratorium is going to go away. So what are you feeling about that? Would you. Clearly you're moving forward with this application, but sounds like there's an opportunity to add more units again in the near future. Is that a possibility and something you'd pursue. You know, I would say, at this point, no, we've been in this for over 10 years. And I think the property owner, Sal Rubino would just as well move forward with this project. There was also a meeting with the neighborhoods, you know, maybe eight, nine years ago for the 24 unit project, and they were very adamantly opposed to that number of units on this property, mainly due to potential traffic impacts. You have the school across the street, which has its share of traffic. So when we really designed down to the eight and then later the 10 we had a neighborhood meeting and everybody was way happier that we had reduced the scope of the project so for those two reasons time money and then the neighborhood compatibility I would say that we just would prefer to stick with this and hopefully get her approved. Yes, I completely understand that. Thank you for explaining that to me. Then if no other commission questions of the applicant we can move on to further public comment at this time. All right, so. Looking at our attendees and I see a few hands raised so we'll start with David Ramsey. I'm David, will you please restate your name for the record you have three minutes Ramsey, I live right around the corner off of Christie courts and yes we did have just addressed 10 comments real quick we did have a neighborhood meeting with Jim. And if you're familiar with Madison Lane it's a very narrow to lane road essentially one way with with all the parking that goes on from the apartment complex near the school. So the neighborhood was definitely more in favor of the eight units than anything else. It's a very impacted road, very busy at busy times. For that reason, the corner as you come around Madison Lane is also a very sharp and blind corner with no sidewalks. And so we did discuss, you know, possibly asking the applicant to extend the sidewalk to match the existing street. I got to cut you off for a quick second. Sorry, some of your microphone or the connection. And you're really hard to understand. That's okay. Thank you. Oh, you're muted but that was better. There you go. Is that better. Okay. There you go. You got it. It still says I'm muted. Am I good. Okay. Yeah. All right. So yes, so it's a dangerous walking road, especially adding more units to the to the property so we would the neighborhood would request the opportunity to to extend that sidewalk to the existing sidewalk along Madison Lane and I know there are some trees in the way there that you know I don't know if they would need to be removed or not but we'd appreciate looking at that and then the only other question I would have is parking is a major issue on this road. And so I just want to assure a lot of the parking for these units are in the two car garages. And I want to see if there's any type of storage in the CC and ours that are going to require those garages to be used for actual parking. I know, in a lot of projects that I deal with. People are, you know, there's deed restrictions on the garage that they can't be used for storage that they must be used for parking. And I would just strongly strongly encourage that be the case for this development. If we take four bed eight four bedroom houses and people are using their garages for storage or other things that's going to put a lot of cars on this road that it cannot handle. It is a one way exit road there's no exit through the school. It's only Madison Lane and with the restaurant, the school and all the neighbors in this neighborhood it's just it's not conducive to having more cars on the street. Those are those are my my main comments and I would just ask the commission to strongly consider those those options. Thank you for the time. Thank you, David. All right. We will go to Richard emig next good morning please restate your name for the record you have three minutes and meet yourself. There we go. When we did the initial design of the three, the four duplexes, there was no required we did not have to put a turnaround fire turnaround. When it was required we add the future duplex, we had to provide a turnaround and the fire department approved the angle that comes in, and it will be marked so that nobody parking that area. That's the only comment I wanted to add. Thank you Richard. All right, and let's see Richard your hand still raised but I'm going to breeze past you there. Um, if there are any other members of the public who wish to speak at this time please raise your hand by pressing star nine on your phone or the hand icon on your computer if you have the zoom app, and I am not seeing any chair. Great. Thank you so much. Drake. Appreciate everyone's comments. Typically, there's an opportunity at the end of public comment for the applicant to respond to any questions, and there was one. So I was wondering if Mr. Weaver would like to comment on the parking in the garage is question. And then we'll close public comment after that. Chair. Yeah. Also asked the applicant to comment or staff to comment on Mr. Ramsey's concern about the sidewalk and extending it. Yes, please. Thank you. Mr. Weaver, if you're still available, do you want to comment any further? If not, you don't have to. You are muted. I'm not sure if you're trying to. Is that better. Okay. I don't think we have a problem with either of those at this point we usually you don't develop CC and ours but if that were to be a condition that people park in the garage, I park in my garage so I'm fine with that. And as far as the sidewalks, I don't have a set of the plants sitting here in front of me, but I thought we were extending sidewalks down toward the cul-de-sac. And that would certainly be appropriate. Given the amount of traffic and people living along there in the school so I don't think we have a problem with either of those. So we need to add a condition of approval. Where exactly are we taking that sidewalk to I was a little unclear based on Mr. Ramsey's comments exactly that sidewalk would be extended to. It appears right now that the sidewalk is from the property line to the east, and then, you know, a little turn of the cul-de-sac on the west. So, then it stops at the Eastern property boundary there. Right. Yes. So how far would that be desirable for that sidewalk to extend that's what would be acceptable. Um, I think at this time, let's, if we can finish the public comment portion and then and close that out and then come back to discussion around that. I would appreciate that. And then we'll also come back to the discussion on the garages because these are not the sale units. So CC and ours are not a appropriate mechanism. It would be the management company for the units. Correct. Great. Then if there's no other questions that can we can close a public comment at this time and then move on to discussion. I'm seeing a couple of hands that just went up. I don't know if these are new, you know, comments that members of the public wish to provide or if they're related to the discussion that is occurring now. We did not have any hands up. A moment ago when I turned it back over to you, but now we have four hands up so. Okay. Do you want him. We, it's, yeah, it's kind of tough because I don't. I'll close the public comment portion. What's typically done when this happens in the straight. Do we move on or do we allow this? This is Daniel says what the county council's office. So, you know, you've, you've closed the public comment. Those who wish to participate had the opportunity to participate. And it's unclear as to whether folks who had already spoken are now raising their hands again. It's unclear at that point, but we don't really have a way of checking until we open the public back up. So I don't, I don't know if there's, it's up to the chair to decide whether or not you want to open the public comment back up just to check on these names, but we did provide ample time for the public to participate in this. Any comments that have been emailed, I am not sure I'm not showing any other comments being put forth, but that's completely up to the chair but I, like I said, I believe that we have had our public comment period. And so you can move on, if you wish. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. I think then if it's standard that we move on, let's go ahead and do that. And at this point, we're going to bring it to the commission to discuss. So, what any commissioners like to start, I'd be happy to get started on discussion points here. Like to understand, and Jocelyn this might be a question for you also is, you know, do we typically require parking in garages as on other projects have we been doing that is that standard practice or a requirement anywhere. It's not enforceable by, you know, the planning staff. We, we have had projects where there were neighborhood concerns about parking, where we've included conditions of approval that the manage the management of the site. You know, it should be a condition of the lease for the property, and the property management company would enforce that. We might also want to have a condition regarding conversion of these any garage spaces to 80 years as well. That would be something to consider. Thank you so much. That makes sense. And then as far as the sidewalk, you know, I'm not. My opinion is I'm not inclined to force an applicant to go out and this is on their property they're doing all the sidewalk on their property, and it would be my inclination to be thankful that we have that. An arbitrary like line of where someone wants to sidewalk fixed to doesn't seem like an appropriate way to get this fixed. I'd love to hear the rest of the commissions, you know, thoughts on that. That's kind of where I'm at on that point. And then as far as the parking unit, I don't know that if it's not enforceable, and the county doesn't have a way to follow up on it. And it's not standard practice and it's not code. I, you know, the applicant may be okay with that and if you know if that's the case I wouldn't be opposed to it. But I'll lean to some other commissioners that have been here a little longer than me to carry on that conversation. As far as the garage conversions, I would not want to adjust any conditions to preclude that that's a state law that allows, you know, a view conversions as well as our local law that allows it. And, you know, I understand that parking is a challenge in this area to understand that housing is also a challenge. I'm a little, I've been torn about this project because it, you know, if you used all the state bills and the bonuses and all the things like you could get up to 31 units on this lot. By, you know, not saying that that would all 100% fit, but that's what the numbers. And so, you know, that had a lot more back down to eight, which is kind of a challenge for us as a community because we're so behind on arena numbers we need housing we need affordable housing you know kinds of housing. And now we're back down to this kind of lower end of our density range. And, you know, so, I've been torn on this project from when I saw it. So I appreciate that the applicant kind of explained what had happened. And I'm, you know, this one, you know, it is, it's at where it's at. And I'm really excited to hear that the sewer more terms getting fixed a future project with this kind of zoning which is like one of the best sonings that we have for housing in our, in our county, you know, are going to be able to utilize a little bit more density. So I'm really thankful for that. And so this is Daniel says what they can just wanted to clarify. So the two questions that are being discussed at the present time are the sidewalks being extended past the property line. And the idea that there would be a condition that occupants or residents be parking in their garages is that right. Yes, sir. Okay, I just want to say just on the parking piece there's you know I also want to just alert you to the challenges of enforcing that condition right I mean there's there's, I don't I don't really think there's any precedent for forcing folks to park inside of their garages and for the county to police that is a completely different question. So just want to make sure that the commissioners are thinking about that. And as far as stretching a sidewalk past the property line I think you've addressed that already. Great. Thank you, Mr. is what I appreciate that feedback and input. Those are all my thoughts on the project and I love to hear other commissioners. I do have comments on what Mr Ramsey was talking about that sharp curve which is a blind corner. It's just a 90 degree turn actually. And from looking at the drawings it appears to me that the eastern most entry and exit lane to the property is near that that blind, very narrow turn. I was wondering if Mr weaver would still be available to tell us how far it is to the entry and exit way. We don't have that information right at the tip of my fingers. I'm looking at it quickly I would say it's about 100 from the actual corner. Around 180 feet where that driveway is from the corner itself. Okay. I had another comment. The, well, I had two other comments. Are there any plans to improve Madison Lane? I was out there and I just found it almost impossible. I was out there at the time when parents are picking up the students at three o'clock. And I think there are 130 cars that pass at that time. Are there any improvements? Or Madison Lane. Beyond the improvements to the section directly fronting the property. There are no improvements planned for that section between so called drive and the corner. Okay, but the improvement in front of the property would not take in this blind curve, I'm guessing. No, because the property doesn't extend to the corner. There are, if the sidewalk were to be exact, there are significant trees that are in the way of extending that sidewalk. Large redwood I believe. Okay, my last question is, this has been proposed as a 10 unit apartment complex. Are these all rentals? Yes. Okay. Are they, is there any prohibition about using them as vacation rentals? Typically, a rent, an apartment cannot be used as a vacation rental. The applicant would be the property owner who would own all 10. That's correct. Not individual, you know, individuals could not apply. But they could sublet to a vacationer. No, not, not legal with the permit now. Okay. They could, they could sublet, you know, long term basis, but they, if that was allowed by the management company, but not as a vacation rental, not legally. Right, a vacation rental is less is 30 is less than 30 days. Any rental, more than 30 days is just a rental. I think I don't think we have anything on the books to prevent. I think that's what commission allows me is wanting to know what's to keep them from being used as, you know, vacation homes anymore, you know, short term rentals anymore than any other apartment. Where, how do we legislate that let's just review it in a few sentences. We do not allow apartments to be rented to be to obtain vacation rental permits apartment owners apartment renters. Okay, so that's, that's the, the clear answer. Okay, I have, I have no further questions. Thank you. I do have, I would like to hear a little bit more, it seems like County Council has provided us guidance in regards to the issue of prohibiting certain uses in the garage so I don't feel the need to go into that anymore. But the applicant did indicate a willingness to work on the sidewalk issue and I'm curious from staff. Do you think that it's appropriate that maybe you work with the applicant to see if something can be done in regards to that extension. I would want to work with the road engineering section. I'm not making any comments on that. That's not my area of expertise. I, I say I do believe that there would be an existing tree that would prevent the extension of the sidewalk in front of there's a house that's sort of on the east and property line there. I'm not sure that I know they do use that area for parking. I'm not sure what would be involved in doing that and whether that would be supported by that neighbor. It's hard for me to tell without further studies. Okay, well I would be prepared to make a motion and include in that motion that staff have a discussion with other public works are appropriate road staff about the possibility of creating an extension to the sidewalk. Thank you Commissioner shape or greatest. I'd like to, if we could dig into that just a bit more. I believe that the adjacent property where you'd extend that to you would have to build this sidewalk on someone else's property. And so that would include. That's a whole, that's a whole lot more that's why the problem, that's why the sidewalk stops where it does that's my guess. Because we're not building into an existing street that just hasn't been developed yet we're taking a private property, giving the sidewalk, essentially, to the public does that make sense. So the neighbor next door would have to accept the same thing. Mr Machado you're here. And do you know anything about that am I right or wrong is that something that's enforceable or possible. I'm not opposed to it I just want to make sure that we are actually that with something that could be done. Well, two thoughts on it. So extending the sidewalk across others frontage certainly has impacts to those people. And so, you know, there could be an unwillingness for those adjacent landowners to cooperate with any sort of sidewalk extension. The public right away is very limited in this area most of Madison is like a 30 foot right away. So we have to really see if there's even room within the public right away otherwise you would also have to acquire an easement from the adjacent property owners but at a minimum, even if there were enough public right away to fit a sidewalk in there, it would certainly affect the neighbors property and most of those people have, you know, trees fences, you know their yards have been developed fairly close up to the edge of the pavement. So it would be a challenge it would certainly require a lot of coordination with the adjacent landowners and cooperation. And so it'd be I would say it's unsure whether they're that cooperation would exist it's also unclear if there's enough public right away, which would necessitate the acquisition of additional easements which is a pretty, that's a pretty big burden. It'd be a pretty big lift. Certainly we could discuss it more. But that's that's what I see looking at, you know, the GIS and and the mapping that I can see in front of us today. Thank you so much. You know, with that thought, Commissioner Fredis would you want to maybe adjust how we would work that knowing that we'd have to take over, you know, public works that have to assist in like an easement onto private property where others may not want that. Okay, just interrupt quickly. I just received an email from Dave Ramsey, who is a civil engineer and he's saying that he would be happy to discuss the extension of the sidewalk with road engineering. He also says that the adjacent property owner is more than happy to remove the trees and doesn't use parking, although I can see in the street view that he is using some of the right way for parking. Edward itself could remain. And there's one other tree. He says it's not a heritage tree we don't have heritage trees in the county and it's not in the coastal zones that would not be a significant tree. And that would need to be rubed it is quite a sizable tree. That was his comment. I believe he tried to speak at the hearing but because it was a public comment he was not that opportunity. Here, Gordon, I'm not going to support removing trees helter skelter at the last minute. This is not how I would like to proceed in the least we want to get it studied that's one thing, but I do not think that we need to do the planning department job here, I would not support emotion going in that direction at all. This is Daniel says what they again if I might weigh in just a bit I think we're kind of getting outside of the bounds of this the approval or denial of this actual permit and to tie anything, which could be neighbors discussing this issue with with county staff which is what is appropriate here I think we shouldn't tie any of this to this particular permit. Thank you. Also, there was a neighborhood meeting where the proposal was explained the neighbors and we owe something to what they think is going to happen there I don't. I do not think that justifies this kind of last minute change with us acting in lieu of proper planning, so I won't support it. Thank you all for those comments yes I understand. I would agree I think that adding things last minute without research or really taking the time to dig in and with all these, all of these challenges I would just immediately brought up it's pretty clear that we would need some more study, and so I would agree with that. I'm ready to move make motion to prove the project that they will make you know if that's appropriate at this point. I think if other commissioners. Oh God. We just that would be with the addition of the language regarding that the drainage condition just that unless the property improvements in the county right away it's constructed to comply with county design criteria standards that they would have been as I will add that. Yes, I was definitely assuming that thank you for bringing it up. I think this is a well designed project thoughtful and well planned out in long time in the making. It certainly adds moderate more apartments which is something we need. I don't even comment on how we could pack 31 units in their given situation the road situation the neighbor situation goes to Asia, so on so forth but I think right now, it's a well designed addition to housing I'd like to vote for it. And that's fine with me I appreciate the discussion I think it was worth having. I would ask to make her the motion if she would include adopting the sequel mitigated negative deck and the mitigation measures and certifying certifying the mitigated negative deck pursuant to the requirements of sequel, and then to approve the application. If those modifications could be made to her motion. Absolutely, I should have included all that when I said approval, and that fills it out to way it need legally needs to be so let's add that to motion and now we have a second can we call the question if there's another discussion. I didn't believe I heard a second on that. I, that's. I asked maker the motion to make those changes and that I would second it with those changes. Okay, thank you commissioner for this I missed. I did do. Great so we do have a motion commissioner shepherd and a second from commissioner freighters. If there's any other discussion we can hear it now or as you take a roll call vote. Okay. Commissioner shepherd. Yes. Commissioner leasing B. Mr. Leasing B. You are muted Judy. I wasted all of that. Okay. No, I, I cannot support this project, based on verbal assurances, which should have been documented and reports that we can actually verify what has been said in this meeting. My vote is no. And chair Gordon. Yes. Thank you everyone with that. So I think we, let's just say that we passed it and so order. Correct. Motion passes three to one, and we do not have Rachel Dan with us today. So she is a no vote. Okay. Thank you everyone. That was a fun one. We're back into this after a couple months off into it. So with that will close agenda item number eight and move on to agenda. Excuse me agenda item number nine, this one in particular has actually been rescheduled to July 13. And so we won't have any discussion on this one today. We can move to item 10 planning director's report. Mr. Machado. Thank you chair and commissioners just a couple items to share with the commission this morning. First up, a quick update on our unified permit center efforts. And so for the past couple months, public works and planning staff have coordinated together to share the front counter the existing front counter to, to improve our communications with our constituents. So sharing the same scheduling tool to ensure that when customers constituents come in and ask questions that all the appropriate people are there. This is a effort towards the new unified permit center, which part of this update is also to share that those design efforts have started, and we're hopeful over the next one to two years to construct a new lobby a new front counter where public works staff planning staff will work together shoulder to shoulder to improve coordination with customers constituents. We will also be focused on the customer experience trying to make it a more welcoming more useful space for for all of our constituents. And so that's a little bit about the the UPC, an update there. Secondly, I'd like to share that our sustainability update is going quite well. Some of you may have attended we've had six community meetings. And I think do I see. I don't see Stephanie Hanson on the on the call today others I would turn it to her to share more detail but I would like to share that we've had six community meetings to share with the community our sustainability update. Additionally, the draft EIR is out for public review today oh I see Stephanie now good. I'm going to introduce. I just missed you there Stephanie so I'm going to turn the microphone over to Stephanie to provide an update to the commission on our sustainability update and our EIR efforts. Thank you Stephanie. Thank you Matt I was not properly elevated, I think and I'm trying to turn on my camera to see how to do that. Okay, hang on. Okay, there we go. Thank you, Jocelyn. Thank you, Matt. Good morning commissioners. As Matt mentioned, we haven't been having community meetings on the sustainability update we've had a lot of good input. Moving at your next meeting on May 25 staff is preparing a series of study sessions on the sustainability update for the commission. The first study session would be an overview of the project and subsequent study sessions will focus on policies and regulations associated with topics kind of focused on the big picture highlights and while there's a lot of detail in the sustainability update there's a lot of moving things around we really want the commission to be able to focus on the major changes. The next study sessions would focus on the built environment and land use. Next step would be transportation and public facilities. This be followed by another session on the code modernization portion of the project, as well as agriculture and other natural resources and we'll also give a briefing on the EIR at that meeting. A fifth study session could accommodate any topics that the commission wishes to return to. Public hearings at the commission would begin in August and go through September. We're anticipating two public hearings right now but a third hearing could be scheduled as an additional meeting if needed. The board will have public hearings in October through early December with the intent of adopting the amendments by the end of the year. The sustainability update is a very large project involving general plan amendments, county code amendments, new development design guidelines and map amendments. We encourage the commissioners to become familiarized with the project beforehand by visiting the project website where you can find the draft documents that have been out for public reviews since the end of February. And on the website, there are also links to all the documents and as well as additional materials and particularly recordings to the series of community meetings that have been held this spring. It's an excellent way to kind of grow, you know, a full understanding of what's in the project and delve into a little bit more detail by topic. I can follow up with an email to the commissioners that provide the appropriate links because the draft documents are approximately 2500 pages we encourage the commissioners to review the documents using the links. With that I'll turn it back to Matt or Dosslin. I'm happy to answer any questions. I had a question. The document is 2500 pages long. So is there a summary that is much shorter. Yeah, very good question. I can provide this in the email to direct you where to go exactly but the project description that is in the in the EIR provides a really good summary of the whole thing. That would be the best way to see that. How long is that. Sure, I think it's maybe 80 pages, something like that. And where is it available or someone else has printed it out in the library. The EIR is available at the planning department counter. Now I meant the summary that you were talking about. Is that that's part of the EIR. That's part of the EIR. And so what are we actually going to get to look at. I'm not going to try and read 2500 pages online. Right, which is why we're trying to find ways to summarize materials and focus in on the highlights and the important changes that are in in this project. But we can, we can also follow up with good ways to try to get a handle on it. And again, like I said, the community meetings are a really good way to understand what's in the project and can be done at the commission's leisure. Well, if we're going to have a study session I'd like to have some pages of text that I can actually read I spend my whole day as most people do at a computer and that's asking a lot to read even 80 pages online. You can print them both sides. But we generally have received some with big important countywide projects like this I'd actually like to spend some time studying it. And that's why we're encouraging you to do this but we could, we could attach the EIR project description to the staff report as well. I think that would be most helpful. Okay. Also, I just wanted to say I'm little off topic but it is customary for us to see all the will serve letters as part of staff reports and I, I understand why Judy is so upset so I want to make sure this obviously project we just passed changed hands a time or two but I do think that is important for us all to see. Sorry, this is off topic second. I just want to say congratulations on finishing all this work on the sustainability section and I very much look forward to looking at it closely that's why I want to make sure I can get it in a form where and I can do that for saying oh yeah I'll just read 80 pages tonight online and you know as a planning commissioner with another full time job. It's just not realistic or not let alone 2500 pages. But congratulations it's a month is a huge accomplishment. Yeah, thank you. The team is very happy to have the amendments out in in the public and to be moving forward with adoption so we, we appreciate the commission's support on that. Thank you Stephanie and Commissioner shepherd loud and clear on the the will serve letters. We agree that's an important piece and so we'll be sure to make those available on the future projects. Thank you. And chair that completes the report for this morning. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah and I just want to add I'm, you know, thank you for all the work that goes into the sustainability updates a big deal. Is it is clear is this the like means to meeting the Reno numbers we have zoning essentially in this sustainability update. Yeah, thank you. That's that's a good question. Um, the sustainability update definitely provides the policy and regulatory framework for how we are going to try to meet our arena, which would happen next year in as we update our housing elements housing elements not part of the sustainability update be a whole separate project next year. The sustainability update includes updated regulations and also includes a new residential flex zoning district and that'll be key to allowing properties to to meet our Rena. If the commission wasn't aware the ambag did pass the final Rena methodology after approval by the state and the county, the county's allocation is 4,634 units over eight years. We do have a lot of work to do an additional reasonings as a part of that project next year. The sustainability update however does include an initial start at this with the rezoning of 10 parcels to residential flex to try to get ahead head start on that and provide more housing or a little bit earlier. I have another question for Stephanie. This is something I really wondered when the state gives out these new quotas, looking for example at Scott Valley. The state just gives them out today, does their department take any preliminary work at all in turning what places like Scott Valley can provide in terms of resources for example, water. That's a big issue because I've talked to people at Scott Valley and they have no idea how they have enough water for what that quota has been given to them. They don't think they do other places don't have sewer capacity. Does the state even look at that or do they just declare this is what we'd like to have you do and then it is really up to the local communities, the counties and the cities to decide what they really can do. The state is motivated but there are finite resources here and there seems to be a big disconnect between the state quotas and what's actually accomplishable in terms of you know infrastructure. To give a brief overview of the process, the state hands down a number of units to the COGS, to the Council of Governments, so ambag is the one for our particular region. That number was around 33,000. I think they look for the methodology is complicated. I think they look for places where we need additional housing and this particular cycle was all about providing opportunities for more affordable housing and addressing equity issues. All the COGS got allocations that were much larger than they had previously, and so we think that they do look at some things but then the breakdown and the dissemination of those units among the jurisdictions is developed in the methodology that is developed with the planning directors and ambag and there were a lot of meetings on this. We revised the typical methodology by trying to put more units where we have transit facilities and to take into account something we call the resiliency factor. So if you were a jurisdiction that is subject to a lot of wildfires or sea level rise, that factor was included and an adjustment made in the methodology. Things like water and sewer are also in the methodology but it didn't solve the problem for areas like Scott's Valley or Monterey in particular has moratoriums on issuing water. We'll serve letters so that's defined by the state so it's very, it's not only a little complicated, it's very imperfect and I would say all jurisdictions are going to be struggling to figure out how they can accommodate those units for all of our situations. Well, frankly, that's helpful. In other words, the answer is sort of but not really. So the state looks gets the political poodles of having said yes, we should have told all this much housing, and then the local communities are in the position of saying, well, do we have the water, do we have the roads, can we accommodate that much growth. And so they're always going to be in an awkward position in Scott's Valley. You know, Scott's Valley is a really good example. They just don't have the water. So where are they going to get it, can't make more. Yeah, and there's other imperfections as well. One of the imperfections is a generous and critical way of, of saying what assistant at me that seems just, I was just kind of curious and you've explained it so, you know, don't feel like you have to defend it it just is what it is so you kind of answered my question. I wasn't going to defend it, but I did want to add that the other problem here is actually meeting the renas, which is very is very much out of a local jurisdictions control. So there's only so much we can do because we're not housing developers. So that's, that's the other big issue with it. Yes, I understand you can allocate housing but you can't. It's a position to build it that's got to be private development, but that's a whole nother subject. I just wanted some of these numbers just seem to have been drawn without paying attention to resources at all and I was just wondering what the process is. Thank you for attempting to explain something that does still doesn't make much sense to me. Thanks. When are we going to start meeting and, oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Commissioner Shepherd. That's okay. I'm done with that. Okay, I was just going to say thanks for that update I think today's hearing was a good reminder of like why these community means are so important, a lot of the community has input when it comes to specific projects but you know where they really need to give the input is in these updates and general plan updates and so that we're not making one off decisions on project specifics that are, you know, maybe okay maybe not so I'm really glad that we're doing this and I'm hoping you're getting a good turnout. Yeah, you know it's been, it's been okay. Some have been better than others. It's really helpful that we have the recordings available on on YouTube so we know that people are continuing to access those even though they might have missed the meetings. So technology has really helped us out this time around, which is great. But you know, that's kind of the nature of public involvement is that you might not get really good input until it's a development in somebody's backyard. And that's that's unfortunate but we are giving it our all to do that public outreach for sure. Thank you. Anyone else has any questions we can move on but I appreciate the report. Mr. Machado. Thank you so much. Do we have a report any upcoming meeting dates and agendas and straight. Um, yes, we have currently we know, at least at this point in time that we expect to have meetings on May 25. On June 8 June 22 and July 13. Because we still have time for the June meetings and beyond we may be adding additional meeting dates or items to those dates but it looks like so far. Those ones are ago, as Stephanie mentioned, we're going to be getting into the sustainability update study sessions so we're going to have a busy summer. And I think Renee was getting ready to ask so about bringing the meetings back to the chamber so I might just touch on that which is. We are trying to bring the planning commission meetings back to the chambers in June. However, we've been testing a new hybrid meeting format and we haven't quite gotten it worked out so. I will keep the planning commission updated on the progress we are making. If we aren't able to get the meetings back in the chamber and feel that they will be successful, we will continue with the remote meetings until we've got the glitches worked out. But that is our goal is coming back in June. Thank you for responding to my email inquiry with a poll of planning commissioners. I'm checking in to see if you would like to come back and it sounds like the consensus is planning commissioners would like to come back to the chambers. So looking forward to that, and that is all I have chair. What are we going to be talking about the second meeting in May. What's on the agenda. Um, on the agenda, the second meeting in May. Mike, are you still with us. Yes, I think that's the first sustainability update study session. And it's so far, that's the only item we have on the agenda. Thanks, Mike. Sounds good. Thank you. This summer. I'm looking forward to it. Do we have any update from county council today. Yes, thank you chair. I'd like to let the commissioners know that yesterday the board adopted the wireless regulations that you all work so hard to review and provide very substantive and nice comments to just want to let you know that. And other than that, I have nothing to report. Well, that's, that's it. Thank you everyone. I really appreciate everyone's help and feedback today. Some tricky questions in there and we got through it. So I appreciate that. I'm looking forward to get back in it. And sorry, I'm a little rusty today. We'll get there. With that, we can conclude the hearing and we'll look forward to seeing you guys on the 25th.