 all right chair Cisco staff is ready when you are okay um let's see any other commissioners here all right commissioners if you can please turn on your cameras and get prepared for the meeting okay there we go okay so with that I will call to order tonight's meeting of the city of san joseph and commission and start by reading the statements due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders in dash 25-20 and in dash 29-20 which suspends certain requirements of the brown act and the order of the health officer of the county of sonoma the shelter in place to minimize the spread of COVID-19 the planning commissioners will be conducting today's meeting in a virtual setting using zoom webinar commissioners and staff are participating from remote locations and or practicing appropriate social distancing members of the public may view and listen to the meeting is noted on the city's website and is noted on the agenda members of the public wishing to speak during item four public comment or during our public hearing items will be able to do so by raising their hands and will be given the ability to address the commission so with that I will ask for roll call please thank you chair Cisco let the record reflect that all commissioners are present great with that we'll move on to the approval of our november 2nd 2020 minutes any comments and corrections on those not seeing any then those will stand as printed with that we'll go ahead and move on to public comments which is a time for any member of the public wishing to address the commission on matters of interest to the commission that are not listed tonight as a public hearing may do so if you would like to make a public comment you may use the raise hand fit feature if you're calling in by zoom or if you're calling in by phone hit star nine and you'll be recognized by the host and allowed to unmute and speak for three minutes that I'm going to go ahead and open public comments thank you chair Cisco at this time no one is raising their hands okay so with that I'm going to go ahead and close public comments and bring it back to thank commissioner reports any reports by commissioners tonight okay not seeing any we'll move on to department reports any department reports tonight good afternoon chair Cisco and members of the planning commission we do not have any department reports this evening however I did want to let you know that following this evening's meeting we will be issuing a cancellation of the November 26th planning commission meeting and in doing so we'll bless everyone a happy thanksgiving thank you great thanks um so with that we'll move on to statements of abstention by commissioners any abstentions tonight Mr. Callia I unfortunately need to abstain from item 10.1a due to a financial conflict with the applicant and anyone else yeah I have to abstain from 10.1b due to a possible perceived financial conflict okay great we have no study session tonight nor any consent items so with that we're going to move on to item 10 of public hearings tonight 10.1 is our fall 2020 general plan amendment package it's going to be consisting of three separate items and three separate public hearings all of which are export aid disclosures so we're going to begin with 10.1a and for sure Callia you will need to exit the whatever you call this for the time being thank you okay so with that we'll begin with item 10.1a which is a public hearing for uh 35 75 Mendocino Avenue a general plan amendment we don't even have it now and Amy Nicholson is our presenting planner so that will turn it over to staff oh wait excuse me it is an export aid disclosure and uh so with that Commissioner Carter anything to disclose uh for item 10.1a I have visited the site had a brief conversation with one of the applicants and also saw the item when it came to the waterways committee I have nothing further to disclose Mr. Duggan for item 10.1a I had a Zoom meeting with the applicant's representative um and um have nothing further to disclose and nothing to disclose on B or C okay and Commissioner Okrepki then you only need to do the disclosure for this particular item I'll ask for it separately each time uh I met with representatives for the applicant via Zoom and have visited the site great Mr. Peterson I also met with uh the applicant via Zoom to discuss the projects I didn't learn any new non-public information and I also visited the site. Nice to meet you. I also met with the applicant's representatives via Zoom and visited the site and nothing further to disclose and I also met with the applicant's representative via Zoom visited the site and have no new information to disclose and so with that I will now turn it over to Ms. Nicholson. Good evening Chair Sisko and members of the commission the item before you is part of the fall 2020 general plan amendment package and includes the project of 3575 Mendocino Avenue hold on Amy we are able to your audio cut out if you can start the presentation over can you hear me okay yes we can now okay great good evening Chair Sisko and members of the commission the item before you is part of the fall 2020 general plan amendment package and includes the project at 3575 Mendocino Avenue the project represents up to 14.5 percent of the city's market rate housing goal by 2022 and also 9.8 percent of the very low and low income housing goal the project consists if you can hold off once again um we're seeing your full project if you can go into the slide mode I think the screen that's being shared isn't that um presentation mode what is going on give me just a moment to figure out what's going on with the shared screen no problem thank you are you seeing the full presentation yes thank you so I will walk into the next slide here which includes progress toward the city's housing action plan and the proposal represents up to 14.5 percent of the city's market rate housing goal by the year 2022 and also 9.8 percent of the very low and low income goal the development includes up to 532 multi-family housing units and 162 of those would be dedicated to low and very low income senior households in addition up to 370 market rate housing units would be provided the project also includes a one acre park with public access in addition to necessary improvements for the subdivision including public improvements landscaping throughout the project site and perimeter and also a stormwater outfall into Russell Creek this graphic shows the proposed site plan and also the location of existing bus stop there is the high frequency bus stop on bison tenille lane and the proposed relocation of the bus stop along Mendocino Avenue which is currently shown in magenta but would be moved closer to the senior housing component of the project shown in orange the approval before the planning commission this evening include a recommendation to the council on a sustainable communities environmental assessment also called a ski and this is for sequel compliance the project also includes a general plan amendment to change the land use designation on the site from mobile home park to transit village medium in addition to a zoning map amendment to change the zoning district of the site from rural residential to transit village residential with a senior housing combining district applied to a 2.5 acre portion of the site and also the resilient city combining districts applied throughout the site the project also includes a tentative map which is divided into two phases one would be for the senior housing component and the other for the market rate component design review will also be required for this project the city currently has the design review the middle for the senior housing portion of the project the market rate design review has not yet been submitted the project site is located at 3575 Mendocino Avenue just east of highway 101 and south the Mendocino Avenue over crossing the project site is located within one of the city's priority development areas called the Mendocino Avenue corridor PDA and PDAs are areas where residential growth is envisioned and those are also places where access to high frequency transit is existing this aerial photograph is from February of this year and it shows that the project site is primarily vacant the site was impacted by the Tubbs fire in 2017 and at that time 116 of the mobile homes were destroyed the remaining mobile homes that are shown in this aerial photograph were removed from the project site in July of this year in January of 2020 the city council approved the journey's and mobile home park relocation impact report and following that action and a neighborhood meeting and also concept design review were held for the project following those two pre-application meetings the necessary entitlement applications were submitted to the planning and economic development department and in March a notice of application was distributed to not only surrounding property owners and tenants but also to all former residents of the journey and mobile home park in August the project was reviewed by the waterways advisory committee and in September updated project plans and an updated project description were submitted the public hearing and also the intent to adopt the skiya was distributed both by mail and also by an onsite sign on September 25th and on September 28th the 30-day public review period for the environmental document commenced the project site currently has a general plan land use designation of mobile homes and the proposed development would require a general plan amendment to transit village medium this land use designation allows for between 25 and 40 units per acre on sites within a half mile of high frequency transit the project is consistent with the required density for the proposed land use designation and also meets a number of the city's general plan goals and policies as it relates to providing housing in particular housing for special needs groups it also is consistent with a number of greenhouse gas reduction policies by providing high density housing in close proximity to transit and also near with nearby services the zoning for the project site is rural residential with the resilient city combining districts the resilient city combining districts was formed following the pubs fire to increase the resilience of the area and encourage rebuilding what this combining district does is that allows for a reduced review authority for design review entitlements and so the design review entitlement for the affordable component which the city is currently in receipt of would be reviewed by the director this ordinance has been been amended by the council and so the review process for any additional projects on the site would be subject to the newly adopted ordinance the proposed zoning district for the site is transit village residential retaining that resilient city combining districts and then there's also the senior housing combining district which would be applied to a two and a half acre portion of the site in the southeast corner this is required to allow for the senior housing parking provisions to apply to that particular area which would be rezoned to include that combining district the project has been found to be consistent with with each of the development standards in the tv r zoning district including lot coverage setbacks and lot size however the vehicle parking development standard is not met by the proposed project and the applicant has requested a concession which is allowed under the inclusionary housing ordinance and i'll be speaking more about this later on in the presentation the project complies with the california environmental quality act by providing what is called a sustainable communities environmental assessment or ascia and this was created by senate bill 375 which coordinates land use development and infrastructure investment to help meet california's greenhouse gas emission reduction mandate it does this by integrating land use housing transportation and greenhouse gas reduction and the bill establishes specific concepts such as the sustainable community strategies alternative planning strategies and transit priority projects the benefit of providing a schia for sika compliance is that there is not a need to repeat analysis of any growth inducing effects and greenhouse gas effects from cars or light trucks and there is not a need to include a less dense alternative to reduce those greenhouse gas emissions there is also no need to require analysis of any impacts to regional roadway networks ascia is similar in many ways to a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration except for the following points one is that cumulative effects mitigated in a prior eir such as the sustainable community strategy that was done for this region are not required to be considered cumulatively in addition the point that was just made that there is not a need to repeat that growth inducing effects analysis nor the impact to regional transportation network one way that a schia is more like an eir is that the substantial evidence test applies not be fair argument and then finally because the city does not have a specific procedure in place to adopt a schia the council would need to be the review authority so the planning commission would be making a recommendation on this document much like an eir the i'm sorry in order to qualify for a schia document a project must meet a number of qualifications one is that it's considered a transit priority project and this in this case the project meets that definition it is a residential project it is within a half mile of a high quality transit corridor and provides a minimum of 20 units per acre in addition it has been found to be consistent with the sustainable community strategy with an eir the schia must incorporate all feasible mitigation measures and performance standards or criteria that are located within the eir for the sustainable community strategy and it also must find that all impacts are less than significant the schia drafted for this project was circulated on september 28 through october 27 there were no written comments received from state agencies nor from members of the public there are a number of mitigation measures within the schia and they are shown in the topical areas on the slide i do want to note that there are two modifications two the mitigation measures both are clarifications and i'm going to read through those at the end of this presentation the site plan shown on the screen here um shows that the site would be accessed from two points on mendicino avenue the public street shown on the lower portion of the screen would provide access to the senior housing component located in the southeast corner and also to the central park area the remaining streets throughout the development would be considered private the market rate housing is located in the other parts of the site and again the particular design of that part of the project has not yet been submitted the tentative map before the commission is proposes two phases and eight separate lots the central park that is proposed would be um on there on lot seven and the first phase of the development includes this includes the that senior housing component in addition to the public street the project includes a one acre private park which would have a public access easement over it so while the park would be privately improved and maintained any member of the public would be available or would be able to utilize that park and the park would include um some active recreation space and also some passive recreation space the project also includes um private outdoor space specifically for the residents and you can see on the senior housing components that their their private open space throughout that development the project does comply with the city's requirement that any new residential project contributes to the development of park and recreational facilities throughout either the dedication of land or also the payment of fees this project based on the uh one acre public park uh would receive a 100 credit for the park impact fee for the senior housing components and then also a 45 credit would be provided to the park impact fees for the market rate development the city has an inclusionary housing ordinance which requires that any project contribute to the need for affordable housing within the city this project provides a total of 22 percent of the total unit as affordable and so it does exceed the thresholds required by that ordinance the ordinance itself does allow for affordable housing units to be concentrated in one area of the project site if this is required um due to funding and that is the case uh with this project here based on compliance with the inclusionary housing ordinance the project is entitled to receive one concession a concession can be a development standard and in this case the applicant has requested a vehicle parking reduction they must provide a demonstration that the concession would result in a cost reduction and the applicant has provided that information and that is included as an attachment to your staff report the zoning code section that speaks to concessions states that the city shall grant a concession requested by an applicant unless the city can make a written finding that either the concession does not result in actual cost reduction or that the concession would have a specific adverse impact on public health or safety or the physical environment or any other concession that would be contrary to state or federal law planning staff has found um that the project has demonstrated the cost reduction and that none of these findings can be made in response to a public comment uh early in the planning review process an emergency preparedness plan was submitted by the applicant it is comprehensive and outlines the roles of emergency coordinators and available resources in addition to necessary measures to be taken following a number of emergencies including wildfires extended power outages and gas explosions the plan also includes uh building evacuation plans in addition to shelter in place procedures there have been a number of public comments received throughout the the review of this project and those started with the neighborhood meeting that was held in February some of those comments included support of the low income senior housing component there were suggestions that the parking for both vehicles and bicycle spaces could be further reduced and that the building height could be increased that the remaining mobile homes could be donated and that the applicant could coordinate with Kaiser to encourage housing of medical employees uh the evacuation plan that I previously discussed was requested following the notice of application and following the notice of public hearing there were many comment letters received and passed on to the planning commission um in support of the high density residential project so with that the planning and economic development department is recommending that the planning commission recommend approval to the council of the sustainable community's environmental assessment the general plan amendment rezoning and tentative map and that concludes my presentation I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have and we also have various city staff here as well I also wanted to mention that sand tech which is the environmental consultant who prepared the sea a document is also available for any specific questions thank you commissioners um I'm inclined to have us hold our questions so after the applicant presentation in the public hearing if nobody has some yep I sure we Amy were you gonna um tell us about the revised mitigation measures yeah I will read through those yeah I'd like to hear those if that's okay before we hear the public comment absolutely I have those available okay so the first condition would be it is related to one of the mitigation measures in the sea but it would be a condition added to the tentative map resolution and it would read as follows the cultural resources monitoring plan as identified in mitigation measures cul-2 in the sea shall incorporate all actions agreed upon between the city of santa rosa and great and ranta ria during consultation and just a little bit of background on this the sea a document does include a requirement for our cultural resources monitoring plan and that's the one named in cul-2 however this is necessary just to provide that extra level of detail to ensure that any um anything agreed upon is put into that plan for future uh staff that are going to be reviewing this project and then the second change would be to the skier resolution and this relates to mitigation measure bio three and it takes out the word permanent so i'm going to read uh the condition as proposed so it states following the completion of construction temporary impacts to the perennial stream parentheses wrestle creek shall be restored to return the impacted area to pre-construction conditions including grading and revegetation using a local native seed mix permanent impacts to the perennial stream and emergent wetland shall be mitigated at a one-to-one ratio through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits at a local mitigation bank approved by the north coast regional water quality control board the change to the language there does not in any way change the analysis of the environmental document there was just an extra word that made its way in there that kind of changed the meaning there and so we wanted to make sure that it was very clear um and so that's the reason for that change quick clarifying question okay um is the applicant here wanting to make a presentation yes you're gonna hold on one second sure all right we just gave permission to a caron nasty do you have the ability to mute and unmute yourself great thank you so much i assume you can hear me can excellent thank you um good afternoon chair sisco and members of the commission my name is karen massi i'm the project manager for 35 75 mendicino avenue we are extremely pleased to be here today um this project represents three years of a lot of hard work on the part of the applicant but as well as the city staff um and the entire team we're really excited to be able to bring this project to you and more over to um be able to rehouse folks back on the site it's been a long time and the displaced residents we know would love to be able to return home so if we could go to the next side please thank you um i'd like to go ahead and introduce our project team with us this afternoon is larry florin and silverberg and effron choreo um they are representatives from burbank housing as well as related california and are the affordable housing developer for the project also with us today is ramsey schwaito he is the property owner um and that ramsey's family has owned the property since the 1950s and was responsible for the original construction of the mobile home park we're also joined by our full baby of consultants our architects engineers landscape architects and traffic engineers are with us so they'd be happy to answer any questions for you as we move forward in the process you will note that um a market rate developer is not part of the project at this moment um but after we complete our entitlements the property owner envisions taking the project to market and so hopefully in early 2021 we'll have a market rate developer join the team next slide please i also want to acknowledge our many many community partners that have supported us over the last three years um not only the project and and it moving forward but also the prior residents um you're looking at many of the agencies that had have offered support to this process and this project and as amy mentioned in her staff report um we have received almost 20 letters of support on the project next slide next slide please thank you um so i don't certainly don't want to duplicate what amy said but i do want to share with you some of the site context that we considered as we moved forward with developing our site plan amy mentioned that the site is located on the mendicino avenue corridor priority development area which is an area that is intended for increased residential development and specifically near transit the site does have ample access to transit and alternatives modes of transportation it is located within a half a mile from the bicentennial way transit corridor which is one of the city's highest quality transit corridors with 15 minute headways there are also six bus stops in the vicinity of our project and as well as class two bike lanes and connections to smart with regards to the um built context we are working with a previously developed infill site there's a tremendous amount of existing infrastructure in the area um that can be optimized and better utilized for redevelopment of the site and then we are also um adjacent to Kaiser Permanente hospital which is four to five stories in height and um offers a strong built form for compatibility with our site next slide please the site also offers opportunities for jobs housing synergy within a two mile radius there are six major employers of the site the site has great proximity to neighborhood amenities including a grocery store and obviously the medical survey services that are immediately adjacent to us to the south and then finally the site is located at the intersection of three of the city's identified evacuation routes mendicino avenue highway 101 and the fountain grove parkway and all of these characteristics really make this a key opportunity site for a transit priority project next slide please in addition to looking at the site context we reviewed the city's goals and objectives and found um that the city is really looking to foster compact development patterns and encouraging high density and in particular affordable housing in areas um such as this priority development area the the goal is really to place housing next to transit facilities shopping and employment on major arterials so the you'll see that the master plan aligns well with the goals and objectives of the city's the city also recognizes um that sometimes parking can be an impediment to projects and so there are policies within the general plan that speak to helping to facilitate the development of housing and in particular affordable housing by providing relief to the parking requirements you'll as amy mentioned we are seeking a concession for parking on the project next slide please we really focused our core design principles on the site in three areas the first was transit oriented development obviously we wanted to optimize and maximize the site's location and its proximity to transit we are also proposing to relocate the bus stop on our project frontage and enhance it so it is more user friendly we've also focused on health wellness and sustainability we really wanted to create a neighborhood that was inclusive and um represented diversity both for all ages as well as incomes and so we've also incorporated a number of indoor and outdoor opportunities for recreation and we've prepared a health action plan through the enterprise community foundation that assesses the health needs of seniors and seeks to program and provide support for any health issues that are identified as a result the third design principle that we incorporated into the site plan it was really the idea of resiliency and preparedness we recognize the history as the site as being impacted in the 2017 Tubbs fire and as such it was really important to us that we design a site that adequately addressed access as well as the needs of future residents so we integrated a number of building safety mechanisms including backup power fire resistant landscaping and other mechanisms to ensure that we were designing as safe of the site as possible we've also prepared an emergency response and preparedness plan so that future residents know how to respond in the event of an emergency so that they can adequately evacuate from the site next slide please so Amy presented the master plan earlier i'll just go over this quickly we are proposing up to 532 multifamily units 30 of those affordable units would be for seniors we have developed the site plan around a one-acre central park again back to the key design principle of health and wellness giving folks a place to congregate and socialize and also recreate we have included three points of access the main entry is a full public street and then two private driveways fire code only requires two points of access for the site but we felt that it was extremely important that there was adequate ingress and egress to the site so we went ahead and included the third point of access as amy mentioned we are also requesting a 25 parking reduction that was our original request when we submitted the application to the city and the proposal at that time was to provide 719 parking spaces next slide please as we conducted our public outreach for the process and reached out to our neighbors specifically kaiser they expressed a concern about our request for the parking reduction and asked if we would consider looking at our site plan to see if we could add additional parking spaces back into the site plan so you can see on the site plan on the right hand side the areas shown in tan or orange are areas that we were able to add additional parking back into the site plan and that totals an additional 84 spaces which reduces our parking reduction request down to 16 for 0.2 percent from 25 percent and increases the number of parking spaces that are proposed to 803 and i'm pleased to be able to share that kaiser was very happy that we were able to amend the site plan and add the additional parking and there is a letter of support from kaiser in your in your agenda packet next slide please just wanted to share a little bit of more detail with you about the central park there are areas for passive as well as active recreation and it really is envisioned as a central gathering area for the community to come together and you can see some of the character images on the right hand side to give you a sense of the type of community that we're working to build next slide please so the affordable housing component is located in the southeast corner of the site it is comprised of 162 units it will be divided into three separate buildings and those buildings will be three to four stories in height the units will all be one and two bedroom units since we are working with a senior demographic and and they will be 530 to 800 square feet in size roughly we've included many amenities in the senior facility as you would expect to see both indoor and outdoor multi-purpose rooms health and wellness rooms outdoor courtyards as well as community gardens next slide please this slide gives you a perspective on what the senior affordable housing would look like looking southwest across menacino avenue next slide wanted to share with you some of the affordability component of the project the project will be affordable to lower income seniors almost 75 percent of the units will be affordable to seniors in the extremely low and very low income categories meaning that the rents will be between 587 to $1,209 per month depending upon income and then also whether the unit is a one bedroom or a two bedroom so these units are anticipated to be affordable to seniors earning between $15,000 a year and approximately $51,000 a year so we've really tried to reach the the deepest level of affordability and make sure that we're targeting seniors across the spectrum importantly we are also looking to invite the prior journeys and residents back to the site and we are hoping that they will be interested in returning to the property next slide please the market rate rental housing makes up the remainder of the site it's envisioned to be constructed with up to 370 units it will follow the transit village residential development standards and be constructed with multiple buildings up to three and four stories in height up to a total gross square footage of 510,000 square feet it will include a mix of bedcount so 65 percent is envisioned to be larger units of two and three building two and three bedrooms excuse me and the remainder would be smaller units for singles and couples next slide please the the market rate component will have to come back to the city at a future date for design review approval but we have designed the project in a way so that the market rate and the affordable share common design principles there will be multiple buildings in the market rate components and the buildings are envisioned to have similar articulation include a variety of materials also be oriented onto the street in the central park have parking located to the rear and then obviously connections to open space and transit to support the TOD concept next slide please this is a view from the central starts from the central park looking northwest towards the market rate units to give you a sense of the community next slide please and then finally next steps the process moving forward after we receive our recommendation from the planning commission tonight we'll be moving forward to the city council in early December following that we will be completing director level final final design review with staff concurrently we will be applying for state and federal funds both tax credits as well as community development block grant disaster relief funds actually currently we are underway on our design development and construction documents for the project because we have a construction start date that is required under our funding sources of september 2021 so the affordable component will actually be the first component envisioned to be out of the ground on this project next steps for the market rate component the property owner is will be working to identify a market rate developer and we are optimistic that we will be able to identify that partner in early 2021 so that's I believe oh I should share next slide is fine thank you Amy I should share that we have reviewed the additional condition of approval related to the cultural resources that's Ms. Nicholson shared as well as the revision to the mitigation measure related to the biology and we are in agreement with those recommendations so with that I'm happy to try to answer any questions that you have but we also have our full consultant team here to assist as well thank you thank you Miss Matthew and again commissioners any quick clarifying questions of the applicant before we go to the public hearing okay great not saying any all right so with that this is a public hearing tonight if you're a member of the public wishing to speak on this item you can raise your hand through zoom or if you're calling in by phone hit star nine and you'll be recognized by the host and allowed to speak for three minutes there'll be a little timer on the screen for you follow to know when your time is coming to an end with that I'll go ahead and open the public hearing thank you chair cisco we have a few hands raised so I'm going to go in the order that I see them okay and the first one it's listed as one name terry shore there's one word excuse me so terry shore you have the ability to mute none of yourself thank you thank you very much uh good evening uh terra crepe key and planning commissioners staff and member of the public members of the public my name is terry shore I am the advocacy director for greenbelt alliance um greenbelt alliance um endorsed and support the project before you this evening we put the project through our public policy committee which consists of a number of planning professionals and architects and others and we're able to ask questions of miss massie um and berbeck housing so they were very pleased overall with the project um we also a very uh appreciate the fact that um berbeck housing did reach out to greenbelt alliance early on in the project we realized it was a controversial project in a very high profile location at journey's end that was impacted with the fires though there are many many um issues and concerns um that had to be worked out though we do really appreciate all the work that berbeck housing is done with the community as well as the city of san rosa our elected officials and the planning commission to move this project forward so thank you very much on greenbelt alliance um endorses and is in support great thank you thank you and next we have a phone caller um with the last four digits of five three three nine so if you can please state your name for the record and i've given you permission to speak you may have to press star six to do so yes we can thank you okay this is linda adrian um i'm a former resident of journey's end um and i get emotional about it but anyone who knows he knows as the way i am anyway i lost my home i definitely want to move back there i think it's a fantastic and convenient location the freeway entrance is just down there the kaiser's next door trader joe's is across the freeway safely is down the street gas station is down the street it's a really handy handy location um easy access fountain grows over the hill and it's a really good location for seniors especially i am a senior and and i really encourage you to accept this and okay and so they can get on and um and get it built um i don't know quite what else to say other than i think it's it's there's a lot of people that can live there and i think many of the past residents might consider moving back because it is a good location and it's it's like a um everything is included in the property so there isn't a dozen for seniors that's really handy and convenient because you don't have to try and find places to go i think the new layout that's been presented is perfect and will be and work really well with it anyway please approve it i appreciate i appreciate having been able to speak about this thank you so much thank you the next on the list is ananda suite i'll give you permission to speak and you can start when ready great good afternoon chair cisco and commissioners my name's ananda suite i'm with the santa rosa metro chamber of commerce and i'm here to express the metro chamber support of the redevelopment project at 35 75 mendicino avenue as you well know santa rosa was facing a housing shortage before october of 2017 when our crisis was magnified overnight including the loss of journeys and mobile home park the proposed redevelopment of this site aligns with the city of santa rosa's fire recovery goals and this project represents the exact type of investment that we need in santa rosa while addressing our critical housing shortage santa rosa's housing shortage is the greatest threat to our long term economic and cultural success it's impeding business growth and causing economic community health and environmental damage as our residents struggle to access adequate housing were forced to commute long distances the result is increased air pollution and traffic congestion growing inequity and reduced productivity housing is one of the largest challenges for local employers who need to recruit and retain employees in order to stay and grow in santa rosa the development of both affordable and market rate housing is vital to address these challenges and an increase in housing near transit retail and major employers will bring tremendous returns to santa rosa placing high density housing at this location is exactly the type of development we need in our community and we urge you to support this project thank you thank you next we will have a luke lindenbush and luke you can unmute when you're ready thank you very much commissioners my name is luke lindenbush with generation housing i'm calling in tonight to express generation housing strong support for 35 75 menisino avenue and i want to start with a personal note my grandmother moved from missouri to santa rosa after the death of her husband earlier than she had expected when she was 55 years old she yearned to be close to my parents but found limited housing opportunities that she could afford here in sonoma county my grandmother lived the last 15 years of her life in an affordable mobile home in santa rosa just like those that once stood at journey's end without this opportunity the end of her life journey would have looked very different i would not have grown up knowing my grandmother and she likely would have died alone thousands of miles away from family but she didn't and that is the power of affordable senior housing in keeping families together and it's largely why i'm a housing advocate here in sonoma county today the loss of journey's end was among the greatest tragedies of the tubs fire yet i was hopeful that a great greater opportunity for elder santa rosans to live with safety and dignity would arise from these ashes 35 75 menisino will accomplish exactly that the project under consideration this evening will allow this site to be reborn with more affordable homes for seniors than stood before with greater amenities and the access to medical facilities and public transit that render the site viable and desirable for senior housing moving forward the residents of 370 new market rate homes will benefit from a central location in one of the largest job clusters in sonoma county ambitious projects like this one embody the spirit of generation housing they allow our community to live intergenerationally and increase the supply affordability and diversity of housing options in santa rosa and sonoma county as a whole thank you very much to the applicant team burbank housing and related california and senior planner amy amy nicolson for thorough work on this very important proposal generation housing enthusiastically represents the approval of 35 75 menisino avenue thank you all right thank you and with that chair says no one else is raising their hands at this time okay so with that i will go ahead and close our public hearing and i didn't hear three questions that the applicant needs to answer for the public um missing any questions for the applicant and then we'll move to questions i just wanted to see if the applicant could explain a little bit more about about the parking reduction the change to the parking reduction why it went from 25 to 16.8 percent so what what the reasoning at least on on the part of kaiser was um we're happy to respond to that question um in a little bit more detail so the concern about the parking reduction uh really came up when we um approached kaiser with the proposal for the project we shared the site plan with them and at that time they conveyed to us um that they have some parking challenges on their site and they work um hard to monitor their parking and make sure that their patients have adequate access to parking so that they can get to the services that they need so they were concerned specifically that a parking reduction on the 35 75 mendicino site uh could result in our residents utilizing their parking facilities and then walking back to the project site so that was really kind of the genesis of the conversation and which led us to go back to the site plan and see if there was an opportunity to add any additional parking into the plan um we obviously recognize that we're going to be neighbors for a very long time and we want to make sure that we have a good relationship and that there are no concerns going forward so we were happy to look at the site plan and and please that we were able to achieve so many more spaces thank you miss nancy or her team okay oh misha carter oh yeah this and this may require some input from staff because it's related to the cpa document so um one of the impacts uh the air quality the air to mitigation measure primarily reduces the potential impact the tack risk areas the exposure of residents to possible air quality lower air quality um it it lists a number of of measures included in the mitigation measure primarily maintenance of a good hvac system in in the housing but there's also a list of um uh pollution reducing uh plants that could be used along the edge of the site uh or close to the generating uh the air quality generation um areas specifically the freeway and i'm wondering if there was any consideration i i realized that the measures listed in the mitigation measures don't have to all be incorporated but i don't see any of those plants in the landscape plan and i was wondering if there was ever any consideration of incorporating those landscape elements to that mitigation measure thank you commissioner carter that's a great question um the landscape pellet that is shown on the landscape plan is preliminary in nature so um we this question also came up at the creeks and waterway committee as to whether or not it was final um and so we are happy to take a look at that palette and see if there are other species that more closely align with the goals that you're um looking to achieve and the follow-up question the design review will be a director's review is or is that correct yes this is amy neccleton matter correct for the affordable component okay thank you any other questions of the applicant before we move to questions of staff okay not seeing any um any questions of staff vice chair weeks amy you mentioned that um there's no policy for um approval for the see a document so therefore it has to go to council is there go since this is a relatively new type of document is there an idea that there would be some policy where uh it wouldn't end up having to go to council from my understanding and i'll let maybe bill or ashley elaborate on this too that is something that is allowed under the law so long as our city code is updated to reflect that process and i'm not sure if bill or ashley want to add anything to that good evening chairs and bill members of the commission this is bill rose vice chair weeks would you find repeating that question for me amy mentioned that um because there is not because the city does not have a policy regarding the see a document approval of the see a document that it would need to go to council so we're recommending approval to council maybe i heard it wrong what she said is there a there's approval of the see a document will it always have to go to council you know i'm not sure on that exactly so that's okay it was just that i can find out of my mind is i think i think ashley might be able to answer that for us though thank you i can chime in a bit vice chair weeks um it is true as miss nicklson uh stated in the public resources code sections addressing these sustainable um communities environmental assessments it does require that um in order for the lead agency to approve to approve that document the public hearing must be conducted by its legislative body unless the city has a local ordinance allowing a different process for approval by the planning commission with a direct appeal to the council so um that's the statutory construct that we're working within and then to your question could we change that in the future yes we could amend our codes to allow for that approval process by the planning commission and it may be something that we indeed would like to consider and approve as we start seeing more of these documents anybody else raise their hand for uh commissioner dug in yeah i have a question for miss nicklson so i i know that we only have the affordable housing component is the applicant here and um they have not identified a market rate developer yet but we've got a lot of particulars that are being described for the market rate component and i'm wondering what um changes could a future market rate developer um want to want to make to these um details that would trigger additional review like if they wanted to propose fewer um housing units or fewer parking spaces or the location or the type the size of the layout of the central park element like what exactly would trigger additional review and who would that be done by would it come back to us um for the market rate component or would it go um director level or how would that happen the design details including the location of the buildings and the number of parking spaces um would be considered as a part of the design review approval for the market rate component um if anything that ties back to the tentative map for example like the the layout of the lots um and that also includes the park um that may um if there's a a change there um require review uh before the commission um once again but many of the details proposed are within the design review realm and so those would be um acted on during during that entitlement process any other questions the staff mr carter yeah the staff report uh characterized uh the dispersion and concurrency requirements of the inclusionary housing ordinance as being waived for this project it showed up on the con on the uh concessions slide for the presentation could we just get a little clarification as to whether or not that's a concession that the findings need to be made for or it's a director level waiver or it and in the presentation today it said the ordinance allows for it so I just like a little clarification on what mechanism allows that um that change it looks like the concurrency is not going to be a problem if the the affordable component leads but the dispersion requirements obviously can't be met let me I'm searching for the do you want me to address that with your code section here sure Ashley thank you I'm looking at uh code section 2102 100 and it speaks to the allocated unit shall be distributed throughout the residential project however and I think this is your question here commissioner is that exceptions may be granted by the director of planning and economic development um where the dispersion is constrained by financing which I think miss nickle said spoke to earlier and I don't want to step on her toes so if she's ready and wants to chime in some more unless they answered your question well I think it did I was just curious about whether it was a formal action by the director to grant that waiver but there's no it it didn't seem as formal as the parking concession to me that's and I wanted some clarification I think you answered the question thank you any other questions of staff any other questions of the applicants before we go to our decision okay great um um so we'll bring it to the commission um for discussion we have four resolutions um the first one being of the resolution regarding the fiat document and if you wouldn't mind um yes nickle said if you would read again what we should be uh changing to that resolution so that never brave enough to tackle reading resolution can just refer to you as your word yes um okay so the added condition which would change the bio three mitigation measure reads us follows following the completion of construction temporary impacts to the perennial stream parentheses wrestle creek shall be restored to return the impacted area to pre-construction conditions including grading and revegetation using a local native seed mix permanent impacts to the perennial stream and emergent wetland shall be mitigated at a one-to-one ratio through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits at a local mitigation bank by north coast regional water quality control board i may have forgotten the word approved so the last sentence or last part should read mitigation credits at a local mitigation bank approved by north coast regional water quality control board great thank you um so uh commissioners let's begin by uh reading the the um um resolution first and uh we'll go ahead and discuss the project generally but uh once we read that resolution for discussion make sure that in your discussion of the project generally you indicate whether you can find the fiat document adequate or not and make those findings so would somebody like to move that first resolution mr. duggin i will move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of san aroza making findings and recommending to the city council approval approval of the sustainable community's environmental assessment schia and mitigation monitoring and reporting program pursuant to the california environmental quality act for the 35 75 mendicino avenue file number prj20-002 uh and incorporate adding the condition to the revised bio three mitigation measure as um read up by planner nicolson and waive for the reading right thank you and the second second okay so that was moved by commissioner duggin second is by commissioner carter and um by sure week would you like to start the discussion on this sure um well first of all i make all the findings for this um for this resolution and for the fiat document uh i think the project as a whole is really good i don't really good it's not a very good i'm not very articulate um for that site uh it will it's it's as um miss adrian said that there it's near transportation it's near um you know stores uh it's near kaiser uh other services um i think it will be an asset for the community and uh it will i think in many ways help us heal uh so i am uh supportive of this doc of this project and can make all the findings for the fiat document um which i must say was it was it was interesting it was an interesting document for versus sequozo um that's my comment um yeah i agree with uh vice chair weeks that this is a very fitting project for this location um the the sheer number of units of 532 is great especially with 162 um low to very low income units and i'm pleased to hear that unlike some other ones we've seen come for us before that we'll be able to get some of those affordable units built before the market rate units um plus the public improvements are great and um the design of it i i i think is good and um as as vice chair weeks touched on this is important for our community to rebuild this site um and it's extremely important to the survivors of that location and the areas around it to get that burn scar taken care of and and rebuild um to help everybody uh uh not get over but move past um as as well as we can uh what happened in 2017 so um with the added condition in the sea of documents um i'm okay with those and i can make all the required findings to uh vote in favor of the project um i i do am in support of the project as articulated by my fellow commissioners and i can make all the findings necessary for the CEQA document uh including the revised mitigation measures i'll be supporting the project Mr Peterson uh you know i also i think it's a it's a great project um i i think that it's been a very thoughtful design i think the process has has been great i think the applicant has really i think taken the steps to get the buy and get the endorsements of a lot of um the local organizations and i think that speaks to the quality of both the the applicant and the team and the design itself um on the specific issue of the uh i don't know if i should call it CEQA or SCIA or both documents you know i i can make all the required findings um you know a little nitpicky on the parking reduction i understand kaiser's position i think that the applicant had a strong case to keep the full 25 percent they've negotiated in good faith a reduction to the reduction so i i'm not going to second guess that but you know ideally especially with a forward-looking community like this uh we're not looking backwards with you know things like parking and making everything very car-oriented um but overall you know that's definitely not enough to uh affect the my uh for the overall project and i can make all the required findings i can also make all the required findings for the SCIA document um including the revision or the additional null um the changes to bio three um i think it's a super exciting project i think it's going to be a very nice addition to that corner i'd love that they're going to prioritize um the senior units for anybody who wants to return who lived at journey's end i think that's a wonderful um asset to the community um let's see i can support the parking reduction i can also see i know from being a kaiser member and what their parking is like on their site i can understand that they don't want to have um additional parking problems with people who don't aren't visiting doctors they're um parking on their site uh so yeah i'm in support of the project i also can make all of the findings for the SCIA document uh with the the modifications added this is just such an important project um i get emotional remembering this adrian's testimony i mean this really is the project that um it's been such a visible part of stan rhoda not that we would ever forget the 2017 fires and the state of copy park and everywhere else that was burned but you know a lot of us are driving by that every day and that it is a burn scar and it is such a such an intense reminder of so many losses throughout the city and to see this come forward um it's a project that it not only heals our past and um hopefully uh let's say the former residents have the opportunity to return to the place that they love but it really propels us into our future of what we are asking for in our policy for utilizing infrastructure and high density housing where there is transit available so i just really see it as the something that's such an important project on so many levels and i'm definitely in favor of that so with that i'm going to have the uh reporting secretary to take our votes thank you chair sisco as usual i'll go in alphabetical order starting with commissioner carter hi commissioner dougan hi and with commissioner kelly abstaining we're going to commissioner creppy hi commissioner peterson hi vice chair weeks hi and chair sisco hi and uh so with that the uh spear resolution passes with six eyes commissioner calia abstaining next we move to our uh general plan amendment resolution and so if somebody likes to read that i'll move for resolution of the planning commission of the city of san aroza recommending to the city council approval of a general plan amendment from mobile home park to transit village medium for the property at 35 75 mendicino avenue assessors parcel numbers 173-030-001 and 173-030-002 file numbers prj 20-002 and gpam 20-001 and wait for the reading okay my student okay so that was moved by commissioner dougan seconded by vice chair weeks any other comments on the general plan amendment not seeing any okay then i will ask the reporting secretary to take our votes thank you commissioner carter hi commissioner dougan hi commissioner calia abstained commissioner creppy hi commissioner peterson hi vice chair weeks hi chair sisco and i'm you know i also so that passes with six eyes commissioner calia abstaining and next we move on to our rezoning resolution so if somebody likes to read that i'm really on it today thank you i'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of san aroza recommending to the city council rezoning of the property located at 35 75 mendicino avenue assessors parcel numbers 173-030-001 to the transit village residential resilient city tv r-rc and transit village residential senior housing resilient city tv r-sh-rc districts file numbers prj 20-002 and rez 20-002 and wait for the reading and a second all second okay so that was moved by commissioner dougan seconded by commissioner carter any other comments on the rezoning not seeing any so i'll ask the reporting secretary to take our votes thank you chair carter i'm sorry commissioner i'm not the chair hi there's a lot of chairs tonight commissioner carter i commissioner dougan hi commissioner calia abstain commissioner o creppy hi commissioner peterson hi vice chair weeks hi and chair cisco hi and that also passes with six eyes uh commissioner calia abstaining and then before we do our tentative map resolution um if you're still out there miss nippleson i would like you to uh read into the record the change that you wanted to add to that resolution yes the condition would read the cultural resources monitoring plan as identified as the ul2 in the skiya shall incorporate all actions agreed upon between the city of santa rosa and great and rancheria during consultation thank you so would somebody like to read that resolution i'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa recommending to the city council approval of the 35 75 mendicino avenue project tentative map located at 35 75 mendicino avenue assessor's parcel numbers 173-030-001 and 173-030-002 file numbers prj two zero dash zero zero two and maj two zero dash zero zero one with the language as read by miss nippleson and wait for the reading great and a second okay commissioner creppy so that was moved by commissioner dougan seconded by commissioner creppy and reporting secretary can take our commissioner carter yes commissioner denin hi commissioner calia abstain commissioner creppy hi commissioner peterson hi vice chair weeks hi chair sisco hi and so that also passes with six eyes uh commissioner calia abstaining and yeah i believe that concludes that item and yeah that concludes our that was all so that did pass with six eyes and commissioner calia abstaining so um would you like to take a five minute break before yeah okay because uh commissioner creppy needs to exit and um commissioner calia needs to re-enter as to for the abstention so how about if we return at about 5 30 and be prepared to start again so i did visit the site and have nothing further to report mr dougan i have no information to disclose and um i also visited the site uh met with uh the applicant and uh the representative i assume and have no new information to disclose so with that uh we will move on to cv murray who will be presenting staff report chair sisco this is uh on staff liaison and susie murray is being promoted to a panelist to be able to provide her presentation it'll be just a moment okay great we're all learning a lot of patience in this type of mode there she is oopsie okay bear with me i need to share my screen here can y'all see it yes okay part two of the fall 2020 general plan amendment package is the yolanda industrial project having problems advancing my slides as well here we go here we go the yolanda industrial project proposes uh general plan land use amendment and zoning amendments for six parcels um and there are seven parcels actually involved in the um the project so uh the the rezoning and general plan land use amendments will allow cannabis related uses as well as other light industrial uses for six parcels that don't already have that light industrial zoning the first the planning commission is being asked to um make three recommendations to the city council the first one is for a mitigated negative declaration the mitigated negative declaration has an expanded scope and that's where the seven parcels comes in it involves i'll i'll talk a little bit more about that when i get further into my slide because i've got some um a graphic that supports it then as far as the general plan amendment is concerned it proposes uh changing the designation for retail and business services and medium high density residential to light industry there are currently six six or five of the six parcels have retail and business services land use designation and the sixth is medium high density residential so all of the the six parcels involved in that have zoning that is consistent with their respective general plan land use designations now um so there are six parcels that will go from the general commercial zoning district and i'm sorry five from the general commercial zoning district and one from the multifamily residential zoning district and um will be uh shifted into the light industrial zoning district so this slide is one that you normally see when we are proposing housing and in this case we are not proposing housing but what it shows us is um our regional housing needs allocation or our arena numbers um the the the project proposes changing one of the um for one of the parcels involved is a half acre uh property and it's it is currently has that medium high density residential land use designation it's got the potential with its uh current zoning to um develop six residential units um the general plan provides a table that um calculates how the city will meet those those rena requirements this parcel was not included in that table and i wanted to highlight that for you this here's an aerial view of the project site um the the project site is um highlighted in yellow um i also wanted to include the parcel numbers just to clarify because there's some pretty interesting addressing going on on the in this stretch of yolanda road or yolanda avenue there is a lot of project history um for these seven parcels i've highlighted in yellow the ones that really pertain to the general plan amendment and the rezoning before you this evening so back in september of 2018 um the applicant had um pre application meeting with staff to kind of look at the general plan uh amendment and the rezoning and the scope of the project four days later a general plan application was submitted to planning and economic development the following january the companion rezoning application was submitted and then um following august august 2019 a neighborhood meeting was held um to to introduce the the concept to neighbors in this slide i put side by side the current general plan land use designations and zoning um it's also uh i'd also like to mention that the this project is within the santa rosa avenue priority development area but um on the the the colorful image the general plan land use designation what you can see is up in the right upper right hand corner the northeast corner of the development site which is outlined in black is the gray that light gray color that is the light industry um general plan land use designation and that parcel is involved um involved in this project even though it's not involved in the rezoning and the general plan amendment so the project has been found in compliance with the california environmental quality act um an initial study was conducted which resulted in a mitigated negative declaration and that document was circulated for a 30 day public review period um beginning on june 30th this year part of that document um includes a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and addresses um effects that could potentially be significant in air quality culture and tribal cultural and tribal resources geology and soils greenhouse gas emissions hazard hazardous materials and noise um all of the mitigation measures established in that document would reduce um any potential impacts to a level less than significant so the mitigation the mitigating negative declaration does have a broader scope uh beyond the general plan um amendment and the rezoning it also includes redevelopment of the of the buildings fronting the uh yolanda avenue um as shown in this graphic on the on the top or the north side is where yolanda avenue is and the new construction though the the proposal was to demolish and reconstruct two new commercial buildings along the you'll be able to see from yolanda the existing businesses and the commercial buildings that are on the back side of or the south side of the development area there are no changes proposed in either use or um uh the actual buildings late in the game when we had a couple issues come up related to to the project site um the first one was the the senate bill 330 or the housing crisis act of 2019 and what that does is it tells um agencies that they can't rezone properties or uh change the general plan land use designation on properties that are designated for housing development into other uses commercial or industrial or or yeah other uses and um and this this parcel would um so we have that one parcel that's currently got medium high residential density land use designation and again it has the potential to develop six units but that parcel is also landlocked which i'm i'm relatively sure is why it wasn't included in that those rena calculations that i mentioned earlier but um the senate bill 330 also says that if you have an offset as part of one of one general plan amendment or um concurrent review of general plan amendments that you can change that that property from residential uses to other other targeted uses so this project is offset not just by the one you just heard about 35 uh 75 mendicino avenue but also by um several thousand uh new units created by the downtown station area specific plan there was also recently a stop work order um uh issued from our code enforcement department for some work being done without benefit of permits the zoning code doesn't allow us to go forward with any um uh entitlement review um unless it's to address those code enforcement issues um since then since that happened and since the staff report was written a building permit has been submitted to correct the the outstanding violations so we're we're good to go there um all public comments or i'd say no public comments were received uh to date um for this project there was a small noticing defect the onsite sign was posted two days late it needed to be up by november 2nd and it didn't go up to no till november 4th this and i would like to say that i'll take full credit for that um and the hustle and bustle of getting things out we had the graphics made and i neglected to send it to the applicant this fortunately the zoning code does allow the review authority to act with minor noticing defects so with that it is recommended by the planning and economic development department but the planning commission adopts three resolutions for the landa industrial project recommending the council adoption of a mitigated negative declaration approval of a general plan amendment and approval of a rezoning and that concludes my presentation i know that the uh applicant has a brief presentation that they would like to meet make and i'm available for questions if you have any okay thanks mary um commissioners any questions of uh miss murray right now as i can get us back to the panel and can see you planner murray if you can stop sharing your screen please great here we are um any terrifying questions of staff right now before we move on to the applicant presentation okay all right what our applicant like to give us his presentation give me one second while i load that up oh no i do never mind i'm the challenged one in the department as far as technology goes so i think that this is up and running now share screen can y'all see that okay and you did it um and i i don't know if as uh has alan been elevated in yes all the all the applicants have the ability to mute and unmute themselves okay uh yeah can you hear me okay yes yeah hi chair cisco and members of the uh commission my name is alan henderson i'm the applicant and the owner of this industrial park i've purchased it 20 years ago i'm a local resident and i wanted to um bring this park into a little bit better light since it's been a little dilapidated the building on the left is a mall fireplace building the buildings to the back of this photo all have small industrial tenants already there furniture rv specialists a mall fireplace and so i wanted to get the entire business park under one zoning um classification um to allow more um options when people wanted to become tenants of the park and at the same time fix up the building in the front which is that little house in the lower part of the building and then the building to the left which is an old dilapidated building built 1970 uh housing mall fireplaces so if you could go to the next side please so this is how the parcels look and now we're looking backwards yolanda avenue is up at the top of the screen and uh those the other three metal buildings are down at the bottom and to the right is a small parking lot which is the half acre residential lot that borders the two an apartment complex to the right and so mall fireplaces up on the upper right and at the top of the screen is the little building that i wish to take down and bring and make a retail building out of that that's a little more upscale and brings a little better um design and and influence to the lower end of yolanda avenue uh next screen please so this is that front area this is a little um used car lot in the that houses uh that's housed in the uh little building and then mall fireplaces there to the to the far left uh behind it so that's an aerial view go ahead next one and this is kind of a ground view so you can see that you know it's it really doesn't show a lot a lot of used cars it's just not a really good use especially with across the street when they're going to have the residential community being built there so i'm looking to tear down this building put in an ice retail also tear down the long fireplace building and put in a multi-tenant building back there of which it will look like this next slide so that's what i'm proposing for yolanda avenue so i think it'll have a big impact on uh as you turn the corner off of santa rosa avenue it'll show some uh integrity and and really fix that that property the back buildings will remain the same and so i would like to petition to the commission to um allow me to change it to light industrial from the current conditions of general commercial and that's it great thank you mr. Henderson and again when it returns to the commission panel any questions of the applicant right now before we go to the public hearing not seeing any okay um this is another public hearing tonight if you're a member of the public what wishing to speak on this item and you're observing by zoom you can hit the raise hand fist feature if you're calling in by phone you need to hit star nine and you will be recognized by the host and given three minutes to speak so with that go ahead and open the public hearing sure sisco at this time no one is raising their hands okay i'll give it about another 10 seconds or so and still nobody that is correct no one is raising their hands at this time okay great then i'm going to go ahead and close that public hearing and i'll bring it back to the commission commissioners any questions of the applicant or staff by chair week question of mrs. Murray uh because of the noticing defect is there any language that we need to if we decide to go forward is there any language that we need to put in any of the resolutions i'm gonna say no because we've never done that before questions yep who should follow it's also a question for susie it's more of a general question as well i guess um how long are essentially neighborhood meetings valid for because i was like in the project history the neighborhood meeting was in august of 2019 not just wondering for my own curiosity how long how long does it take or when would trigger another neighborhood meeting i don't know that the zoning code actually tells us what how long they're good for but if the project changes significantly we would certainly have another meeting um this in this case there was an awful lot of interest in the project so okay and then just another clarifying question with the rezone from general commercial light to light industrial will all the existing businesses be like continue to be legal or were they earlier any that would be potentially like legal non-conforming well first if there were a business that we're operating legally now and we changed the general plan land use designation and the rezoning they would be grandfathered and is legal non-conforming uses but i think that um in i think that most of the uses that are out there there are out there now are almost more appropriate for the light industrial zoning district they've been there for a very long time but there is some manufacturing and auto repair and and things like that that or rv i guess but um that are really more appropriate for the light industry and light industrial um land use zoning districts great thank you any other question mr carter yeah i noticed that the um the medium high residential property to the southeast uh has built fairly close to the property line can you tell me miss murray if there's anything specific in the light industrial zoning or the cannabis code to address setbacks from light industrial structures or operations to residential structures so some of the protections that we have actually in the city code are you know things like the noise ordinance and and whatnot that would protect those residential uses from the impacts or noise impacts from um commercial commercial or light industrial uses um that that particular property that's at 368 yolanda and they are they're proposing a long narrow um light industrial building but um but that building will not be home to any cannabis uses the cannabis uses are proposed at that building that fronts yolanda avenue and um that's at 358 not 368 so um there are protections um any new construction this project by the way has um there are two design review applications that are currently under review those those those applications were considered in the scope of the the mitigating negative declaration and those will be scheduled one before the zoning administrator because it's less than 10 000 square feet and the other um at the uh before the design review board because it's significantly larger than 10 000 square feet um as part of those hearings we will look at you know the those review bodies will look at the setbacks and what have you um I also there was a a slide and I believe in the plans um uh uh a proposed site plan that might help um understand help you understand the the um circulation of the site um I can if I can figure out how to bring my slideshow back up I could probably put that up on the screen if that would help yeah I mean I trust our design review processes I was just curious as to whether there was a specific side yard setback for light industrial to a budding residential and if we don't know that off the top of our heads it's it's fine it's it's more than it's determined through that design review process and that's what that board will look at and it's a really good question because it's it's always kind of a conundrum how you make that transition but they they've done it before there are questions of staff or the applicant okay um so for this item we have three resolutions and uh beginning with the uh the adoption of the mitigated negative declaration um so again when we begin with that resolution we'll go ahead and discuss the uh the project generally but if you'll also speak to finding the uh adequacy of the mitigated uh negative declaration so would somebody like to read that first resolution I share weeks I give Commissioner Deggan a break thanks okay I move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa recommending to council adoption of a mitigated negative declaration and mitigate mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Alanda industrial project located at zero 324 324 is listed twice just to clarify that's why I included the uh assessor's parcel numbers there are two buildings that have 324 and the zero is the the um undeveloped site that has the residential designation thank you so uh located at zero three twenty four three twenty four three twenty eight slash three forty three thirty three fifty slash three fifty eight and three sixty eight Yolanda Avenue also identified as the assessor's parcel numbers zero four four dash zero eight one dash zero two nine zero four four dash zero eight one dash zero two four zero four four dash zero seven two dash zero zero six zero four four dash zero seven two dash zero zero seven zero four four dash zero seven two dash zero zero eight zero four four dash zero seven two dash zero zero nine and zero four four dash three nine oh dash oh six one file number p r j one nine dash zero zero two Wait for the reading. And I'll second it. Good choice. OK, so the MMD was moved by Vice Chair Weeks, seconded by Commissioner Deggan. Commissioner Deggan, would you like to start? Sure. And I'll thank Vice Chair Weeks for reading all those numbers. I can make all the findings for the mitigated negative declaration. And I'm in support of the project. I think it makes sense to rezone and reclassify these in the general plan and make it all a cohesive site. And I think it looks like a nice attractive use of this parcel or these parcels. And I'm in support of the project. Mr. Collier. I can also make the required findings for the mitigated negative declaration. And I will also be supporting the project. I agree with Commissioner Deggan that it makes more sense to have these re-zoned all in the light industrial. And I look forward to seeing the site developed. Mr. Carter. Yes, I can make the required findings for the mitigated negative declaration. And I, like my fellow commissioners, support the rezoning in general plan amendments to bring a little unity to the property and provide the flexibility and certainty of development that those changes will make. Great. Mr. Pearson. I can also make all the required findings. I echo my fellow commissioners. And I also just note that I do find that this is a minor noticing defect. It's not enough for me to have to redo the project and re-notice. So just a minor one, I'm OK with proceeding. Vice Chair Weis. I also can support the project and make all the required findings. I do think, as Commissioner Deggan indicated, the zoning is more appropriate. And as Commissioner Peterson indicated, the two-day noticing defect to me is not so crucial as to not act on this item. I also can make the required findings for the adequacy of the MND. And I think this is a really nice project. I think it's good, especially as we start to move forward with another general plan update to kind of catch these places that are landlocked, that nothing will ever happen as far as housing. So I think this is a good amendment to make it light industrial and to fit in with that area better. And I think it's been handled as far as what the law suggests in terms of moving the housing over to with the concurrent general plan amendment for 3575 Mendocino. So with that, I'm also in favor of the project. And I'll ask the reporting secretary to take our votes. Thank you, Chair Sisco. Same thing, alphabetical order ending with Vice Chair and Chair, starting with Commissioner Carter. Aye. Commissioner Duggan. Aye. Commissioner Calia. Aye. Commissioner O'Crepkey abstained. So moving on to Commissioner Peterson. Vice Chair Weeks. Aye. Chair Sisco. Aye. And so that passes with six ayes. Commissioner O'Crepkey abstaining with that resolution having been moved by Vice Chair Weeks and seconded by Commissioner Duggan. So next we move on to our general plan resolution if somebody liked to read that. Oh, wow, you're brave to move. Commissioner Duggan. I'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa, recommending to the city council approval of a general plan amendment for five parcels at 324-324-328-340-330-358-358-350-358 Yolanda Avenue. Assessors, parcel numbers 044-081-029-044-081-024-044-072-006 044-072-007 and 044-072-008 for retail and business services to light industry. And for one parcel at zero Yolanda Avenue, assessors, parcel number 044-0-390-061 from medium high density residential to light industry for the Yolanda Industrial Project, file number PRJ19-002 and wait for the reading. Yeah, second. I'll second. Right. So that general plan amendment resolution was read by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner Peterson. Any other comments on that? Okay, not seeing any. Mr. Maloney to take our vote. Commissioner Carter. Aye. Commissioner Duggan. Aye. Commissioner Collier. Aye. Commissioner Kepke of Staining, Commissioner Peterson. Aye. House Chair Weeks. Aye. Chair Siscoe. Aye. And so the general plan resolution passes with six eyes, Commissioner Kepke of Staining and again was moved by Commissioner Duggan seconded by Commissioner Peterson. And we have one more, the rezoning resolution. So let's share the wealth here. Okay, Vice Chair Weeks. So I saw Commissioner Collier put his hand up too. He can handle it. I'll do it. I'll do it. But watch, my dog is about to start parking all of a sudden. I bet you. I'll move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of St. Lawrence recommending to the city council rezoning of the properties located at three, two, four, three, two, four, three, two, eight dash three, four, zero, three, three, zero, three, five, zero dash three, five, eight Yolanda Avenue also identified as assessors, persons numbers 044-081-029-044-081-024, 044-072-006, 044-072-007, and 044-072-008 from the CG general commercial zoning district to the IL light industrial zoning district. And the property located at zero Yolanda Avenue also identified as assessors, persons number 044-390-061 from the R315 multifamily residential zoning district to the IL light industrial zoning district file number PRJ19-002 and way further reading. Yay. And now the easy part who wants to do the second. Okay, vice chair weeks. Thank you, commissioner Calia. Okay, so the rezoning resolution was moved by commissioner Calia seconded by vice chair weeks and it's been the one you can take our votes. Commissioner Carter. Aye. Commissioner Duggan. Aye. Commissioner Calia. Aye. Commissioner Krepke abstaining moving to commissioner Peterson. Sorry, I didn't hear you there commissioner. Vice chair weeks. Aye. And chair Cisco. Aye. And so the rezoning resolution passes with six eyes commissioner Krepke abstaining. And I believe that concludes that item. And hopefully commissioner Krepke is around and getting ready to rejoin us. Yeah, there he is. Yay. Thank you. Okay, so with that we'll move on to our final public hearing tonight. Item 10.1 C, which is a public hearing and our general plan amendment package 2020. It is the TNL micro cannabis facility, the mitigated negative decoration and general plan amendment and rezoning and the major conditional use permit. It is an ex parte disclosure. So commissioner Krepke. I visited the site and I have nothing further disclosed. Mr. Calia. I also visited the site and I have nothing further to disclose. Mr. Duggan. I have nothing to disclose. Mr. Carter. I visited the site and have no further disclosures. Mr. Peterson. I also visited the site and have no new information to disclose. And vice chair weeks. I visited the site and have nothing to disclose. And I also visited the site and have new information to disclose. So with that, I believe this one belongs to the planning planner and the triple. Great. Thank you. Chair Sisco members of the planning commission. I just want to confirm that you can see my shared screen. We can. Great. Thank you. So my presentation this evening will be the third item in the fall 2020 general plan amendment package. This is the TNL micro cannabis facility project located at 3515 and zero industrial drive. So the project description would include requests for a general plan amendment from retail and business services to light industry in a rezoning from general commercial to light industrial for the two parcels located at 3515 and zero industrial drive. This would allow operation of a proposed commercial cannabis facility consisting of commercial cultivation at 10,202 square feet, non-volatile manufacturing at 3,282 square feet and distribution at 6,016 square feet in an existing two story 19,500 square foot commercial industrial building. The cannabis cultivation land use is subject to approval of a major conditional use permit and planning commission approval of a major conditional use permit this evening would be subject to city council approving of the proposed general plan amendment and rezoning. So the project site is located in Santa Rosa's Northwest Quadrant. The site is surrounded by a variety of commercial and light industrial uses including public self storage facilities to the north, commercial retail, fitness and health facilities and wholesale merchants to the south, indoor commercial recreational facilities and occupied and unoccupied retail spaces to the east and public self storage and a blood donation collection center to the west. Specifically, the project site is located on the north side of industrial drive east of airway drive at its intersection with industrial. It's comprised of a 0.24 acre parcel and a 0.99 acre parcel. These parcels are assessor text parcels created as a result of the special tax district. The approximately 1.23 acre project site was developed in 2004. The project site fronts industrial drive is developed with public improvements, site circulation areas and surface parking on the smaller assessor's parcel directly affording industrial drive. And then the larger 0.99 acre parcel is developed with the two-story 19,500 square foot building. The building is oriented towards industrial drive with the parking lot along the southeast and north sides. And it sets back at least 25 feet from all property lines and adjacent development. The loading area is located on the west side of the building and the site currently provides 54 parking spaces three of which are ADA compliant. The project site is currently provided with water and wastewater service by the city, including fire flows. The building's exterior footprint is approximately 13,650 square feet, but it does include 19,500 square feet of improved internal space on the ground floor and mezzanine levels. The mezzanine level would cover only about approximately 50% of the front half of the building with the remainder of the building, interior being a two-story space. In accordance with zoning code 20, section 20-50.050A4, the required neighborhood meeting was waived by the director because no residential neighborhood would be impacted by the proposed project. No notice of application was distributed as required by section 20-50.050 subsection E. However, we do rely on section 20-60 sets of section 20-020A3, which states that a defect or failure in the notice procedure shall not affect the jurisdiction or authority of a review authority to take action on a matter. Property owners and occupants within 600 feet of the proposed project have received a mailed notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration for the TNL micro project, received a mailed planning commission public notices and would also have access to onsite noticing for this evening's public hearing. No public comments have been received in response to any of the notifications. Here we can see the existing general plan and zoning of the subject site that is outlined in yellow. To the north of the site, we have light industry retail and business services, land uses. To the south, we have the same light industry retail and business service. To the east, we have retail and business service and then to the west, light industry retail and business services. So the site is at the edge of one of our larger light industrial zoning districts in the city's northwest platter. In terms of the request for the general plan amendment, the applicant made the request for two primary reasons. First, as we see on the left is related to industrial vacancy. Professional real estate markets demand studies show less than 5% vacancy in industrial spaces in Santa Rosa leading up to the second quarter of 2020. So that would be an eight quarter data analysis. Ideally, the city would have a higher vacancy rate to facilitate negotiating power of leases as well as to encourage a variety of uses, sizes of operations and market mix. Amending the general plan for this property would provide approximately 20,000 additional square feet of industrially zoned space. Additionally, if we look to the left and we look at the retail environment, we see that this area here to the east of the project site bounded by industrial drive in Cleveland Avenue is a portion of the city affected by the 2017 Tubbs fire. The Kmart property that once occupied this large parcel to the east provided an economic and retail anchor for the neighborhood as well as for the adjacent retail uses in the area. However, following its destruction, the retail businesses have suffered due to a loss of a retail activity as well as put traffic that supported retail operations. It's not anticipated that a major retail anchor will develop the former Kmart property. In fact, we have met with property owners who are proposing a community care facility for Native American tribes at that site. Additionally, given the restrictions on retail operations imposed by COVID related state and local health ordinances, as well as significant restriction in consumer spending, retail is a less profitable enterprise at present and likely moving forward. Resoning and amending the general plan from retail and business services to allow for industrial uses aligns the property with its neighbors, as well as the actual current intensity of use of the building. So in terms of general plan findings, what you have before you are some of the key goals that would be implemented should the planning commission choose to recommend approval of a general plan amendment. The general plan seeks to protect the industrial land supply and ensure compatibility between industrial development and surrounding neighborhoods. Conversion of existing developed land in response to market demand would ensure that the industrial land supply continues to meet economic needs. Additionally, rather than promoting development to vacant greenfield sites, conversion would foster a compact development pattern that reduces travel, energy and land usage and materials consumption while promoting greenhouse gas emissions reductions city wide. Finally, rezoning and amending the general plan from retail and business services to allow for industrial uses would align the properties, land use opportunities with its neighbors, as well as the current actual intensity of use of the building. Additionally, for findings, we find that the project site is adjacent to a large industrial parcel west that's designated light industry in the general plan diagram. And that really serves as a gateway parcel to the large swath of industrial properties that we've seen in previous slides. The surrounding uses are a wide mix of commercial and light industrial uses and the property is already adjacent to an industrial district. Therefore, amending the general plan and rezoning the property would render the property more compatible with its neighbors. Additionally, the intended manufacturing uses are light and nature, which would be compatible with the overall zoning of the area and the neighborhood. The property is currently developed with a two-story commercial industrial building which could accommodate a wide variety of light industrial uses while maintaining the compatibility with the neighborhood. It changed the general plan and the property's designation is necessary to better utilize the space. Industrial designations would better reflect the property's current occupancy as a furniture warehouse and the changing character of the overall neighborhood as well as the property's adjacency to one of the city's largest industrial zones. And so then the zoning map amendment is a proposed rezoning from general commercial to light industrial zoning district for the project site. And the light industrial zoning district has applied the areas appropriate for some light industrial uses as well as commercial service uses and activities that would otherwise be compatible with residential retail or office uses. The light industrial zoning district is consistent with the light industry land use classification of the general plan and would implement this land use designation for which general plan amendment is proposed. General plan section one dash two requires that the general plan be internally consistent. Therefore a proposed amendment to a zoning district that is consistent with the general plan land use designation and implements that land use designation would be consistent with the goals and policies of all elements of the general plan. The rezoning and amending of the general plan for light industrial uses would not foreseeably increase the intensity of the properties use nor have any foreseeable effect on the public's health safety, convenience or welfare. And the project as proposed and conditioned meets all the required development standards for the light industrial zoning district. And so now we want to turn to the proposed cannabis uses. A major conditional use permit is required for cannabis cultivation exceeding 5,000 one square feet of gross land use. In a light industrial zoning district non-volatile manufacturing and distribution would be permitted uses. And so the major conditional use permit before you this evening is for the proposed cultivation land use. In terms of the proposed cannabis uses the minimum parking requirement would be 20 spaces and at present the site is developed with 54 spaces available. Specific regulations contained in chapter 20-46 of the cannabis ordinance include dual licensing requirements and these cannabis uses would be required to additionally be licensed by the state and comply with all local and state regulations for cannabis operations. For these specific uses which would be closed to the public the operations would not be open to the public therefore any access by minors would be subject to state employment laws for cannabis operations. The applicant has provided policies and procedures for inventory and tracking of cannabis and cannabis products as well as maintenance for associated records. And state law currently does allow multiple cannabis land uses and state operator licenses for multiple permits on a site. The project application has been reviewed by building and fire departments and has been conditioned accordingly. The applicant demonstrates a clear understanding of what is required to comply with building and fire requirements. The applicant has also provided a security plan that includes required security enhancements and has provided a certified odor mitigation plan which describes operational processes and maintenance plan including activities undertaken to ensure the odor mitigation system remains functional that there are staff training procedures in place and that the engineering controls would include the installation of activated carbon filters on recirculating your systems. The applicant has also indicated that it will comply with the city's outdoor lighting ordinance as well as the city's noise ordinance and the applicant notes that it does not propose any outdoor mechanical equipment other than standard HVAC systems that would be typical for light industrial uses. And so with the city council approval of a general plan amendment to light industry in adoption of a zoning code map amendment to light industrial, the project would be consistent with the general plan land use designation and implementing zoning district. It would retent to previously occupied commercial building in a commercial industrial area with a light industrial land use. As such, the area is well suited for the proposed operation. There are no existing or planned residential uses in the immediate vicinity of the project site and the use has been conditioned to minimize impacts to adjacent properties. The proposed uses would be located entirely within the existing commercial industrial building. The building would be fully accessible with ADA standards, although no public access would be permitted and all necessary utilities are available on site. It would be consistent with the surrounding land uses as identified in the general plan and the proposed conditions of approval address the requirement to minimize potential odor, light pollution and noise, as well as requirements for a decryptailed security plan that include background checks for employees, 24-hour monitoring, use of surveillance cameras, secure entry gates to the project site and similar measures. And so an initial study was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The proposed project was found to result in potentially significant impacts in air quality, greenhouse gases and transportation. The mitigation measures included in the MND do address their quality of potentially some significant impact of odor and would be successfully mitigated to a level undetectable outside the building. In terms of greenhouse gas impacts, the project would install real-time energy and water tracking. And then finally for transportation mitigation measures include signage and circulation markings to better ensure that to reduce any potential conflict between vehicles and pedestrians. A notice of intent to adopt a MND was posted with the State Clearinghouse and the Sonoma County Clerk's Office initiating a 30-day public comment period beginning June 22nd, 2020 and ending July 22nd, 2020. No comments were received by the city during the public comment period either from the public or from the revert agencies. The allocation of additional square footage to distribution with no increase in total square footage does not rise to the level of significant new information that would require recirculation under the California Environmental Quality Act. The project's mitigated negative declaration sufficiently analyzed the project's maximum potential environmental impacts from all industrial land uses in the 19,500 square foot of land use. Building space, including distribution. No significant issues were found or needed to be addressed during planning review and no issues remain to be resolved. And as I mentioned, no public comments were received at the time that this presentation was prepared or at the time of this evening's meeting. And so with that, it is recommended by Planning and Economic Development Department that the Planning Commission adopt a MND and MMRP for the project. Recommend that the city council approve a general plan amendment resolution to change land use designation of the subject parcels to light industry. And recommend that the city council adopt a rezoning ordinance to amend the zoning map to light industrial for the subject parcels. And that the Planning Commission approve a major conditional use permit subject to city council approval of the proposed general plan amendment and rezoning to allow cannabis cultivation in 10,202 square feet of the existing commercial industrial building. With that, Planning staff is available for questions and the applicant is available, applicant team is available as well for introductions and any questions that you might have. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Triple. So the applicant is not making a presentation, or just gonna be available for questions that's necessary? That is correct. The applicant representative would like to introduce the applicant team if the commission wishes. Okay, well, let's take it back to the commission. Any questions of staff before we hear from the applicant? No, okay. All right. That will hear from the applicant and have those introductions made. Applicants have the ability to mute and unmute yourself if you can do so, you can speak. Thank you. Good evening, Chair Siscoe and commissioners. This is Erin Carlstrom. Well, rather Erin Carlstrom's voice coming to you on behalf of Andy and Tao Nguyen, who are the owners of the building and as well as the applicants, they are waving but you cannot see them. We are also joined this evening by Justin Witt from Belgium Race who were our environmental engineers and drafted the initial study and MND. Justin may be waving, I don't know, but he is here and available if any of you have questions about that document. We're super grateful to your staff's assistance and Andrew's efforts to get us here and cognizant of the time, as well as Andrew's stellar job in presenting the project and its components. I'm not going to make a presentation. However, we are available to answer any of the questions that commission may have. Thank you all for your service. Thank you, Ms. Carlstrom. Good to hear your voice. Okay, any questions for the applicant before we move on to the public hearing? Okay, not seeing any. So tonight, this is a public hearing. So for our members of the public out there, I have a feeling there aren't many given the response. If you want to make a comment under the public hearing, you can raise your hand by Zoom. If you're calling in, you can hit star nine. We'll be recognized by the host and allowed to speak for three minutes. With that, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Chair Siscoe, at this time, no one is raising their hands. And I will note that there are two members of the public right now. Okay, so you know that there are members of the public out there, but they're not asking to speak. Correct. Okay, great. All right, in a few more seconds, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing and bring it back to the commission. Krishna, if any questions of staff and the applicants on this, not seeing any. Okay. So this involves four resolutions, fewer numbers on these. And so as usual, we'll begin with the mitigated negative declaration resolution, discuss the project generally and make whatever amendments we need to, if necessary. So with that, would somebody like to move the resolution for the MND? Okay, Commissioner Carter. I move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa, adopting a mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the TNL micro cannabis facility located at 3515 and zero industrial drive, assessor's parcel numbers 148-050-027 and 148-041-049, file number PRJ19-039 and waive further reading. Commissioner Calia. So that the MND was moved by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Calia. Commissioner Calia, would you like to start? Sure. I can make all the required findings for the MND and the MMRP and we'll be supporting the project. Mr. Ocracki. Like Commissioner Calia, I can make all the required findings and we'll be supporting the project. Commissioner Carter. I can make all the required findings for the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation and monitoring program and reporting program. I'd like to also thank Andrew for putting together a great package, having links in the staff report is very handy because I so love reading the zoning ordinance. Don't we all, Commissioner Duggan. Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I can make all the required findings for the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and I support the project. Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson. We need to have you on mute and hello. There you go. Yeah, sorry, I applauded that I think I'm having a little bit of internet issues. So if I cut out, I'm still here. Yeah, I will echo my fellow commissioners. I think, I don't want the two members of the public that are currently watching to think that we haven't done our homework. This was a very comprehensive package. I think it was a very good explanation from the planning and economic development department. I think the questions that we normally have were answered already as part of this packet. So I think, well, there's a lot of moving pieces to this, resolving the issues was pretty straightforward, at least from my end. So with that, I can make all the required findings for the resolution one. I share weeks. Mr. Peterson said that this was a very thorough packet as usual, and I can make all the required findings and support of the project. And I also can make the required findings for the mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. All of you did that so well. And I'm definitely in support of the project. I think that all the findings can be made on the general plan and rezoning and the conditional use permit package was very complete as usual. And Mr. Tripple's staff report was very complete. So I feel very comfortable in approving the project as well. So with that, that resolution was moved by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Collier and Mr. Maloney will take our votes. Thank you Chair Siscoe. Commissioner Carter. Hi. Commissioner Duggan. Hi. Commissioner Collier. Hi. Commissioner Kripke. Hi. Commissioner Peterson. Hi. Vice Chair Weeks. Hi. Chair Siscoe. Hi. And so again, the MND resolution passes with seven eyes. Next we have our resolution regarding the general plan amendment with somebody like to read that. Vice Chair Weeks. I move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa recommending that the city council amend the general plan for the PNL micro cannabis facility from retail and business services to light industry for the properties at 3515 and zero industrial drive. Accessors partial numbers 148-050-027 and 148-041-049 file number GPAM19-003 PRJ19-039, way further reading. And the second, Commissioner Collier. Okay, so the general plan amendment resolution was moved by Vice Chair Weeks seconded by Commissioner Collier and Mr. Maloney can take our votes. Yes, Commissioner Carter. Hi. Commissioner Duggan. Hi. Commissioner Collier. Hi. Commissioner Kripke. Hi. Commissioner Peterson. Hi. Vice Chair Weeks. Hi. Vice Chair Siscoe. Hi. And so the general plan resolution passes with seven eyes. And next is our rezoning resolution. And we like to read that. Great. Mr. Collier. I'd like to move resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa recommending to the city council rezoning of property located at 3515 and zero industrial drive. Assessors parcel numbers 148-050-027 and 148-041-049 to the light industrial IL district file number R-E-Z-19-010 PRJ19-039 and way further reading. Great. And the second. Okay. So that was moved by commissioner Collier seconded by Vice Chair Weeks in this morning's integral. Commissioner Carter. Hi. Commissioner Duggan. Hi. Commissioner Collier. Hi. Commissioner Kripke. Hi. Commissioner Peterson. Thank you. Vice Chair Weeks. Hi. And Chair Siscoe. Hi. That rezoning and the resolution moved by commissioner Collier seconded by Vice Chair Weeks passes with seven eyes. And last but not least is our initial use permit resolution that somebody liked to read that. Okay. Vice Chair Weeks. You got up there. Let's do it. Okay. I move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa making findings and determinations and approving additional use permit for the TNL micro cannabis facility from retail and business services delight industry for the properties of 3515 and zero industrial drive assessor's parcel numbers 148-050-027 and 148-041-049 file number GPAM19-003 PRJ19-039 and way further reading. And the second by commissioner Oprepke. So that was a conditional use permit resolution was moved by Vice Chair Weeks seconded by commissioner Oprepke. Any other comments, discussions? Chair Siscoe. Yes. I believe that on the the commission of the city of Santa Rosa Yes. I believe that the opening statement needs to be amended to strike from retail and business services to light industry. It looks like that was a That's followed the general plan amendment correct. Okay. So Vice Chair Weeks, you catch that. You wanna reread the heading? With that correction. Andrew, can you say it again for me please? Sure. You would reread the heading but strike the text from retail and business services to light industry. They move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Santa Rosa making findings and determination and approving a conditional use permit for the T and L micro cannabis facility for the properties at 3515 and zero industrial drive assessors parcel numbers 148-050-027 and 148-041-049 file number GPAM 19-003 PRJ19-039. And wait for the reading. Okay. And I'm assuming Commissioner Oprepty you'll second that again. Okay, great. So the conditional use permit with the heading amended was moved by Vice Chair Weeks seconded by Commissioner Oprepty. Any other discussion? I don't think we did. Okay. Our votes for Mr. Maloney. Thank you. Commissioner Carter. Aye. Commissioner Duggan. Aye. Commissioner Clalio. Aye. Commissioner Oprepty. Aye. Commissioner Peterson. Aye. Vice Chair Leeds. Aye. And Chair Sisco. I'm not hearing anything. Okay. Aye. And so again the conditional use permit with the heading amended was moved by Vice Chair Leeds seconded by Commissioner Oprepty and that passes with seven ayes. And that concludes that item. I believe that concludes our meeting for this evening. So I'm going to go ahead and understanding our November 26th meeting will be canceled. So I'm going to adjourn to our next regularly scheduled meeting, which would be December 10th. So with that, thanks everybody. Did a good job. Thank you, Commissioner. Thanks.